Posted by Robert Dayton on March 21, 2012 at 6:43 PM
I do all of my photo processing on my desktop computer.
I do not have a laptop. I know that the latter is con-
venient to have on the road. However, 5 or 10 years ago,
I read that for processing images, a photographer would
get better results off of a desktop. If that was true in
the past, is it still valid?
If a laptop gets equally good processing results, I'll
consider purchasing one. I don't want something cheap,
nor do I need something that's expensive and state of the
art. Therefore, if the results are equal to that of a desktop,
what kind of laptop would you recommend, what are some ball
park prices to expect, and what are some good retail outlets
from which to make a purchase?
This is a good question Robert and I'm going to be really interested in the replies you get here.
I have always done all of my processing on a desk top at home but I bought a nice 15" Dell XPS last year to take with me on the road. If I could get the processing done on the road great. The laptop is certainly capable of doing the tasks.
This winter I went on a 7 week tour out west and I found I have a problem getting the brightness just right on the laptop. It seems that my screen will change brightness depending on the angle of tilt. There is not a huge difference, but enough that I was unsure of the results I was getting so I held off of doing any final processing. The main thing I can do is to be able to download my camera cards every night and begin the process of sorting. When I got back home to my desk top I did have to do a little tweaking on the brightness of some of the images that I tried to process on the road. I wonder if anyone else has experienced this.
Posted by Eva McDermott on March 21, 2012 at 8:45 PM
Hi Robert - I do use a laptop for all of my processing.... a LenovoW701ds but unfortunately they are no longer available and quite pricey when they were. It is very convenient for me since I like to work on my stuff at lunch time at work (work) and also when I go to Maine. Too heavy to take anywhere else if you are not using a car for transport. It is a photo work station with built in color calibrator. On the road, I have used my work work Dell 6400 but also use my X-Rite i1Display 2 Color Calibrator to calibrate the screen. Don't know if that helps.
Posted by Mark Seaver on March 22, 2012 at 12:38 AM
Robert, I have and use both. The laptop is very convenient for trips, but for top quality results you have to adjust the viewing angle carefully (I started a thread on that a while back). Otherwise you get color and brightness variations even if you calibrate it. There may also be potential problems with automated adjustment for ambient light, but those can also occur with some desktops. I think that if you're very careful (maybe even obsessive) about the viewing angle the laptop can be nearly as good as a desktop, but I still prefer the convenience of my desktop. In addition, it seems that laptops are not as long term reliable as a desktop. A number of hard core computer users that I know won't keep a laptop more than about 3 years because of the potential for major problems as they get old. So even if you decide to go laptop, I would strongly recommend that you have an external hard drive at home for storing all your photos (and other important stuff).
I'm an Apple guy since 1985, so I can't really recommend sources. I did by my last Mac through B&H Photo and they also carry some Windows machines. I've used them for camera gear and film since 1980 with absolutely no problems.
I think a laptop would fall short for critical image work for a couple of reasons. The first was already mentioned: when the viewing angle of the screen changes, the brightness and contrast change. This will lead to variability that would be hard to control. Also, unless you spend really big dollars on a big screen laptop, you'll be squinting at the screen, which would be uncomfortable after a time.
Unless you purchased a laptop with a dedicated video card (again, more bucks) you'll have to satified with on-board AGP graphics. For large image files, screen redraws will be slower. There is also the downside of limited on-board storage. You can get some pretty large SSD's for laptops, but be prepared to spend some serious money.
There is also the issue of heat. Laptops are not designed to run at high CPU loads for long periods of time and they will get hot. If the temps get too high, the life of the electronis will be shortened.
Now, If I was going to spend time on the road. I'd use a laptop to cull the downloaded images and do the keywording. Once I got home, I'd pull the best of the best into my desktop and do critical editing there. The takeaway from this is, if you want a laptop, get a smaller one that's great for the road, and drop the big dollars into a desktop.
Now for the plug: I have a Puget Systems custom desktop. It is absolutely the best machine I have ever owned. Puget also makes laptops, so, if you are serious about having a top-end laptop (or a desk top for that matter) for image editing, give them a call, and tell them I sent you. Their customer service is first rate. Their computers are not inexpensive, but the quality is second to none. Puget Systems.
and as a note. Having spent the last two weeks processing on my laptop, I think that you can get the screen angle very close to right by looking for the reflection of your eyes (assuming a glossy screen). When they're in the middle of the screen, the angle is very close to perpendicular, which is what it needs to be.
Posted by John Mumaw on March 22, 2012 at 11:46 AM
Preston mentioned every point of concern that I have regarding this subject.
I suppose a lot depends on what editing steps you take. Simple adjustments to RAW files in Lightroom, or more extensive optimization in Photoshop?
Like Eva, I use a Lenovo laptop (x220) with a beautiful non-glossy IPS screen where an off perpendicular viewing angle has no discernable adverse effect. Yet I still will not use it for critical editing because there is nothing quite like a large high quality monitor display at eye level for making my best prints.
Posted by Paul DeCesare on March 22, 2012 at 2:36 PM
I triple ditto the Lenovo mobile workstation if you go for a laptop, and of course, calibrate it. They have the W520 on sale for $1189 (I just looked). For that price you get an i7 processor, NVidia Quadro 2GB graphics card, Win 7 Pro (not Home), 7200rpm 320GB drive, DVD burner and 1600x900 resolution on a 15.6" non-glare LED screen. Yikes, I might have to look at that for myself, lol! It only has 4GB of ram, but ram is the cheapest it's ever been. Anyway, if you want a laptop to pull off editing, a bit more $$ gets you a lot more photographer-dedicated features. Man, you could even edit video on this thing given the i7 and that monstrous video card!
Unfortunately, the W520 uses a TN screen rather than the much better (and more accurate) IPS screen.
IPS screens have a much wider color gamut and clarity, while TN screens are considered 'value technology'.
The monitor is surely the most important feature concerning precise image editing.
You can read more about the differences at 'LCD Monitor Technology Explained', if you wish.
If you want to edit images critically and accurately using a laptop, then I would highly recommend that you base your search for one with an IPS monitor.
Posted by David Bostedo on March 22, 2012 at 9:41 PM
A few notes from my point of view (some of which is in the other mentioned thread) :
1) Whether or not a laptop will work for you greatly depends on how tolerant you are of small changes or variation in your images.
2) Other people (most other people) will inherently see your images as somewhat different than what you see anyway, due to the vagaries of calibration and monitors, and the fact the most people (even many on NPN) don't calibrate or don't have good calibration.
People not on NPN or other photo pro or photo geek shoots (99.9% of the people online at least I'm willing to bet) most likely don't know what color calibration is, and what they see is a complete crapshoot.
3) So if you make prints, and like them, that should be the ultimate arbiter of whether or not to be happy with your system, IMO.
3) If you do want to approach good desktop results, you have to find a laptop with a first rate monitor, as John pointed out.
4) Not all desktop results are good - the monitor is extremely important for desktops as well. People working on cheaper desktop monitors probably have similar issues to average laptop users.
5) I haven't owned a desktop in about 12 years, but I have had 3 high end laptops, all with excellent screens in that time. My current on is a Dell XPS Studio 16 with an RGB LED IPS panel. The variation due to viewing angle is small, and it covers more gamut than Adobe RGB.
6) I work on multi-shot panos, and HDR... occasionally things slow a bit, but it's pretty responsive for my needs. A lot of being happy with performance depends on expectations of course.
7) I have 8GB of RAM and a 512MB video card. And this is in a 3 year old laptop. My laptops have averaged about $1800 each when purchased.
If you're still thinking laptop, you might want to see this article or google for others.
Posted by Scott Fricke on March 22, 2012 at 10:27 PM
I use a 17" MacBook Pro laptop and have found it exactly matches the color/brightness on my desktop monitor. I can put my laptop screen right next to the desktop monitor and the images on each will look identical to my eye. I do check the brightness setting on the screen before I begin and have found it pretty easy to adjust the screen tilt.
I use PS4 and have found it handles files from my 5DII quite easily. The laptop has 4G of memory which seems adequate for processing.
It won't help for editing away from home, but you can connect a high quality stand alone monitor to your laptop, calibrate it and use it as a primary display for editing purposes. That's what I've been doing for the past few years. It provides the flexibility for other computing needs that a laptop naturally affords and the exacting requirements of display quality for image editing. When I'm using PS, for instance, the image fills the stand along monitor screen and the various palettes reside on the laptop screen.
Posted by Andy Richards on March 24, 2012 at 7:59 PM
What Kerry said. It seems to me that most of the discussion here really misses the point. It is not the "laptop" that is the issue, it is the monitor. Because I need to be mobile for my business, I have used a laptop as my primary computer for many years. For the majority of my photo editing, I connect the laptop to a separate monitor which is calibrated. From an image quality standpoint, I cannot where there can be any difference between the same calibrated monitor connected to a laptop or a desktop.
Of course, there are physical and cost factor issues. Any laptop which is an "apples to apples" comparison to a desktop will be significantly more expensive than the desktop. Said another way, the desktop will get you a lot more computing power at a lot less $. If you don't have any need for portability, the desktop makes sense. While I agree with what Preston said about heat, I haven't ever had one fry on me yet. At work, I have a small fan that I blow underneath the laptop to help cool it.
I have always used my work computer as my personal computer also. I recently wanted to upgrade to 64 bit processing for both PS and LR4 and decided to buy a dedicated computer for my personal use. Because I need to have the laptop to download images on the road, I opted, again, for a laptop.
Posted by Eva McDermott on March 24, 2012 at 9:33 PM
I think Andy and Kerry hit the nail on the head. My work station needs to be mobile s well.
BTW - I use a simple Acratech device on my laptop monitor to make sure it is at the right site angle. Acratech Viewing Angle.
My Lenovo W701ds is a super 64-bit machine. W701/W70ds . Sad to see that Lenovo discontinued it.
"It seems to me that most of the discussion here really misses the point. It is not the "laptop" that is the issue, it is the monitor."
Andy, I agree with your statement, up to a point. I use 4x5 film, scan everything and do all my processing on a desktop, but my wide gamut monitor (carefully calibrated) is a necessary tool for 'getting it right'. Aside from my monitor, I require a high performance machine that runs quietly and cool under the load of 1+GB files.
If I did use a laptop as my primary computer, I like the dual monitor idea mentioned above; image on the stand-alone monitor and tool pallets on the laptop screen. IIRC, this does require a computer with a PCI video card (for the big screen) and AGP graphics for the laptop screen, or a dual screen capable PCI video card (expensive).
In the end, I suppose that what it truly boils down to is this: Is one achieving their goal using the system they have chosen, in a cost effective manner, and are having fun at the same time?
--P
Posted by Robert Dayton on March 25, 2012 at 11:18 PM
Thanks everyone for the input and advice. It's been very educational.
Posted by Andy Richards on March 26, 2012 at 8:47 AM
Preston - Great discussion and I'll surely defer to your expertise and experience with computer "engines." I agree that in an "apples to apples" comparison, the Desktop will always win. My "portability" decision is a bit of a compromise, but one I am constrained to with my budgetary limits.
My comment was more about the "image quality" and that it is the monitor that counts, not whether the processor is a laptop or desktop, because it was my perception that that point was being missed in the discussion up to that point.
I use my laptop/external monitor exactly as you describe, i.e., the tool palettes on my laptop's built in monitor and the image alone on the calibrated monitor. I have learned the hard way that you just can't rely on the built in screens on the laptops (unless, I guess, you have the device mentioned above). I use the standalone monitor in the same place and have color temperature lighting and re-calibrate the monitor about once a month. I just have the video card in the laptop and no special cards. I plug the monitor in with a dvi plug and with Win7 there is a utility for splitting the two. Works like a charm. I have a 19" widescreen and it is pretty close to the aspect ratio of my DSLR files and very close to a 13 x 19 print.
"My comment was more about the "image quality" and that it is the monitor that counts, not whether the processor is a laptop or desktop, because it was my perception that that point was being missed in the discussion up to that point."
Andy,
I guess I didn't explain myself well enough, but I totally agree with you on this point. The CPU, video subsystem and RAM is not that big a deal unless these items are not robust enough to do the crunching that is requierd for today's OS', programs, and files.
"I just have the video card in the laptop and no special cards. I plug the monitor in with a dvi plug and with Win7 there is a utility for splitting the two."
That's a cool deal. Not being a laptop person (and also being a BDOF) in this day and age, it appears things have changed. It sounds like you've got a great system.
--P
Posted by Andy Richards on March 31, 2012 at 4:21 PM
Preston - not sure its a great system -- not even sure its as great as your :-). But I DO like the dual screen for working on images. I just switched to 64 bit on everything and my old trusty "spyder" wouldn't load up on the system and I had to buy an new calibration tool and didnt want to mortage the house again, so I bought a Huey. I am not sure I like the results :-(
Discussion
19 repliesI do not have a laptop. I know that the latter is con-
venient to have on the road. However, 5 or 10 years ago,
I read that for processing images, a photographer would
get better results off of a desktop. If that was true in
the past, is it still valid?
If a laptop gets equally good processing results, I'll
consider purchasing one. I don't want something cheap,
nor do I need something that's expensive and state of the
art. Therefore, if the results are equal to that of a desktop,
what kind of laptop would you recommend, what are some ball
park prices to expect, and what are some good retail outlets
from which to make a purchase?
Thank you for your time.
Cordially,
Robert Dayton
I have always done all of my processing on a desk top at home but I bought a nice 15" Dell XPS last year to take with me on the road. If I could get the processing done on the road great. The laptop is certainly capable of doing the tasks.
This winter I went on a 7 week tour out west and I found I have a problem getting the brightness just right on the laptop. It seems that my screen will change brightness depending on the angle of tilt. There is not a huge difference, but enough that I was unsure of the results I was getting so I held off of doing any final processing. The main thing I can do is to be able to download my camera cards every night and begin the process of sorting. When I got back home to my desk top I did have to do a little tweaking on the brightness of some of the images that I tried to process on the road. I wonder if anyone else has experienced this.
I'm an Apple guy since 1985, so I can't really recommend sources. I did by my last Mac through B&H Photo and they also carry some Windows machines. I've used them for camera gear and film since 1980 with absolutely no problems.
Unless you purchased a laptop with a dedicated video card (again, more bucks) you'll have to satified with on-board AGP graphics. For large image files, screen redraws will be slower. There is also the downside of limited on-board storage. You can get some pretty large SSD's for laptops, but be prepared to spend some serious money.
There is also the issue of heat. Laptops are not designed to run at high CPU loads for long periods of time and they will get hot. If the temps get too high, the life of the electronis will be shortened.
Now, If I was going to spend time on the road. I'd use a laptop to cull the downloaded images and do the keywording. Once I got home, I'd pull the best of the best into my desktop and do critical editing there. The takeaway from this is, if you want a laptop, get a smaller one that's great for the road, and drop the big dollars into a desktop.
Now for the plug: I have a Puget Systems custom desktop. It is absolutely the best machine I have ever owned. Puget also makes laptops, so, if you are serious about having a top-end laptop (or a desk top for that matter) for image editing, give them a call, and tell them I sent you. Their customer service is first rate. Their computers are not inexpensive, but the quality is second to none. Puget Systems.
--P
http://www.naturephotographers.net/imagecritique/bbs.cgi?a=vm&mr=66874&CGISESSID=cb0d3ef5784c3b4966d9ac64e9b51787&u=7781
and as a note. Having spent the last two weeks processing on my laptop, I think that you can get the screen angle very close to right by looking for the reflection of your eyes (assuming a glossy screen). When they're in the middle of the screen, the angle is very close to perpendicular, which is what it needs to be.
I suppose a lot depends on what editing steps you take. Simple adjustments to RAW files in Lightroom, or more extensive optimization in Photoshop?
Like Eva, I use a Lenovo laptop (x220) with a beautiful non-glossy IPS screen where an off perpendicular viewing angle has no discernable adverse effect. Yet I still will not use it for critical editing because there is nothing quite like a large high quality monitor display at eye level for making my best prints.
IPS screens have a much wider color gamut and clarity, while TN screens are considered 'value technology'.
The monitor is surely the most important feature concerning precise image editing.
You can read more about the differences at 'LCD Monitor Technology Explained', if you wish.
If you want to edit images critically and accurately using a laptop, then I would highly recommend that you base your search for one with an IPS monitor.
1) Whether or not a laptop will work for you greatly depends on how tolerant you are of small changes or variation in your images.
2) Other people (most other people) will inherently see your images as somewhat different than what you see anyway, due to the vagaries of calibration and monitors, and the fact the most people (even many on NPN) don't calibrate or don't have good calibration.
People not on NPN or other photo pro or photo geek shoots (99.9% of the people online at least I'm willing to bet) most likely don't know what color calibration is, and what they see is a complete crapshoot.
3) So if you make prints, and like them, that should be the ultimate arbiter of whether or not to be happy with your system, IMO.
3) If you do want to approach good desktop results, you have to find a laptop with a first rate monitor, as John pointed out.
4) Not all desktop results are good - the monitor is extremely important for desktops as well. People working on cheaper desktop monitors probably have similar issues to average laptop users.
5) I haven't owned a desktop in about 12 years, but I have had 3 high end laptops, all with excellent screens in that time. My current on is a Dell XPS Studio 16 with an RGB LED IPS panel. The variation due to viewing angle is small, and it covers more gamut than Adobe RGB.
6) I work on multi-shot panos, and HDR... occasionally things slow a bit, but it's pretty responsive for my needs. A lot of being happy with performance depends on expectations of course.
7) I have 8GB of RAM and a 512MB video card. And this is in a 3 year old laptop. My laptops have averaged about $1800 each when purchased.
If you're still thinking laptop, you might want to see this article or google for others.
I use PS4 and have found it handles files from my 5DII quite easily. The laptop has 4G of memory which seems adequate for processing.
Of course, there are physical and cost factor issues. Any laptop which is an "apples to apples" comparison to a desktop will be significantly more expensive than the desktop. Said another way, the desktop will get you a lot more computing power at a lot less $. If you don't have any need for portability, the desktop makes sense. While I agree with what Preston said about heat, I haven't ever had one fry on me yet. At work, I have a small fan that I blow underneath the laptop to help cool it.
I have always used my work computer as my personal computer also. I recently wanted to upgrade to 64 bit processing for both PS and LR4 and decided to buy a dedicated computer for my personal use. Because I need to have the laptop to download images on the road, I opted, again, for a laptop.
BTW - I use a simple Acratech device on my laptop monitor to make sure it is at the right site angle. Acratech Viewing Angle.
My Lenovo W701ds is a super 64-bit machine. W701/W70ds . Sad to see that Lenovo discontinued it.
Andy, I agree with your statement, up to a point. I use 4x5 film, scan everything and do all my processing on a desktop, but my wide gamut monitor (carefully calibrated) is a necessary tool for 'getting it right'. Aside from my monitor, I require a high performance machine that runs quietly and cool under the load of 1+GB files.
If I did use a laptop as my primary computer, I like the dual monitor idea mentioned above; image on the stand-alone monitor and tool pallets on the laptop screen. IIRC, this does require a computer with a PCI video card (for the big screen) and AGP graphics for the laptop screen, or a dual screen capable PCI video card (expensive).
In the end, I suppose that what it truly boils down to is this: Is one achieving their goal using the system they have chosen, in a cost effective manner, and are having fun at the same time?
--P
My comment was more about the "image quality" and that it is the monitor that counts, not whether the processor is a laptop or desktop, because it was my perception that that point was being missed in the discussion up to that point.
I use my laptop/external monitor exactly as you describe, i.e., the tool palettes on my laptop's built in monitor and the image alone on the calibrated monitor. I have learned the hard way that you just can't rely on the built in screens on the laptops (unless, I guess, you have the device mentioned above). I use the standalone monitor in the same place and have color temperature lighting and re-calibrate the monitor about once a month. I just have the video card in the laptop and no special cards. I plug the monitor in with a dvi plug and with Win7 there is a utility for splitting the two. Works like a charm. I have a 19" widescreen and it is pretty close to the aspect ratio of my DSLR files and very close to a 13 x 19 print.
Andy,
I guess I didn't explain myself well enough, but I totally agree with you on this point. The CPU, video subsystem and RAM is not that big a deal unless these items are not robust enough to do the crunching that is requierd for today's OS', programs, and files.
"I just have the video card in the laptop and no special cards. I plug the monitor in with a dvi plug and with Win7 there is a utility for splitting the two."
That's a cool deal. Not being a laptop person (and also being a BDOF) in this day and age, it appears things have changed. It sounds like you've got a great system.
--P