----- Original Message -----
From: <usher99@xxxxxxx>
>
> I thought windoze 7 is pretty good at using RAM for cache anyway so am
> skeptical a dedicated RAM
> disk is worth the effort for PS to perhaps further speed it up over an
> SSD. PS should scarf up available RAM anyway, no?
>
I have no idea if PS will give up using temp file on scratch drive in Win 7,
I think 99% no. There is always temp file created on the scartch drive once
you open PS. The file can increase to a few GB when you do a few editing on
a large file. A very fast drive is required if you want a smooth action but
it does not speed up the whole opeartion much (it is just a matter of 0.2s
or 2s). Actually, a system with i7 is already too fast for PS use.
> My system finally complained bitterly trying to render a 6min in 1080p
> video in CS6. I had used several
> modifications of the clips including filters which I presume had to be
> applied to each frame. It took almost 40 min
> but came out OK. The clips had to be converted to "smart objects" or
> it is just applied to one frame--a bit sneaky.
> I can't even imagine how long it would take to process 30 fps raw
> files with the RAW video from Magic Lantern.
>
> Better mostly stick to stills, Mike
If you want fast video editing, go for the top six core Xeon, no hard disk
can speed up your process. BTW, check your CS6 to see if it only use single
core like PS :-)
C.H.Ling
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|