Optimise my laptop for 4x5 scanning (epsonscan/vuescan) and CS5 editing

[sanking]

Thank you for your suggestions thus far. I believe the maximum ram for my version of MacBook pro is 4gb. Also, will the fw800 drive help a lot? Isnt it still quite slow? I was once looking into getting a pcmi card slot thing to connect esata drive to the computer. Anyone know about this? I am wondering whether buying a new laptop altogether would be better?

See, http://www.everymac.com/systems/appl...ryn-specs.html

From what I understand Apple only supported 4 gb of RAM but third parties support 6 gb in a 2+4 configuration.

But if you can buy a brand new Macbook Pro and max it out with RAM it will certainly be much faster than your 4,1 unit.

Sandy

[karl french]

I have the same machine. I just recently replaced the second 2 GB ram chip with a 4 GB chip. The computer recognizes 6 GB just fine. I have noticed a slight increase in speed with CS5 as well.

I replaced the HD with a 500 GB drive as well. A nice upgrade from the 120 gig hard drive it originally came with.

[Kirk Gittings]

Upgrade your Macbook Pro to 8 gb and give it a fighting chance! Comparing a computer with 4 gb to one with 8 gb is apple to oranges, all else equal.

Sandy

Holy cow! I thought it was already maxed out with 4gb. Some sites say this will take 16GBs! Is that true? This is new territory for me with a newer MBP the last one I had only took 3gb.

[sanking]

Holy cow! I thought it was already maxed out with 4gb. Some sites say this will take 16GBs! Is that true? This is new territory for me with a newer MBP the last one I had only took 3gb.

Check this site for complete specifications for your model. http://www.everymac.com/

Most 2011 MacBook Pros will take up to 16 gb of memory. They were often configured with only 4 gb but it seems that most can be easily upgraded to 16 gb.You should get a very significant bump in performance going from 4 gb to 16 gb.

My 2010 Macbook Pro only takes 8 gb, but it runs a lot faster with 8 than with 4.

Sandy

[Frank Petronio]

Those files - 4x5 inches at 2400 ppi at 16-bit RGB are 650mb - are simply too large for efficient Photoshop work on a MacBook Pro, even with 6 or 8gb of RAM and a faster hard drive.

A new laptop would be better but the right tool is a 16gb iMac or better yet, a Mac Pro tower.

In the meantime, why not downsample and work with smaller files? If you can't afford a more powerful workstation then can you afford to be making giant prints from the larger files?

In my own case, I have a similar laptop to yours and I will scan at a high resolution, then downsize to a more moderate 200mb file size. These are much easier and faster to work on, and more than sufficient for nice 16x20 display prints.

If you have a beautiful high-res scan, archive it and come back to edit it in the future, when you have a more powerful computer. Your skills will be better too, hopefully.

In the early 1990s with 68030 processors, a 20mb file would choke the machine for 30 minutes per step! A few years later, 20mb was a standard working size, and it has doubled every few years ever since.... These are glorious times but there are still practical limitations.

[Frank Petronio]

Few people, other than fine-art large-format photographers, use such large image files. For example, a large highway billboard, 14 x 44 feet, only requires a 100mb file to print well. Even double-page spreads for magazine ads are only that much... large movie posters might use larger files, but most of them are interpolated.