I've been using Macs since the olden days when you could upgrade the RAM and hard drive. The move to "soldered on" everything bothered me a lot when it first started to happen. But I have to admit, at this point it bothers me more in principle than in practice. In reality, you just make sure to overprovision a little to accomodate future needs -- and the fact is, Macs (and computers in general) have gotten so bloody fast and much more reliable than they used to be. And, factoring in inflation, they've even gotten quite a lot cheaper over the years at the same time.
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.
Mac Mini for Photographers?
- Thread starter JL Radcliffe
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Interesting... Capture One runs flat with Photoshop in the background.
Some kind of swap file has to be holding the whole thing up, but I can't feel it unresponsive.
I had an 15" i9 MBP with 64Gb of RAM before that mini. And the i9 was stuttering even with nothing but Safari open...
My buddy has a massive Lightroom library for his photography and he's got 32 GB in the PC I built him and he hasn't had any issues in years. 32 GB would be the minimum recommendation though for large projects.
Your Lightroom performance is depended on a number of things. Memory available, location of catalogues, location of photos, what you are doing, etc.
When I got my Studio I had enough boot drive space to move all of my Lightroom auxiliary files (catalogues, caches) to my fast boot SSD. This did provide some performance improvements in scrolling through the library (don't do that much editing) but there are still slight delays getting the master files from a (~1000 MB/s) external HD Raid. Right now Lightroom is using ~3.6 GB of memory but vaguely remember much higher numbers.
Think I saw some videos about significant speed improvements on import, but can't find those references right now.
I spec out systems to the maximum I can afford in order to have headroom for future OS/software requirements which are always greater.
When I got my Studio I had enough boot drive space to move all of my Lightroom auxiliary files (catalogues, caches) to my fast boot SSD. This did provide some performance improvements in scrolling through the library (don't do that much editing) but there are still slight delays getting the master files from a (~1000 MB/s) external HD Raid. Right now Lightroom is using ~3.6 GB of memory but vaguely remember much higher numbers.
Think I saw some videos about significant speed improvements on import, but can't find those references right now.
I spec out systems to the maximum I can afford in order to have headroom for future OS/software requirements which are always greater.
Last edited:
Now I'm still using LR6 because I refuse to rent Adobe software which is pure crud. The only reason I fell in with LR is because it was the only real game in town for so long.
Thinking of switching to C1.
Anyways my "Main" library is at 125K photos and it doesn't let me import anymore without it crashing. My Mini is an i7 with 64GB of ram and the library is stored on a 4TB RAID 0 Thunderbolt 2 SATA SSD array. Specs aren't the issue here but something in software is.
I'm not sure if it's been fixed in CC, but I know in 6 that library size will hurt the performance hard.
I have over 91k images in LR and have no problem adding more. Obviously not as many as you, but there is no official limit to a catalog capacity. But I use the latest version, not LR6.
For what it's worth I don't use a single large library for LR (Classic, latest version). I make a new library for each shoot/assignment, it keeps things very snappy.
Starting this year I've started new annual libraries. Seems to keep things going alright.
My library is nearing 200k pictures and only issue I have is that when browsing the 1:1 previews have a bit of a lag.
I'm a full time photographer (only video is usually BTS on iPhone) and I will say without a doubt 100% go with a Mac Studio if you can afford it. I fell for the "8GB unified memory is like 16 blah blah blah" and I will say for any serious workflow, it was one of the WORST experiences I have ever had. My 2014 5K iMac (maxed out) was faster and better overall in multitasking. I purchased an M! Mac mini 16gb/2tb max spec on cpu & gpu and it was a joke honestly. Done watch any of th Maxtech reviews or nonsense videos form the YouTubers that test 50 images.
I run LR classic, PS, and work with Capture one and if you plan on working with anything while keeping PS open at the same time it's a joke. The lag with retouching using D&B or even the basic heal brush with LR open in the background gave me so much lag that it wasn't realistic for doing my work because of the time it took to get through edits. It was at the point where I could have maybe 3 RAW files open in PS at any time if LR was open also. This also put it into memory issues & warnings quite often. Pair this with the performance hit with scaling with most monitors and it's a waste of money and time.
Fast forward and I traded the M1 Mini (less than a year old) for the Mac Studio and it is literally the fasted system I have used in the last 10+ years. I have pushed it to see if I can lag it out and it's been nearly impossible (again I don't do any video). One of my test was a composite I did with 37 30MP RAW files and PS worked like a dream(0 memory swap or out of memory warnings). LR did show some lag when I tried a photo merge with the same files. Import/export were amazing, using filters, presets, all very smooth. For the record I run this with a BenQ 4K monitor via TB4 and no issues. Not to mention the M1 is already old tech. I would suggest a Mac Studio with the M1 Max, 32GPU, and at least 1TB SSD since the Apple tax on storage is still a joke. You can get a 2,000 MB/s external SSD for half the upgrade cost.
I may get some hate for this but in all seriousness the M1 is NOT for heavy, multitasking, or long work loads with editing. I've been a Photographer for nearly 20 years (I know I'm old) but I've been using Macs even longer and I stay up on tech, especially if it can improve my workflow and save me time. If you want a good review of the performance of all the Apple silicon Macs in one place check out ArtIsRight on YouTube, his reviews can be long and he's a bit of a dry speaker but he gives real testing results (panorama test, imports with 1K images not 50) and gives some really great info that may help you make a choice that's best for you.
P.S
I also had the Studio display Nano texture but returned it. It was an amazing monitor but decided against nano & wanted the adjustable stand so I'm waiting for that to ship one day soon.
Thanks for this, lots of information here to digest. And really surprising how he shows the Capture One performance is not all that. I wonder if there's an issue with his machine, as he mentioned a few times.
To the op.
im retired with photography as my hobby.DEPENDING on how you edit I’m sure will be a decision on how powerful a machine you need but in my own experience with Mac mini M1 base machine on LG 4k 27 monitor using photoshop and Lightroom working on 1 photo at a time with using Fuji uncompressed raws From my 24mp sensor doesn’t raise a sweat,if I upgraded the machine would be total overkill for me,I’m not sure how you work and size of your raw files and how many or fast you need to work on at a time as most pros do,but just wanted to give you my experience.
im retired with photography as my hobby.DEPENDING on how you edit I’m sure will be a decision on how powerful a machine you need but in my own experience with Mac mini M1 base machine on LG 4k 27 monitor using photoshop and Lightroom working on 1 photo at a time with using Fuji uncompressed raws From my 24mp sensor doesn’t raise a sweat,if I upgraded the machine would be total overkill for me,I’m not sure how you work and size of your raw files and how many or fast you need to work on at a time as most pros do,but just wanted to give you my experience.
Last edited:
What was it about the nano texture you didn’t like? I’m looking at the studio so would find your experience helpful.I’ve always loved the Mac glossy screens and when I went from my old 2011 imac with reflective glass screen but made the photos look so much better, then experienced most modern screens with heavy coatings and anti glare screens,they look so much duller. What do you think?
I loved that you didn't mind about it and provided us with such testimony. Thanks for sharing.
This is my case too. Working on Capture One and Photoshop. Have traded an i9 MBP on this M1 Mini and I have no regrets.
The nano texture itself worked great for reducing glare/any reflections (like the old matte screen option on MBP) but it just seemed like the images weren't as sharp and the contrast & colors seemed like they were just a bit dulled. As the main setup with my workflow I was questioning my edits based on how they looked on the iMac 5K. It just came down to that and with the extra cost, I'd rather have th height adjustable stand. The speakers sounded great, the monitor design looks great, and the whole cord being attached wasn't an issue at all. If I would have been working on a nano textured screen from the start I would have kept it. Maybe my eyes were playing tricks but for 90% of people they would would love it (minus the cost).
I use Lightroom nearly daily for work and I would recommend 32GB at the least. WIth the m1 minuend 16GB I was in swap with 20 minutes of any real editing and once I opened PS and added some layers I would need to close everything else to avoid the out of memory warning. I know the apple tax is steep but I'd go with more memory vs storage if it came down to it. You can also set your LR & PS cache & scratch disk to an external ssd to keep performance up.
I have a similar experience and fully recommend the Studio [I have the ultra as I do a lot of 3D, but also dabble in big images as a result]
I also agree on not getting the Nano studio display - I got one and returned it for the standard, and havent looked back.
Yes I was fearing that, I just dislike the anti glare coatings and agree the photos definitely don’t pop so well.thanks for the reply
I upgraded from 2011 iMac i5 to M1 mini 16GB. Photoshop/Lightroom/InDesign/Logic Pro. Never seen the beachball since.
Especially InDesign was sometimes struggling on the iMac which I upgraded from 16 to 32 GB ram and SSD.
Never noticed difference between 16 and 32 GB, SSD upgrade made it more than useable for me (a little more than 70000 images in LR catalog, mostly 20 megapixel images)
Upgraded only because of the High Sierra limit from the iMac.
Compared to Mac mini 2018 i7 8GB at school (I’m teaching PS and LR) the M1 is much faster in Lightroom.
The same panorama stitching took about 2 minutes at i7 mini (with blazing ventilator) and only about 20 sec on M1 (staying cool) …
Especially InDesign was sometimes struggling on the iMac which I upgraded from 16 to 32 GB ram and SSD.
Never noticed difference between 16 and 32 GB, SSD upgrade made it more than useable for me (a little more than 70000 images in LR catalog, mostly 20 megapixel images)
Upgraded only because of the High Sierra limit from the iMac.
Compared to Mac mini 2018 i7 8GB at school (I’m teaching PS and LR) the M1 is much faster in Lightroom.
The same panorama stitching took about 2 minutes at i7 mini (with blazing ventilator) and only about 20 sec on M1 (staying cool) …
The main thing that stands out for me is that photography is a hobby for you, not a job. As an M1 user, the M1 Mini is just fine. Unless your hobby is producing an unusually large amount of photos. Just make sure it's 16gb memory, and not the 256gb ssd version. I'd get 1tb minimum personally.
All that said, I think the Studio is still an outstanding value compared to the macbooks and wouldn't hesitate to spend the extra $1k (approx) on the base-model Studio since I could see getting many many extra years of use out of it.
Also the Mini m1 is likely gonna be replaced by the m2 soon so you may as well wait for that one if you don't need to buy now.
G.
Interesting to me that no one is recommending the iMac for this use case? That will give you an M1 with a screen as good as studio display from what I’ve heard, for less than the combo your looking at? Is the problem smaller screen size? Perhaps I’m just clueless
I would 100% recommend a 2020 27" 5K iMac with the i7, 8GB Ram to save money(I'd go 64GB minimum but prefer 128 for my work), the 5700xt GPU, and 1TB ssd. The 2020 iMac didn't get the hype it should have, especially as well rounded it was for so many task. I would not recommend the M1 iMac due to the same performance issues as any M1 Mac. For a casual user surfing the web, email, some office, and basic creative taks an M1 is fine. The overall issue is the plain and simple fact that for real workflows and/or heavy task it's just not up to the job. Skip the YT videos that edit a 5 minute video or export 50 images and use that for their benchmarks, yeah that's right, looking at MaxTech again. One of the more popular worst real world reviews you can find and their tabloid style clickbait headlines.