I was never able to utilize the full capacity of a Gigabit (1000Mbps) Ethernet connection up until now. The way I was able to do that was to have two computers with SSD (Solid State Drive). Then I copied data from one computer to the other. Just see for yourself…
In the past whenever I transferred data to either a network storage, server or simply another computer there was a bottleneck. And the bottleneck used to be either the source or destination drive because more than likely the device had a regular disk storage. Currently my desktop PC has Corsair Force GT SSD drive, and my laptop has a Samsung SSD. In essence I’m going from SSD over a Gigabit Ethernet to another SSD.
In the past the most I got out of a Gigabit Ethernet was 50-60 MB/s. But now you can see that I was able to achieve 116 MB/s. That’s maxing out the Gigabit Ethernet. Is my Gigabit LAN the bottleneck now?
Up until today I was hesitant to rotate my photos right after downloading them from my camera. The reason was that rotation is considered editing, and every time you edit JPEG file loose quality.
Now after doing some research I found out that I was wrong all along. If the dimensions of the image are multiples of 8 then the rotations are lossless. Otherwise it is not possible to rotate the image without recomputing the blocks which re-compresses the image and quality is lost.
Guess what… whichever resolution you pick (small, medium or large) on your camera dimensions are divisible by 8. WOW… AND THIS IS TRUE FOR ANY CAMERA MANUFACTURER. So no more keeping the pictures unrotated. Oh, this is true for Windows and Macs built in picture viewer. I’m sure it will be true for other viewers as well.
Engagement and PreWedding Photography
#Photography by GasparianFOTO
www.gasparian.us
#Wedding #Photographer #Engagement #Special Events
Young Bride.
Photography by GasparianFOTO
www.gasparian.us
#wedding #photography #baptism #birthdays
My wife and Charlie (Taken with Instagram)
Self-Portrait during work
In my earlier blog posts True Power of Your PC I stated that I’m able to do practically everything with only 4GB of RAM. That’s still is true but yesterday I noticed that my current system which has 8GB of RAM is still running out of memory when rendering the video with Adobe Encore.
Some background info about my computing habits. I always turn the Virtual Memory off to actually see at what point in time does the physical memory run out. Obviously it’s not an issue, and I never run out of memory on day-to-day computing otherwise I would never turn the Virtual Memory off nor would I recommend anyone to do so. Running out of memory starts happening during memory/RAM intensive operations such as video editing, Photoshop, virtualization, gaming, compiling/development and so on.
Now, how is it that my old system with 4GB or RAM and my new system with 8GB or RAM behave the same. What I mean by this is that both systems were able to run the application without the Virtual Memory and both systems reported running out of memory somewhere in the middle of the rendering?
Looking at the picture you can see that all available memory has been taken and the screen shot looks very similar to the screen shot from the 4GB of RAM system. My understanding is that Adobe will take as much free memory as possible even though it doesn’t absolutely need it. My assumption is that if I had 16GB or RAM I would have still gotten the same error message at around 20% into the rendering.
At first thought I’m going to assume having more memory helped Adobe Encore finishing the job faster, but I don’t have any facts to support that. My current system renders twice as fast but obviously it’s not because of the memory. My new system is a completely new system with Intel i7 2600K CPU overclocked to 4.8GHz. On the other hand my older system as an AMD Phenome II X4 940 Black Edition running un-overclocked with the original specs. So there is no way for me to tell if the extra 4GB of Ram is making any improvement except that it’s a 8GB vs 4GB.