Am thinking about getting an IMac Pro 10 core for my photography editing and as an investment that it will last me a long time. I use Lightroom. Has anyone had any experience with this computer using Lightroom and would Lightroom use all ten cores?
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
iMac pro on lightroom
- Thread starter Lawrenceblau
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
I use Lightroom latest version quite a bit on 2017 5k iMac i7 (not pro) and it uses the 8 available cores fine - 4 real cores with hyperthreading so I'm sure it will work on 10 core just peachy if anything it's overkill unless you're in a real rush (time=money) or massive files I'm working of canon raw files of c 20mp
[doublepost=1535151824][/doublepost]I currently shoot with a Sony 7RIiii, 42 mp and Sony A9 24 mp. I would rather go towards the IMac pro and probably get more than I need to try and lengthen the life of the iMac. The 10 core 32 RAM seems like the sweetspot
You may want to read my post from an older thread where I described the usage of the cores with LR:
iMac Pro Lightroom 7.2
A large Lightroom test import seems to max out at around 1000% cpu:
It did hit 1400% at one point, dropped to ~100%, but seems to hover at 800-1000%, so only about 30-40% of my cpu capacity (18-36 logical) was used. That makes me wonder if an 8 core would do the trick. 16 logical Faster cpus and 1600% theoretical maximum.
It did hit 1400% at one point, dropped to ~100%, but seems to hover at 800-1000%, so only about 30-40% of my cpu capacity (18-36 logical) was used. That makes me wonder if an 8 core would do the trick. 16 logical Faster cpus and 1600% theoretical maximum.
I have a 10c with 64gb RAM and Vega64, working with D850 raw files (45mp).
Generally performance is very good, especially importing and exporting - which can be ridiculously quick...plus I can start editing images during import without thins slowing down.
There are still times where Lightroom will slow right down though, usually with images that have a ‘lot’ of adjustment brush work - such as having to mask off a fiddly area requiring many small brush strokes. For images that don’t require a huge amount of localised adjustment, everything remains snappy for the most part. At least, I rarely find myself waiting for Lightroom to catch up which is very good considering the file sizes.
I should also point out that’s all despite the fact my entire catalogue runs from an external Sandisk Extreme 900 SSD, which potentially gives an overal reduced performance versus working directly off the internal SSD.
Also, I never hear the fans. Ever!
Generally performance is very good, especially importing and exporting - which can be ridiculously quick...plus I can start editing images during import without thins slowing down.
There are still times where Lightroom will slow right down though, usually with images that have a ‘lot’ of adjustment brush work - such as having to mask off a fiddly area requiring many small brush strokes. For images that don’t require a huge amount of localised adjustment, everything remains snappy for the most part. At least, I rarely find myself waiting for Lightroom to catch up which is very good considering the file sizes.
I should also point out that’s all despite the fact my entire catalogue runs from an external Sandisk Extreme 900 SSD, which potentially gives an overal reduced performance versus working directly off the internal SSD.
Also, I never hear the fans. Ever!
I do some time lapse photography and find th exporting and processing using Star Stax is very slow using my core i7 2015 MacBook Pro. Furthermore, my MacBook Pro will start to overheat during the process
I have a Sony A7RIII, a 10-core Vega 64 iMac Pro and a top-spec 2017 iMac 27. I use Lightroom CC Classic on both. I'm mainly a videographer but I process 42 megapixel ARW stills occasionally.
Both computers do OK. Past versions of Lightroom had severe problems with GPU utilization for certain LR functions and it was sometimes faster to disable GPU acceleration in LR>Preferences>Performance.
The latest 7.5 version of LR CC Classic seems a lot better. Doing some brief tests, the iMac imported and generated 1:1 previews in 37 sec, whereas the iMP took only 30 sec.
A key problem area in past versions was responsiveness of the adjustment brush. Not only would it often become laggy and sluggish, but the iMac Pro seemed no faster.
That now seems a lot better -- both LR CC ver. 7.5 seems a lot better on both iMac and iMP, and the iMP seems genuinely faster. The adjustment brush is more fluid and responsive on the iMP. Likewise it seems noise reduction and sharpening are more responsive on the iMP.
Of course the iMac Pro is quieter -- you almost never hear the fan spin up, whereas the i7 iMac spins up a lot. This doesn't really bother me because I have several spinning RAID arrays in my office, but the iMP's quietness is still nice.
The problem is the 10-core Vega 64 version is expensive, and there are often excellent deals on the 8-core Vega 56 version. I'm not sure how much faster the 10-core Vega 64 version would be for LR tasks.
You can now sometimes get various iMac Pros on the Apple refurbished site, which are essentially brand new, come with a full warranty and can be returned.
I would exercise extreme caution about buying an Apple computer from B&H, Adorama or other sites which do not permit returns, or which charge a 15% restocking fee.
Apple will likely be releasing an updated iMac fairly soon, and some rumors say it might have a 6-core or 8-core CPU available. If you can wait to evaluate that, it might be good.
My current plan is to buy an iMac Pro 10 core with a 56 Vega card and 32 RAM from Apple with Apple Care. I do not see Apple refreshing the IMac line to be in competition with the Pro line unless they also refresh the Pro line at the same time. The only thing I am on the fence is to get 64 RAM instead of 32. I would still use the 2015 MacBook Pro on the road.
I have the base iMac Pro model here and 20mp + 36mp RAW files. I used a regular 2015 iMac (3.2 i5, M395, 32GB RAM) before.
On the iMac Pro everything works well. The extra horsepower is great for import, export and batch operations. Also when stitching panoramas or HDR. Import + 1:1 preview generation is much much faster.
Compared to the 2015 Core i5 iMac there is no big difference in speed during normal editing. Lightroom Classic is still sluggish (no matter how many cores you have). Lightroom CC is better.
On the iMac Pro everything works well. The extra horsepower is great for import, export and batch operations. Also when stitching panoramas or HDR. Import + 1:1 preview generation is much much faster.
Compared to the 2015 Core i5 iMac there is no big difference in speed during normal editing. Lightroom Classic is still sluggish (no matter how many cores you have). Lightroom CC is better.
Have a a 10-core Vega 64 iMac Pro with 64GB RAM, use Capture One Pro with the Tangent Element KB panel for edit of my RAW files. Never encountered any lagging.. The iMP gives immediate response, love it compared with my old iMac where it spins almost forever for each adjustment..Also very happy with FCPX and my 4K files..
Thanks for the response. Am leaning towards the same machine as yours except for the Vega 56 card. Also, would like to get a long life out of this machine and am probably overbuying at this time. My 2015 MacBook Pro is still great for single image editing. Has a core i7 2.5 chip and 16 RAM
I have an 8 core / 64 gb / Vega 64 / 2 TB SSD and I've been very pleased by its LR performance on D850 RAW images.
So far, I haven't given it more than 100 RAW to import and make 1:1 previews at a time, but it chewed right through that batch, no problem. I didn't actually put a timer on it, but looking at the clock on the iMac, I saw about 3 minutes for that job.
I was supposed to shoot a local festival yesterday and was looking forward to seeing how it would do in ~500 raws, but the festival was cancelled because of rain.
We've had a lot of rain, such as nearly 50 inches in 3 days at my house, but that has nothing to do with iMac Pro and LR. Sorry.
So far, I haven't given it more than 100 RAW to import and make 1:1 previews at a time, but it chewed right through that batch, no problem. I didn't actually put a timer on it, but looking at the clock on the iMac, I saw about 3 minutes for that job.
I was supposed to shoot a local festival yesterday and was looking forward to seeing how it would do in ~500 raws, but the festival was cancelled because of rain.
We've had a lot of rain, such as nearly 50 inches in 3 days at my house, but that has nothing to do with iMac Pro and LR. Sorry.
Thanks for the comments. I am leaning towards the 10 core 64 RAm and 56 Vega card
I have a 2015 iMac with 8GB of ram, and it handles LR just fine. Granted, I'm not a professional and I shoot on a M43 camera so the image sizes are smaller then what others use. Given my experience, I do think an iMac Pro is over kill, I'm sure others will disagree but I don't think its worth the cost. I mean I see people using LR on a small laptop, (pre-2018)
I know at this point the 10 core IMAC Pro is overkill. I am looking for more speed, power, not having to worry about overheating my 2015 MACBOOK Pro when I do certain tasks and longevity
I'd say hold off and see what Apple will do, if they upgrade the iMac to Coffee Lake then you'll have a 6 core beast that will be more then enough. The question is whether Apple will upgrade the iMac this year - that I do not know.
I agree. If they update, I plan on seeing what the price difference will be. Will probably wait until mid October
You really do use powerful cameras. The Sony 7RI Series is by far no toy. I think the iMac Pro would be a great tool for your usage. Like maflynn mentioned above, I am sure a 6 core consumer iMac will hit the shelve soon.
However, what will you do if Apple bumps up the iMac Pro on the top end to a 22 core CPU and/or lowers the entry price tag?
I would absolutely go for the iMac Pro myself, but I am afraid I am not pro enough at the moment. You on the other hand with those cameras of yours very well might be.
Just imagine you skip the Pro and you go with the consumer version just to find out it craps out on you two and a half years later with no real up-to-date backup in place and valuable customers lost. (it happened to a friend of mine)
I think you should go all Pro and reflect on the unpacking experience of a shiny new iMac Pro ...
I love the Sony line of cameras. The color rendition on them is amazing. I do not want to be locked into a computer that has trouble handling my photography as I grow. I have been told that I should only buy what I use now and that later I can upgrade at a cheaper price. Do not understand that sort of reasoning but to each his own. In 2015 I bought a top of the line MacBook i7 core processor and it is still a great laptop. I travel around the world with it and have had the comfort of working with a computer that I own as my photography grows.
The issue is lightroom is still a hog.
Im a wedding and event photographer by trade and have been looking for an update to my 2010 mac pro since about 2013.
Imports and exports dont tell the story yet it is all people talk about when reviewing the software.
The actual responsiveness of UI is great if you are making small, simple global amends. If your one to delve in and use a lot of the adjustment at your disposal then it really crawls.
At the end of the day the imports and exports make up such a small amount of time compared to the amount of time you spend in the develop module with an event or wedding.
I use 5DSR 5DMKIV 5DMKIII and 6DMKII. These are my impressions from testing all the options. Although they arent scientific I wanted to just test and see what my normal workflow is like in comparison. Benchmarks only tell you so much.
Once you add sharpening, noise reduction and lens profiles which most do with an import preset the UI really starts to lag on every machine I have tested. The iMac pro is quicker at import and export but seems performance is quicker but not that noticeable similar across the board. Especially when you use the more intense processing adjustments like clarity and dehaze. Then when you have made all the standard adjustments adding local adjustments get really laggy.
Then there is the issue of zooming to 100% and it creating instant previews. All images are imported 1-1 but yet it still takes 1-3 seconds for it to give a sharp preview, takes longer for the 5DSR vs the 5DMKIV/III/6DMKII. When you pan through the image it has to load the next part of the image which is a frustrating experience. Im not sure about other photographers but when im making local adjustments I zoom in to make accurate adjustments then zoom out to give me a global view of the edit. I may zoom in 10-15 times to an image while making local adjustments and pan around the image. The first time you zoom in im assuming it saves the preview as a cache and then it is pretty responsive after that.
If like me, usually a wedding will comprise of about 500 images to edit, if it takes the machine 2 seconds to make a 100% preview zooming once per images is 17 minutes you are sat waiting. Thats longer than it takes to import or export the same amount of images generally. There are a lot of areas where lightroom is a pain in the ass and literally steals time from you, people dont seem to document this part of the problem.
For testing purposes I own a 2010 mac pro in my sig, have tested the base 3.2 8 core iMac pro, 2.9 i7 quad 2017 macbook pro, 2017 3.8 i5 quad iMac all top "off the shelf" machines which were tested in store with an external 1tb T5 drive. Unfortunately the iMac only has 8GB of ram of the shelf which probably didn't do it much of a favor. Add to that a 2017 base iMac 3.4 i5 with 2tb fusion which I bought my father as a Christmas present.
The iMac pro was the quickest to import 500 1-1 previews with my import preset which has sharpening, noise reduction and lens corrections off the bat. The 5k iMac and Macbook pro hotly followed There wasn't a vast difference a minute or so across the board.
Once I got the images imported and did my usual workflow I found the iMac pro and 5k iMac UI to perform almost the same lagging in the same areas. The iMac pro was slightly less laggy with local adjustments but really there wasn't enough between them to make me spend twice the amount. The 5K iMac ramp up the fans and was much louder which is annoying. The macbook pro again was the slowest to import and export yet interestingly the UI had no where near as much lag at all under the same circumstance it also ramp up the fans to the point where it was intrusive.
I found this curious and wondered if it was due to the screen resolution of the retina vs 5k. I decided to do a little experiment. If you attach a lower resolution display to the 5K iMac or iMac pro like a 27" thunderbolt display or 27" ACD responsiveness is almost instantaneous, no lag in the UI, nor in zooming. So essentially it would seem the 5K display regardless of whether you using the RX580 or the Vega56 seems to be the limiting factor. Looks beautiful but pushing 14mp at 60fps and changing adjustment sliders basically means trying to re-draw the image at 60FPS is too much. Both cards seem to struggle to keep up at that resolution. With exactly the same preferences set the 2560x1440 display was butter smooth.
Compared to my 2010 mac pro the imports and exports were faster, but we arent talking like twice the speed its like 10-25% the UI felt almost exactly the same but the Mac Pro is on an 2.5k 27" ACD which I actually really like. Although the Mac Pro is slower when zooming to 100% and dehaze is a real pain to use. Thankfully im not that keen on how it looks so dont use it often. Generally the experience isnt that different.
At the end of the day im not really interested in import and exports, its rare that clients expect images back from weddings and events. If im shooting for 8-12 hours I cull images in Photo Mechanic when I get home because it is the quickest way to do so, rate 4* and 5* the images for processing, delete the 1* and leave lightroom to import. The next day start editing and get out a few 5* images to feed the client and get to work on the rest.
The actual speed of the UI is much more important to me than the speed of import and export. Currently the 5K iMac nor the iMac Pro are so much faster its worth dropping 4-5k on one.
For me I would need to come up with some sort of external data strategy because my Mac Pro has 20TB internally and I have a back up of that onsite and offsite. For me to transfer the data I would need an external array for that TB3 connection and the size of the data is an extra £600 then I would need to populate it with new drives so add another £500. More like 6K.
I dont think it is any fault of the Mac. Lightroom needs more work, similar to all of the whole Adobe suite.
I also have a 5 series based i7 gaming PC to test against too and the results are similar. Even from reading about super high end rigs they still arent buttery smooth.
Lightroom got a huge upgrade with 7.2 and smaller improvments up to 7.5 but was so much slower beforehand. There is a lot more they could do. There is obviously an issue with performance of higher res displays and the "use graphics processor" obviously isnt doing the job efficiently at the moment. The activity shows its being used...
Im not sure the iMac pro is the right tool for photographers, for multi media - video/3d design/graphic design etc then yes.
Back in the day the Mac Pro over an iMac was a no brainer because it had the internal storage options and a removable graphics card an free PCI slots. The iMac was too compromised being an AIO. Now the only option is the iMac pro and its non up-gradable. The i series is no doubt more than powerful enough to do the job and generally ECC isnt that helpful in this field but costs a lot more. High clock speeds are also preferred and the Xeons are slower. Funnily enough since 2010 I have had 3 stick of ECC fail yet have never had a normal stick fail.
That worries me with the fact it renders the machine useless and from the lack of professional services attached to the iMac pro from apple it could be a 3 week turn around for a stick to be replaced... and they may ruin the machine doing so. The support reviews have not filled me with confidence at all. Other similarly priced professional solutions come with 24/7 on site support to get you up and running.
I would wait if you can.
The 2018 iMac with the newer chipset will be as quick as the base model iMac pro for these tasks and if the 2017 iMac prices are to go by a top end chip with 32gb ram and 1tb SSD with top end graphics wont be more than £3500. If they keep the user up-gradable ram you could save £200 adding it yourself. Call it £3300 vs £4800 for the iMac pro its roughly 30% more expensive and if PC benchmarks with the new chip sets are anything to go by it will be as quick.
It all depends if apple cripple it with poor cooling.
It feels like ive been waiting for years (which I have) but the 2010 mac pro is still supported under Mohave which means another year at least. Must say something for the machines of this era... lots of people are still using them. It still runs pretty well compared to the cost to upgrade so I think for me personally its worth waiting for the speed improvements to drop in lightroom to take advantage of it.
Not seeing great speed improvements when its been 8 years then its not really worth it...
Similar to the 2013 Mac pro do you have confidence that apple will update it over time? 6 years and still the same cr*p 2013 model. If the Mac pro 2019 arrives that may well be the machine worth buying.
Im a wedding and event photographer by trade and have been looking for an update to my 2010 mac pro since about 2013.
Imports and exports dont tell the story yet it is all people talk about when reviewing the software.
The actual responsiveness of UI is great if you are making small, simple global amends. If your one to delve in and use a lot of the adjustment at your disposal then it really crawls.
At the end of the day the imports and exports make up such a small amount of time compared to the amount of time you spend in the develop module with an event or wedding.
I use 5DSR 5DMKIV 5DMKIII and 6DMKII. These are my impressions from testing all the options. Although they arent scientific I wanted to just test and see what my normal workflow is like in comparison. Benchmarks only tell you so much.
Once you add sharpening, noise reduction and lens profiles which most do with an import preset the UI really starts to lag on every machine I have tested. The iMac pro is quicker at import and export but seems performance is quicker but not that noticeable similar across the board. Especially when you use the more intense processing adjustments like clarity and dehaze. Then when you have made all the standard adjustments adding local adjustments get really laggy.
Then there is the issue of zooming to 100% and it creating instant previews. All images are imported 1-1 but yet it still takes 1-3 seconds for it to give a sharp preview, takes longer for the 5DSR vs the 5DMKIV/III/6DMKII. When you pan through the image it has to load the next part of the image which is a frustrating experience. Im not sure about other photographers but when im making local adjustments I zoom in to make accurate adjustments then zoom out to give me a global view of the edit. I may zoom in 10-15 times to an image while making local adjustments and pan around the image. The first time you zoom in im assuming it saves the preview as a cache and then it is pretty responsive after that.
If like me, usually a wedding will comprise of about 500 images to edit, if it takes the machine 2 seconds to make a 100% preview zooming once per images is 17 minutes you are sat waiting. Thats longer than it takes to import or export the same amount of images generally. There are a lot of areas where lightroom is a pain in the ass and literally steals time from you, people dont seem to document this part of the problem.
For testing purposes I own a 2010 mac pro in my sig, have tested the base 3.2 8 core iMac pro, 2.9 i7 quad 2017 macbook pro, 2017 3.8 i5 quad iMac all top "off the shelf" machines which were tested in store with an external 1tb T5 drive. Unfortunately the iMac only has 8GB of ram of the shelf which probably didn't do it much of a favor. Add to that a 2017 base iMac 3.4 i5 with 2tb fusion which I bought my father as a Christmas present.
The iMac pro was the quickest to import 500 1-1 previews with my import preset which has sharpening, noise reduction and lens corrections off the bat. The 5k iMac and Macbook pro hotly followed There wasn't a vast difference a minute or so across the board.
Once I got the images imported and did my usual workflow I found the iMac pro and 5k iMac UI to perform almost the same lagging in the same areas. The iMac pro was slightly less laggy with local adjustments but really there wasn't enough between them to make me spend twice the amount. The 5K iMac ramp up the fans and was much louder which is annoying. The macbook pro again was the slowest to import and export yet interestingly the UI had no where near as much lag at all under the same circumstance it also ramp up the fans to the point where it was intrusive.
I found this curious and wondered if it was due to the screen resolution of the retina vs 5k. I decided to do a little experiment. If you attach a lower resolution display to the 5K iMac or iMac pro like a 27" thunderbolt display or 27" ACD responsiveness is almost instantaneous, no lag in the UI, nor in zooming. So essentially it would seem the 5K display regardless of whether you using the RX580 or the Vega56 seems to be the limiting factor. Looks beautiful but pushing 14mp at 60fps and changing adjustment sliders basically means trying to re-draw the image at 60FPS is too much. Both cards seem to struggle to keep up at that resolution. With exactly the same preferences set the 2560x1440 display was butter smooth.
Compared to my 2010 mac pro the imports and exports were faster, but we arent talking like twice the speed its like 10-25% the UI felt almost exactly the same but the Mac Pro is on an 2.5k 27" ACD which I actually really like. Although the Mac Pro is slower when zooming to 100% and dehaze is a real pain to use. Thankfully im not that keen on how it looks so dont use it often. Generally the experience isnt that different.
At the end of the day im not really interested in import and exports, its rare that clients expect images back from weddings and events. If im shooting for 8-12 hours I cull images in Photo Mechanic when I get home because it is the quickest way to do so, rate 4* and 5* the images for processing, delete the 1* and leave lightroom to import. The next day start editing and get out a few 5* images to feed the client and get to work on the rest.
The actual speed of the UI is much more important to me than the speed of import and export. Currently the 5K iMac nor the iMac Pro are so much faster its worth dropping 4-5k on one.
For me I would need to come up with some sort of external data strategy because my Mac Pro has 20TB internally and I have a back up of that onsite and offsite. For me to transfer the data I would need an external array for that TB3 connection and the size of the data is an extra £600 then I would need to populate it with new drives so add another £500. More like 6K.
I dont think it is any fault of the Mac. Lightroom needs more work, similar to all of the whole Adobe suite.
I also have a 5 series based i7 gaming PC to test against too and the results are similar. Even from reading about super high end rigs they still arent buttery smooth.
Lightroom got a huge upgrade with 7.2 and smaller improvments up to 7.5 but was so much slower beforehand. There is a lot more they could do. There is obviously an issue with performance of higher res displays and the "use graphics processor" obviously isnt doing the job efficiently at the moment. The activity shows its being used...
Im not sure the iMac pro is the right tool for photographers, for multi media - video/3d design/graphic design etc then yes.
Back in the day the Mac Pro over an iMac was a no brainer because it had the internal storage options and a removable graphics card an free PCI slots. The iMac was too compromised being an AIO. Now the only option is the iMac pro and its non up-gradable. The i series is no doubt more than powerful enough to do the job and generally ECC isnt that helpful in this field but costs a lot more. High clock speeds are also preferred and the Xeons are slower. Funnily enough since 2010 I have had 3 stick of ECC fail yet have never had a normal stick fail.
That worries me with the fact it renders the machine useless and from the lack of professional services attached to the iMac pro from apple it could be a 3 week turn around for a stick to be replaced... and they may ruin the machine doing so. The support reviews have not filled me with confidence at all. Other similarly priced professional solutions come with 24/7 on site support to get you up and running.
I would wait if you can.
The 2018 iMac with the newer chipset will be as quick as the base model iMac pro for these tasks and if the 2017 iMac prices are to go by a top end chip with 32gb ram and 1tb SSD with top end graphics wont be more than £3500. If they keep the user up-gradable ram you could save £200 adding it yourself. Call it £3300 vs £4800 for the iMac pro its roughly 30% more expensive and if PC benchmarks with the new chip sets are anything to go by it will be as quick.
It all depends if apple cripple it with poor cooling.
It feels like ive been waiting for years (which I have) but the 2010 mac pro is still supported under Mohave which means another year at least. Must say something for the machines of this era... lots of people are still using them. It still runs pretty well compared to the cost to upgrade so I think for me personally its worth waiting for the speed improvements to drop in lightroom to take advantage of it.
Not seeing great speed improvements when its been 8 years then its not really worth it...
Similar to the 2013 Mac pro do you have confidence that apple will update it over time? 6 years and still the same cr*p 2013 model. If the Mac pro 2019 arrives that may well be the machine worth buying.
Thanks for your thoughts. It appears that it is your opinion that Lightroom needs to catch up to the hardware and I agree. I believe they will to survive