Xysterz wrote:
@EB-1@, , you have enough computers, drives, and RAM for all of Silicon Valley!
For those that are using a fast external drive, do you dump the photos onto your main machine, do the work, and then transfer/store them to the external drive? Or is the drive fast enough that you do the work directly from that external drive (like it was an internal drive)?
Since I do mainly landscape photography, I generally am processing a smaller amount of photos. Culling through what I've shot, finding those that are the best RAWs to work from. As Dan mentioned above, for the most part, the editing is done in memory, so it just depends on how tolerant you are in performance opening and then finally saving the result. My 10 GbE connection can be saturated on opening a file, but when saving my NAS is the bottleneck. I do have some SSD cache there to boost write performance though. And I don't find it to be unbearably slow.
I have a Thunderbolt NVME SSD that I used a bit, and it is very fast, but at the end of the day I just reverted to editing over my ethernet connection.
If I was shooting high volume, editing/processing high volumes of photos, then I could see maybe a shift to faster devices. But it really comes up to your own personal preferences based on your shooting and processing preferences.
So my working area is RAID 6 (with snapshots) along with a hot spare, the local backup is to a single drive, and the remote backup is to a single drive at my parents and the cloud. My rule of thumb is to never update the RAW files once ingested onto my NAS, and within a day there are 4 copies of it.
But again, my "works well" could easily be considered "crazy" by someone else.
Apr 16, 2026 at 05:39 PM
Previous versions of tsdevine's message #17022059 « RAM and Storage »
