Comments on: The Right Computer For the Job (Not a Netbook) http://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/ photography education, inspiration and wisdom Thu, 29 Jul 2010 03:35:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: D. Travis Northhttp://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/comment-page-1/#comment-261 D. Travis North Mon, 19 Oct 2009 22:02:31 +0000 http://www.shutterphoto.net/?p=1283#comment-261 Touche. Though my caveat is that poor color inaccuracy and poor contrast ratios are more common on Netbooks than full-sized Notebooks or desktop monitors. But there is - as you point out - always the likelihood that your monitor may not be up to the task.If nothing else, a key takeaway of this discussion is that you should be fully aware of your monitor's capabilities Touche. Though my caveat is that poor color inaccuracy and poor contrast ratios are more common on Netbooks than full-sized Notebooks or desktop monitors. But there is – as you point out – always the likelihood that your monitor may not be up to the task.

If nothing else, a key takeaway of this discussion is that you should be fully aware of your monitor’s capabilities

]]> By: VojtechThttp://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/comment-page-1/#comment-260 VojtechT Mon, 19 Oct 2009 17:22:54 +0000 http://www.shutterphoto.net/?p=1283#comment-260 That's true, but you can say that about most notebooks... That’s true, but you can say that about most notebooks…

]]> By: D. Travis Northhttp://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/comment-page-1/#comment-259 D. Travis North Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:30:07 +0000 http://www.shutterphoto.net/?p=1283#comment-259 Let's not forget image quality, though. My problem with the Asus EEE is that its monitor is really not designed for graphics. Aside from pure pixel depth, contrast ratio and color accuracy are very important. As I said...not opposed to using it for a preview. But I would still recommend processing on a better screen. Let’s not forget image quality, though. My problem with the Asus EEE is that its monitor is really not designed for graphics. Aside from pure pixel depth, contrast ratio and color accuracy are very important. As I said…not opposed to using it for a preview. But I would still recommend processing on a better screen.

]]> By: elblancohttp://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/comment-page-1/#comment-257 elblanco Sun, 18 Oct 2009 05:36:46 +0000 http://www.shutterphoto.net/?p=1283#comment-257 I have to agree with some of these points and disagree with others having recently bought a netbook to take with me to help with my photography on a rather big multi-country vacation. My conclusion? If you travel a lot for your photography, a netbook is a practical must. I wish that I had had one all the years before!For about the size and weight of a hardbound book (plus a small portable mouse and a very small powerbrick), you have a great and very portable photo organizing workstation. Granted, the heavy photo editing work will have to happen back home, but I didn't have time to do any heavy photo editing while traveling anyways! I was far too busy taking photos.My workflow consisted pretty much of 1)getting up in the morning 2)taking as many pictures as I could point my camera at 3)moving the photos for that day onto the netbook 4)spot check the photos, delete ones with a thumb in it 4)rinse and repeat160GB is pretty small by today's standards, but even with Windows XP, Office, Gimp, and some various other odds and ends (including a bunch of old games that run on such minimal hardware) and a bunch of e-books and a few movies, I still had about 100GB left. Which works out to storage for about 6,000 15MB RAW photos. 500GB Passport USB drives can be had for another $110 on Newegg. I didn't bring one, but even then, I never felt crunched for space till about near the end of week 2.Using a netbook had many advantages during my trip then did having a regular laptop. 1) It was small enough to fit into every room safe I encountered. My laptop wouldn't have fit into most of them. 2) It was small enough to work on the pull down tray on the plane....in coach. And space left for a mouse. 3) It was small enough to fit on the mini-desk in the stateroom on a ship I was on. The desk was so small I couldn't have fit a magazine or a newspaper on it. 3) It was light enough (<3lbs) that I could lug it around (with mouse and power cord and universal adapter) without it being tiring. 3) It has SD ports on it so I could transfer direct off the card, this saved me from having to drag around more USB adapter cables to transfer from my camera, and was way faster. 4) The battery life is stupid ridiculous. If I turn off the wi-fi I get a bit over 5 hours. On the transatlantic plane trips this was invaluable time for me to sort the thousands of pictures I took on the trip. 5) It was cheap enough that if it was stolen, broken or lost I wouldn't be too heart broken over it (except for the pictures, but I'd have lost those if the same happened to a laptop anyways). 6) It was *just* fast enough to do some basic editing with gimp. And I mean *basic*, like crop, or rotate, adjust some contrast or brightness. But it was clearly not the fastest PC I ever used. I managed to assemble a few panoramas with AutoStitch but it was painfully slow.I agree about the low resolution, I really wish the screen was higher res. There were a few cases that if I had brought along a VGA cable I could have used the hotel TV as a monitor (or a real monitor in the business center) and gotten better resolution.I also agree about the low power, it is slow. But fast enough for transfer and review of the day's take.The trackpad is terrible, but I don't like the trackpad on my main laptop either, so I simply brought a $10 mouse along same as I would have with my laptop anyway.Even given these downsides, I can't see bringing a regular laptop with me on future trips, the advantages are just too great over a regular laptop. .-= elblanco´s last blog ..<a href="http://www.flickr.com/photos/elblanco5/3975606981/" rel="nofollow">Hiding Bovines</a> =-. I have to agree with some of these points and disagree with others having recently bought a netbook to take with me to help with my photography on a rather big multi-country vacation. My conclusion? If you travel a lot for your photography, a netbook is a practical must. I wish that I had had one all the years before!

For about the size and weight of a hardbound book (plus a small portable mouse and a very small powerbrick), you have a great and very portable photo organizing workstation. Granted, the heavy photo editing work will have to happen back home, but I didn’t have time to do any heavy photo editing while traveling anyways! I was far too busy taking photos.

My workflow consisted pretty much of 1)getting up in the morning 2)taking as many pictures as I could point my camera at 3)moving the photos for that day onto the netbook 4)spot check the photos, delete ones with a thumb in it 4)rinse and repeat

160GB is pretty small by today’s standards, but even with Windows XP, Office, Gimp, and some various other odds and ends (including a bunch of old games that run on such minimal hardware) and a bunch of e-books and a few movies, I still had about 100GB left. Which works out to storage for about 6,000 15MB RAW photos. 500GB Passport USB drives can be had for another $110 on Newegg. I didn’t bring one, but even then, I never felt crunched for space till about near the end of week 2.

Using a netbook had many advantages during my trip then did having a regular laptop.
1) It was small enough to fit into every room safe I encountered. My laptop wouldn’t have fit into most of them.
2) It was small enough to work on the pull down tray on the plane….in coach. And space left for a mouse.
3) It was small enough to fit on the mini-desk in the stateroom on a ship I was on. The desk was so small I couldn’t have fit a magazine or a newspaper on it.
3) It was light enough (<3lbs) that I could lug it around (with mouse and power cord and universal adapter) without it being tiring.
3) It has SD ports on it so I could transfer direct off the card, this saved me from having to drag around more USB adapter cables to transfer from my camera, and was way faster.
4) The battery life is stupid ridiculous. If I turn off the wi-fi I get a bit over 5 hours. On the transatlantic plane trips this was invaluable time for me to sort the thousands of pictures I took on the trip.
5) It was cheap enough that if it was stolen, broken or lost I wouldn't be too heart broken over it (except for the pictures, but I'd have lost those if the same happened to a laptop anyways).
6) It was *just* fast enough to do some basic editing with gimp. And I mean *basic*, like crop, or rotate, adjust some contrast or brightness. But it was clearly not the fastest PC I ever used. I managed to assemble a few panoramas with AutoStitch but it was painfully slow.

I agree about the low resolution, I really wish the screen was higher res. There were a few cases that if I had brought along a VGA cable I could have used the hotel TV as a monitor (or a real monitor in the business center) and gotten better resolution.

I also agree about the low power, it is slow. But fast enough for transfer and review of the day's take.

The trackpad is terrible, but I don't like the trackpad on my main laptop either, so I simply brought a $10 mouse along same as I would have with my laptop anyway.

Even given these downsides, I can't see bringing a regular laptop with me on future trips, the advantages are just too great over a regular laptop.
.-= elblanco´s last blog ..Hiding Bovines =-.

]]> By: VojtechThttp://www.shutterphoto.net/article/the-right-computer-for-the-job-not-a-netbook/comment-page-1/#comment-256 VojtechT Sat, 17 Oct 2009 19:04:56 +0000 http://www.shutterphoto.net/?p=1283#comment-256 It depends on how many megapixels you want to process. I have a 6Mpix camera (Canon 300D) and I occassionaly use Asus EEE for image processing. When you want to work with a few files only (develop RAW, do some adjustments), it is quite ok. Poor performance of netbooks is more noticeable in applications which need to work in realtime (like Renoise). .-= VojtechT´s last blog ..<a href="http://denik.zmatek.cz/imgs/166.jpg" rel="nofollow">Kaple sv. Cyrila a Metoděje na Radhošti</a> =-. It depends on how many megapixels you want to process. I have a 6Mpix camera (Canon 300D) and I occassionaly use Asus EEE for image processing. When you want to work with a few files only (develop RAW, do some adjustments), it is quite ok. Poor performance of netbooks is more noticeable in applications which need to work in realtime (like Renoise).
.-= VojtechT´s last blog ..Kaple sv. Cyrila a Metoděje na Radhošti =-.

]]>