MacBook Air with Aperture

I had been wanting to switch from my MacBook Pro to a MacBook Air for travel. My MBP is my main computer, and I have always worried about traveling with it and losing it or having it stolen. Before trips I would sanitize the laptop of files and other info that concerned me, then put those files back on when I returned home.

I use Aperture for my photos. I was concerned that the MBA would be too slow to tolerate. I use the word tolerate, because I fully expect the MBA to be slower than the MBP, but as long as the speed is tolerable for processing photos on site then I can live with it until I return home to a faster computer.

I bought a MBA on Friday, with the understanding that I would test it with Aperture, and return it if it was intolerable. I thought I would share my results in case any others are curious.

I shoot a Canon 40D. The raw files are typically 11 to 15 MB each. I took 55 photos with my camera. Normally I would import the photos with a FireWire card reader. However, the MBA has no ports other than USB. I therefore hooked my camera directly to the MBA with USB to import the photos. I did the same thing with my MBP for comparison. After import, I monitored how long it took to build all the jpeg previews. I choose to build full size previews at a quality level of 5. I then stepped through all the photos one at a time, waiting until the full RAW file had loaded before proceeding to the next file. This was to test the time it takes when adjusting photos, after finishing with one photo and waiting for the next to load.

The results are summarized below.

Read card and draw 55 thumbnails for import ... MBP 16 sec ... MBA 27 sec ... 69% longer

Import 55 photos ... MBP 111 sec ... MBA 133 seconds ... 20% longer

Build 55 full size jpeg previews ... MBP 193 sec ... MBA 304 sec ... 58% longer

Step through all 55 photos ... MBP 154 sec ... MBA 210 sec ... 36% longer

The import function only took 20% longer on the MBA. I suspect this is because the USB connection direct to the camera is the main limiting factor.

Building previews took 58% longer. Not surprising, considering that my MBP runs at 2.33 GHz, while the MBA is only 1.6 GHz. I suspect the processor speed would be the main factor in building previews. Another factor would be the hard drive speed. My MBP has a 200 GB 7200 rpm drive, while the MBA has an 80 GB drive at 4200 rpm.

Stepping through the photos taxes the hard drive and the graphics card. The graphics capabilities of the MBP are much better than the MBA. The MBA was 36% slower, likely a result of the slower hard drive and weak graphics power.

After the first test, I repeated the import and preview test the next day with 108 photos.

Import 108 photos ... MBP 232 sec ... MBA 264 sec ... 14% longer

Build 108 previews ... MBP 383 sec... MBA 635 sec ... 66% longer

Total for import and build ... MBP 615 sec ... MBA 899 sec ... 46% longer

My decision? Keep the MBA. It is definitely slower, but the speed is acceptable to me. I am willing to trade off the speed in order to get a smaller, lighter travel computer. I will be buying a USB card reader to see if it is any faster than directly connecting the camera. I will likely change Aperture's preferences on the MBA so that it does not automatically/immediately build previews. I will then download all cards in succession. Once the cards are downloaded, I will manually initiate the previews, while I grab a cold beer and kick back and relax and savour the memories of the day.

p.s. My thoughts on the MBA. Cool factor is off the charts! It is beautiful to behold and handle. The weight difference is huge. It makes my MBP feel like a boat anchor. There are many sacrifices, but none of them outweigh the final package. Kudos Apple.

Cool info. I have played with the MacBook Air at the store and until you actually touch one, the commercials do not do it justice (as you know). I do not have a trip coming up in the near future and have been holding off in the hope they tweak some things in the next Gen (please a 4 pin FW) but having something so small and light...with Mac OS of course, tempting right now....until they put iPhoto on the iPod Touch

Dam!, I had hoped to just take my Jobo to Fiji and wait for the next model of the MBA. Now I will spend the next month agonizing over this question.

Are you using the SSD or the hard drive option?

How are you able to consider only 64 or 80GB of total disk space? That small a free space would not be enough for me on a trip even if I brought no entertainment with me on the hard drive.

I would be interested to see what your import times would be on the MBP if you used a fast card and a FW reader.

I always use an external mouse on photo trips (although I might not if I only had a 13" screen).

Now I will spend the next month agonizing over this question.

Quit agonizing and go shopping.

Are you using the SSD or the hard drive option?

I am using the hard drive. The tests I've seen on Macworld don't show a significant speed gain with the SSD. The size of the SSD is even harder to swallow than the HD. And the price of the SSD, they must be kidding.

How are you able to consider only 64 or 80GB of total disk space? That small a free space would not be enough for me on a trip even if I brought no entertainment with me on the hard drive.

I have loaded Aperture and several other applications. I also have a 10 GB iTunes library (music only). This leaves about 40 GB free. With previews, this is room for about 3800 photos from my 20D or 3000 photos from my 40D.

I just looked at the photos from my last 3 dive trips. On my two trips to Bonaire last year I shot 1000 photos on one trip and 1100 photos on the other trip. My trip to Grand Cayman this year produced about 800 photos. After culling, I have anywhere from 180 to 260 photos from the trips that I keep.

So, for a dive trip, 40 GB should be plenty.

I am concerned about my trip to Africa this summer for a photo safari. If I exceed 40 GB, I will copy the project to my 250 GB external HD, erase it from the MBA, and start fresh with 40 GB of space. I can also dump the iTunes library if I need to and gain another 10 GB.

I have the external drive partitioned into an 80 GB partition and a 170 GB partition. The 80 GB partition contains a duplicate of my MBA HD which was made with SuperDuper. I can boot from the partition if my MBA HD fails or becomes unusable. The other 170 GB can be used for photos, movies, music, etc.

For redundancy I have ordered a 250 GB HyperDrive. My plan is to copy the CF card to the MBA and the HyperDrive, then verify the files are on both, before erasing and reusing the card.

So, long story short, I don't see the 40 GB as being a deal-breaker for me. However, that doen't stop me from wishing for an MBA with at least 160 GB, and preferably 250 GB. Then I would be really happy.

I would be interested to see what your import times would be on the MBP if you used a fast card and a FW reader.

I don't have a real fast card. It is a SanDisk ultra II 8.0 GB. I do have a Lexar FireWire CompactFlash Reader. Today I went out and bought a SanDisk Extreme USB 2.0 Reader. I did some more tests using the 8 GB CF card, the MBP with the FW reader, and the MBA with the USB reader. Results are:

Import 100 photos ... MBP 171 sec ... MBA 194 sec ... 13% longer

Finish building thumbnails ... MBP 21 sec ... MBA 59 sec ... 181% longer (the MBA had a dozen thumbs to finish, the MBP kept up better during import)

Build 100 previews ... MBP 346 sec... MBA 533 sec ... 54% longer

Total for import and build ... MBP 538 sec ... MBA 786 sec ... 46% longer

Total times were comparable to my earlier test, 46% longer with the MBA. FW vs USB seemed to be a non-issue, perhaps due to the "slow" speed of my card.

I always use an external mouse on photo trips (although I might not if I only had a 13" screen).

Since the MBA has only one USB port, you would need a hub to use a mouse during import, backup, etc. Or, simply get a Bluetooth Mighty Mouse.

Thanks for posting the results of your tests!

I agree with the opinions on the SSD versus the hard drive. SSD needs to get a lot faster to justify its price. I wish Apple saw fit to offer the 160GB 1.8" drive rather than just the 80GB. I feel the disk performance and size really limit the MBA.

With the conventional drive, I don't see why a MBA wouldn't be OK if the size were big enough. It'll be slower but you can wait.

I don't care for the Mighty Mouse and bluetooth mouse choices are limited. Still, I'd stick with bluetooth or stay with the pad myself and avoid the hubs on a trip.

With the conventional drive, I don't see why a MBA wouldn't be OK if the size were big enough. It'll be slower but you can wait.

Agreed. Hopefully the next generation will address this and add one more port (maybe even a FW 4 pin?) Apple, if you read this, I have my credit card ready to go

Yes, if Apple were to have been a bit more generous with disk and added a second port the Air would have been better. If the second port were firewire, though, I'd want the power pins. That port's getting a bus-powered drive for me.

Yes, if Apple were to have been a bit more generous with disk and added a second port the Air would have been better. If the second port were firewire, though, I'd want the power pins. That port's getting a bus-powered drive for me.

When I looked at the Air it looked like it had room for a FW 6 pin, but not sure. Maybe we should both write and tell them they will have two sales if they add a bus powered FW port and a decent sized hard drive. And also an easily replaceable battery. And an Ethernet port, though I am willing to forego the Ethernet. I think I can get by on a dive trip without an Ethernet port BTW, off-topic a bit, SeriTek came out with this (I may have mentioned this in another thread)

http://www.firmtek.com/seritek/seritek-spyder/

Of course not perfect, but a cool way to hook up things that would not otherwise be hookerupable to iMacs and MacBook Air.

I'm with you on all that. Somehow I think Jobs is the one that would need convincing, though. It's a fact that I'd own an Air today if it simply had those two differences. I'd also like to see the wired Ethernet but agree it's not a deal-breaker.

That eSATA product is kinda cool. Amazing what some companies can produce that you wouldn't think of.

One of the nice things that eSATA does for you is overcome the 2TB capacity limit of individual drives on firewire and USB. That only impacts external hardware RAIDs today but the time is approaching. A real, standardized, high performance, high capacity, bootable external disk attachment needs to exist for all PCs, both portable and desktop. Macs have done that well so far with firewire. The 2TB limit is becoming as issue tho.