Using SSD to speed up Photo editing

[ratsa]

I often hear of putting OS and programs on SSD, but I don't care how long it takes to open a program. I do care how snappy Adobe Lightroom is after it is open.

Is anyone here on expert on using SSDs to speed up photo editing, and can offer suggestions on how to set up a system?

Thanks!

 

[popatim]

the First thing you should do is maximize your processor - you'll want an i7; next you maximize your ram; third is throw in supported GPU for processing; and then you make your camera raw cache an ssd.

 

[ratsa]

the First thing you should do is maximize your processor - you'll want an i7; next you maximize your ram; third is throw in supported GPU for processing; and then you make your camera raw cache an ssd.

Lightroom has two "caches".

(1) The Camera Raw Cache is pretty small and can be easily moved.

(2) The Preview cache folder can be several hundreds of gigabytes--its size is unlimited--and always stays with the Lightroom Catalogues.

What would be the strategy for speeding up the Preview cache? Would Crucial Adrenaline, SRT or a hybrid drive be a good solution?

 

[WyomingKnott]

ratsa

On the Adobe site, for another product, their number one recommended use for an SSD is to put the temporary /working storage directories on the SSD. Let's see if I can find a link... http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/optimize-performance-photoshop-cs4-cs5.html#main_Solid_state_disks

Was that relevant?

 

[ratsa]

ratsa

On the Adobe site, for another product, their number one recommended use for an SSD is to put the temporary /working storage directories on the SSD. Let's see if I can find a link... http://helpx.adobe.com/photoshop/kb/optimize-performance-photoshop-cs4-cs5.html#main_Solid_state_disks

Was that relevant?

Adobe Photoshop is a very different animal than Adobe Lightroom. Photoshop and all of the files it uses in any given session can fit into RAM if you have enough RAM, so scratch disk is not an issue.

Lightroom creates "preview files" for its catalogue. It is constantly accessing these files or creating new ones as you move around in the catalogue. I create about 5GB to 10GB of new preview files every month. Some people have over 500GB of preview files, so there is no way all of the preview files can fit into RAM. It is not cost effective to put all of the preview files on SSD drives, and they generally need to live in one directory.

After upgrading the CPU and maximizing the RAM, the only options I am aware of are:

(1) Crucial Adrenaline SSD cache.
(2) Intel SRT SSD Cache.
(3) Some kind of a hybrid drive.

I am leaning towards the Intel SRT Cache because I will have a mobo that supports it.

I have not seen any direct comparisons betweeen Intel SRT and Crucial Adrenaline, either in terms of performance or specs/features.

 

[RetiredChief]

SRT -
How effective this will be is Highly depended on how frequently a given file is called. You will be limited to a SSD (partition) size of 60 or 64 Gigs. But if you get a 60/64 gig SSD suggest you partition it to a max size of 50 gigs. This is so that wear leveling and Gargage controll can have some space to work there magic. If the files called are continuilly changing SRT will be of little help if the file is Not in the cashe, performance is slightly decresed as it will first spend time (Veryshort) checking cache, the loading file from HDD @ HDD speed.
Hybrid drive. the Seagate Hybrid drive only has a small 8 gig cache is is best used as an OS + program drive - which would NOT help. As a storage drive the cashe would probably be too small. Annd Instead of the hybred drive would suggest a Large Ramdrive, ie with 32 gigs ram you could create a 16 gig ramdrive and "preload it" with the files you need - not sure as I do Not use your program.

Stand-along SSD as a work drive would probably be the best option. Would recommend going for capacity (ofcoarse with a SSD that has LOW dissatisfation reviews) as opposed to Getting a Lower capacity drive with higher performance.

 

[JohnnyLucky]

You asked about ssd performance when editing photos. That is the same question I had two years ago. At the time I could not find a satisfactory answer. I didn't find out for certain until I purchased an ssd. The results were mixed. The time it took to complete some editing processes improved. Editing processes which involved rendering did not improve.

There were other improvements but they aren't what I consider to be actual editing. For example creating and/or opening photo galleries is a lot faster. Saving edited images is fatser.

 

[ratsa]

You asked about ssd performance when editing photos. That is the same question I had two years ago. At the time I could not find a satisfactory answer. I didn't find out for certain until I purchased an ssd. The results were mixed. The time it took to complete some editing processes improved. Editing processes which involved rendering did not improve.

There were other improvements but they aren't what I consider to be actual editing. For example creating and/or opening photo galleries is a lot faster. Saving edited images is fatser.

That makes sense. When I said "editing" I really should have said "cataloguing" or something like. Editing is mostly CPU intensive, I would guess. Perusing the catalogue in Lightroom 4 is slow, and I think the bottleneck there is the hard drive, specifically the one that contains the preview files (I keep them separate from the photos themselves). The trouble is that the previews can reach hundreds of Gigs.

My plan is to upgrade the CPU and increase the RAM and then see where that leaves me. Do you think that's sensible?

 

[JohnnyLucky]

Correct. Photo editing is cpu and memory intensive. SSD's are able to read files much faster than hard disk drives. As a result photo galleries will load much faster providing those photo galleries are on the ssd. Once finished working with the images they are transferred to a hard disk drive for storage. A second copy on disc is stored in a fire resistant cabinet.

 

[ratsa]

How about Velociraptor instead of ssd?

 

[RetiredChief]

Might consider the Seagate hibred drive. Usea an 8 Gig Internal SSD to cache most often accessed files. If the file is in the cache, speed = SSD, if On HDD, well then at HDDs. NOTE: the SSD Uses SLC NAND, not the normal MLC that is used in most SSD. SLC is generally faster than MLC and the writes to a Cell are up to 100,000 which is 10 X higher than a MLC.
My Perception, Boot time and some programs will improve. But editing a 1 GB DVD file will be at the normal HDD speed.
http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16822148837

 

[benback]

ArtWeaver is a best photo editing software among all ov them. I had great experience with it. Free version of Artweaver comes with basic photo editing tools. You can use various filters to fix your photos. One great feature of Artweaver is that you can record all the changes that you did to your photos, and can play them back later.
Click Here