![]() I get that the 10R files are bigger and it’ll all take longer and that’s fine…. I upgraded to Ventura and the M10R pretty much in the same week and it’s been a bit of a clucking disaster re performance. This is interesting for me as I’m quite new to mac and finding my way… Monterey and my M10 files with the inbuilt SD reader on my 2021 MacBook Pro worked just fine for me. With a TB4 drive things can go better still. I now have the 2TB on a USB-C drive that maxes read at 830 Mb/s write and 750 MB/s read but I also have a Thunderbolt 3 drive and will put it there to just improve the responsiveness in reading - it goes fast at 1.900 Mb/s and 2.400 Mb/s read. The internal drive reaches 6.300 Mbs write and 5.200 Mb/s read. A volume dedicates space better I understand. I consider creating a volume on the internal SSD with a quotum of 330 Gb for the catalogue and the previews, the latter being the most important feature of LR. Some cables will allow just the USB-A speed, while the same drive on a faster 'real modern' cable will reach SATA speeds. The new approach is APFS with the boot-sector information directly at the file the interlinking is for an SSD faster but also an attempt to hijack the drive is 'impossible'. The exFAT probably is in this history area as well.Īs regards older drives, I have seen that cables make all the differences that drives are blamed for. The reason to stop supporting media with a boot-sector is I think one of them. Now I hope to have a stable machine for the next few years.Īpple is very concious about security, and vulnerabilities. TimeMachine took about 20h to make the first full backup (internal SSD plus external drive). All other data (mainly my Raw-photographs) are on external disks (8TB drive). This includes LR catalogue and all other data related to adobe products. Ventura) and all the APPS on the internal ½ TB SSD. Up to today I just used TimeMachine with any new Mac. Now I am somehow proud that I manged a fully new installation which I never did before. So I deleted the whole 4TB SSD and wanted to re-install Ventura (Contr+alt+r) that ended up with a blinking question mark which seemingly is the worst situation that could happen. After I was persuaded that everything was working fine on the new Mac Studio I wanted to prepare the "old" 2017 Mac as spare machine. Until Ventura came a few days ago.Īfter I have moved all my internal data (about 3TB) onto external 8TB hard drive and after I have installed Adobe products from scratch on my new Mac Studio (after carefully studying which files to take onto the new machine in order to maintain all Adobe presets and Adobe settings). Subsequently I had around 3.8TB plus a second separate portion of about 0.2TB. I remember that I had to bring my Mac into the store (it was DQ in Switzerland) and they had to reconfigure the 4TB memory. As you describe problems started with Monterey. This was NOT an Apple feature as the Apple at that time offered a max of 2TB only. It was a full mistake, when in 2017 I bought an upgraded Mac (from 2 to 4TB). □ I selected the LG monitor (I do not want a 27”). Now on to a Studio, I keep my fingers crossed. i never tried it and left my iMac as a dodo machine. I heard it was overcome by having an external SSD with a Apple-pcie socket adapter to a standard M2-SSD socket: once the original drive was found somewhere even external on USB-C the update would be succesful. ![]() ![]() IMac problems_ Those that did replace the 1 or 2 Tb HDD with a SATA-SSD, and at the same time the 24Gb/100Gb Fusion drive master internally: with I think it was when installing Monterey that some original boot data from the original SSD was required. Externally I have 2x2Tb and some backups.īut LR CC is NOT fast at all. I never upgraded the internals - I have a Thunderbolt SSD and startup is 35 secs. ![]() Indeed the iMac 2017 Retina/Fusion I had was fixed with troubles. I have never had issues with LrC with the catalog on my main drive and the images on an external drive. ![]() If a smaller preview size is selected such a catalog could conceivably fit on a 256 GB drive (but I'd not want to do that). The original files would need to live elsewhere. Depending upon what else the computer is being used for a catalog of that size could fit on a 512 GB drive. The catalog and the 6 or 7 supporting files uses about 115 GB of storage. The images themselves live on an external SSD. My library, for example, contains data about 55K images. Original image files could live elsewhere. The issue was with the location of the catalog. No place for a catalogue.įirst let me say the issue was a bug that has since been fixed by Adobe. It ismpossible not to have an external catalogue (and raw file storage): with the current pricing, even 512Gb is only available in the top range Apple machines. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |