Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 15 Jan 2014 (Wednesday) 14:28
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

Scratch disk?

 
mine1
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Jan 15, 2014 14:28 |  #1

Do you guys set up a dedicated scratch disk for photoshop? And is it only useful if you are doing very big projects or would it help just a normal photo-editing workflow? I have a samsung 840 pro ssd that I have my operating system and photoshop. And I have a red hdd for storage, but that leaves me with 2 empty msata bays in my laptop, so I was thinking of getting a ssd for one to use for a scratch disk for photoshop. Basically I am looking to get the pictures resolved as fast as possible (when importing a batch of photo's I mean) and have the actual ps processes as speedy as possible.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,998 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 16, 2014 01:14 |  #2

No point, if you have enough RAM it won't get used much. Just put scratch on the main SSD, it has plenty of bandwidth for scratch.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,422 posts
Gallery: 217 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4120
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Jan 16, 2014 01:29 |  #3

I keep a second 840 Pro for scratch, temp, etc files.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Jan 16, 2014 12:48 |  #4

Scatterbrained wrote in post #16609626 (external link)
I keep a second 840 Pro for scratch, temp, etc files.

I was thinking of doing that (well they don't make the 840 pro in msata, but i will do something similar), reason I wanted to go with a separate scratch disk is that adobe tells you to get the most speed out of it you need to make sure it is not the drive your photoshop/os is on and to not have it be the disk that has the pictures on it either.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
solara
Senior Member
620 posts
Joined Feb 2010
     
Jan 16, 2014 12:54 |  #5

I found that even on smaller files, Photoshop still created a scratch file on the RamDrive I use for scratch files. Whether it's being used is a different matter, but PS does create that file (or reserves the space for it) anyways. I have 32gb of RAM total, 10 of which is used for a RamDrive.


5D III, 7D | 17-55 f/2.8 | 16-35 f/4 | 24-105 f/4 | 85 f/1.8 | 135 f/2 | 70-200 f/4 IS | 580EX II | YN-560 | Manfrotto 190XPROB+498RC2

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Jan 16, 2014 13:00 |  #6

I am just hoping to get a little extra speed. I have 16 gigs of ram and a fast processor/gpu. but photoshop/lightroom are both so agonizingly slow that any advantage will help.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Jim ­ K
Senior Member
451 posts
Likes: 1
Joined Sep 2008
Location: Rockledge, FL
     
Jan 16, 2014 13:01 |  #7

solara wrote in post #16610651 (external link)
I found that even on smaller files, Photoshop still created a scratch file on the RamDrive I use for scratch files. Whether it's being used is a different matter, but PS does create that file (or reserves the space for it) anyways. I have 32gb of RAM total, 10 of which is used for a RamDrive.

Thanks, I have been thinking about going to 32GB rather than 16GB to avoid a fast disk for scratch. Figured the extra 16GB would cost less than an SSD drive, but if Ps still creates the scratch it might be worth letting it do that on a HD and probably never use it because of the extra 16GB.


Canon: 7D (2, 1 gripped), 50D gripped, 500 f/4L IS, 100-400 L IS, 70-200 f/4L IS, 28-135 IS, 10-22, 15-85 IS, 1.4x II, 580EX
5D3, 24-105 f/4L IS, 17-40 f/4L IS, TS-E 24 f/3.5L II. S100 p&s
Gitzo GT3530LS, Wimberley ver. II. Manfrottto: tripod 055XPROB legs, 448RC2 head; monopod 679B, 234RC tilt head

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,998 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 16, 2014 21:11 |  #8

mine1 wrote in post #16610637 (external link)
I was thinking of doing that (well they don't make the 840 pro in msata, but i will do something similar), reason I wanted to go with a separate scratch disk is that adobe tells you to get the most speed out of it you need to make sure it is not the drive your photoshop/os is on and to not have it be the disk that has the pictures on it either.

Technically true, but in practice unless you're editing multi-GB files constantly with very little RAM I doubt it'll make any difference.

Who uses PS that much these days anyway? Most stuff is done in Bridge/Lightroom.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,422 posts
Gallery: 217 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4120
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Jan 16, 2014 22:36 |  #9

tim wrote in post #16611885 (external link)
Technically true, but in practice unless you're editing multi-GB files constantly with very little RAM I doubt it'll make any difference.

Who uses PS that much these days anyway? Most stuff is done in Bridge/Lightroom.

Most of your stuff is done in bridge/LR/ACR; don't confuse your workflow with everyone elses. ;) Every image I edit goes through Ps, Some files may see two dozen layers or more.


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,998 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 16, 2014 22:42 |  #10

Don't confuse your old fashioned workflow with a modern one ;)

My point is unless you run out of RAM regularly the scratch disk performance is likely irrelevant. There are ways of working that out, something to do with efficiency percentage, but I can't remember the details.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Scatterbrained
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,422 posts
Gallery: 217 photos
Best ofs: 11
Likes: 4120
Joined Jan 2010
Location: Chula Vista, CA
     
Jan 16, 2014 23:07 |  #11

tim wrote in post #16612082 (external link)
Don't confuse your old fashioned workflow with a modern one ;)

My point is unless you run out of RAM regularly the scratch disk performance is likely irrelevant. There are ways of working that out, something to do with efficiency percentage, but I can't remember the details.

Old fashioned? Naw, just different needs. There's a lot that Lr still doesn't do, and I'm not exactly shooting volume over here. :cool:

Personally, I run a second SSD for scratch/temp/page/etc. No point in having software constantly writing temporary files to my primary drive. :cool:


VanillaImaging.com (external link)"Vacuous images for the Vapid consumer"
500px (external link)
flickr (external link)
1x (external link)
instagram (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
grayline
Member
Avatar
247 posts
Likes: 19
Joined Dec 2013
Location: Newnan Georgia
     
Jan 16, 2014 23:57 |  #12

Absolutely. Everyone who uses PS professionally or Seriously uses a Scratch disk or Junk folder,Many many Layers and saves


Gear List :EOS 70D ,Sigma 50mm 1.4,Tamron 18-270, Canon 18-55,Canon HFM31,Canon SX280HS,Olympus E-10 ,

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
mine1
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,289 posts
Likes: 4
Joined Jun 2012
Location: Kalispell Montana
     
Jan 17, 2014 00:00 |  #13

I don't do anything professionally, not even close, I just want as fast as I can get and I would rather not have my os drive getting clogged up with temp files.


http://www.flickr.com/​photos/81190407@N08/ (external link)
Canon 60d.Canon 18-135, 55-250 II, and 10-18 stm. and Benro C-1681t Travel Angel, with Sirui K20x head.

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tim
Light Bringer
Avatar
50,998 posts
Likes: 364
Joined Nov 2004
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
     
Jan 17, 2014 01:39 |  #14

When you're editing programs the OS/software disk is completely idle. Personally I do have a second SSD for page, scratch, and little things like email, but I don't believe it's necessary for most people. If you have 4GB of RAM and work on 16GB files regularly sure, if you have 16GB of RAM and don't work on massive files don't worry.

Just use the OS SSD. Put your images on another disk if you can, but new SSDs are so fast I think you'll find the bottleneck is the CPU even if the OS, programs, images, cache, and scratch are all on the same SSD.


Professional wedding photographer, solution architect and general technical guy with multiple Amazon Web Services certifications.
Read all my FAQs (wedding, printing, lighting, books, etc)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
hollis_f
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
10,649 posts
Gallery: 1 photo
Likes: 85
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Sussex, UK
     
Jan 17, 2014 06:30 |  #15

mine1 wrote in post #16610637 (external link)
reason I wanted to go with a separate scratch disk is that adobe tells you to get the most speed out of it you need to make sure it is not the drive your photoshop/os is on and to not have it be the disk that has the pictures on it either.

This was the case in the days of magnetic spinny things, when heads had to physically move to access different data. If PS decided it needed to use the scratch file then it would have to look up the file's location and then wait for the head to move to the correct place before it could start.

But with an SSD it takes no extra time to access data in a different part of the drive. So there's no perceptible difference in having the scratch on the OS drive or on a separate drive. The only reason to have them separate it the nice warm feeling from the placebo effect.


Frank Hollis - Retired mass spectroscopist
Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll complain about the withdrawal of his free fish entitlement.
Gear Website (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

2,857 views & 0 likes for this thread
Scratch disk?
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is idauria
1258 guests, 214 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.