Best NAS for Capture One/Photo Editing

[jeyare]

i7 in my description:
- for the Thunderbolt 3.0 max performance coverage you need really strong performance from CPU. Reason why QNAP has i7 core inside.

 

[jeyare]

DAS is really better and useful for video editing purposes, than for photo editing. With one exception - just for single person collaboration (mentioned also here). When you have more than single person in the editing process you need NAS environment.

 

[jeyare]

Adobe Scratch disk description:
A scratch disk is a temporary storage while Photoshop is running. Photoshop uses this space to store portions of your (just editing) documents and their history panel states that don’t fit in the RAM memory. Scratch files go into invisible OS-specified folders, except for non-boot volumes on OS, at the root directory of the drive. When a non-boot drive is used as a scratch disk, the temporary files are placed in the drive’s root directory.
To improve performance, set the scratch disk to a defragmented hard disk that has plenty of unused space and fast read/write speeds. ..... Note: this is why I use NVMe, It's useful, faster and cheaper than DAS

Drives not recommended for scratch disk - Network drives ..... Note: this is why I don't use NAS for the scratch disk

 

[jeyare]

If you are still thinking about the Thunderbold 3.0 as enabler for faster Photo editing or QNAP purchase, it’s better to read an interesting stories from direct source = QNAP forum, then you will understand all my written post above.
Gents from real experiences (as we do here) totally confirmed my considerations. I don’t hate QNAP to be sure. QNAP creates interesting NASes, no doubt. I’m just trying to describe that Thunderbold is just commercial enabler more than real asset for fast Photo editing process.

 

[jeyare]

Lessons learned from this case

You can build your own architecture, perfectly fitted to Photography workflow (defined above). Here is high level and useful architecture:

When your single RAW file has size about 30MB, the you will get these performance variations:

When you need get 200MB/s transfer from the SD card into your NAS, you need use really costly 64GB Lexar Professional SD card Class UHS-II. Because standard SanDisk Extreme will stop at 95MB/s level.
As you can see in Table (above) entire process Copy of SD card, include Copy to your Catalog will take 4,5 minutes per 1000 RAW files. For the SD card copy you will never reach better speed with Thunderbolt, because you have speed limit based on your SD card performance. This is your primary bottleneck. And small time difference (100 seconds) for the entire (1000 files) Catalog import is out of useful consideration for Thunderbolt 3.0 buy in.

Most important point in this case is a time consumption within Photo editing process:
- you can't fully utilize 1Gbps LAN with picture <128MB (save from computer to NAS)
- you can't fully utilize 2x1Gbps LAN with picture <256MB (save from computer to NAS)

Let's calculate:
- single 256MB PSD file, you can save it during 1 second in the 2x1Gbps LAN
- single 1024MB PSD file, you can save it during 4 second in the 2x1Gbps LAN ... is it slow?
How many 1024MB PSD do you have in the editing process?

Pragmatic recommendation
You need just 2x1Gbps LAG between your NAS and your computer:
- every single Synology DS plus line has two and more Gbps NIC. Then you can take discussed 6bay NAS, e.g. DS1618+. Cost about 800Euro.
- investment to switch, e.g. USW-16-POE. Cost about 300Euro.
- investment to 2x1Gbps adapter (LAG capable) for your computer. Cost about 50Euro.
Total cost:
1150Euro

or You can purchase
similar QNAP TVS-672XT-i3-8G with 6bay configuration, include 2x10Gbps Ethernet and Thunderbolt 3.0
Note:
there isn't 4x1Gbps and 4GB RAM config for this model when we need 6-bay NAS with Thunderbolt 3.0
Total cost:
1 880 Euro
But when you need also network connection to your NAS you need purchase also the switch.Next cost.

And definitely yes: for such operation (mentioned from beginning of this thread) you don't need more than 4GB RAM in your Synology and more than 2x1Gbps NIC. Because it's enough for such case.

Then Thunderbolt 3.0 is absolutely out of pragmatic discussion.

But final decision is always up to you.

 

[Zathras]

A DAS is great, but it makes your workenviroment static: no room for movement other than carrying the DAS
with you. Thats why I use (at the moment) a T5 ssd. Really great.
But when finished there has to be a transfer:
SSD to DAS. DAS TO NAS. NAS to client. A lot of moments where things can go wrong.
But that can be my own fault of course, because I use this method.

At the moment I find myself have a lot of duplicates and that takes a lot of space because
I am too afraid to delete files. "was that my last edit?" etc. A NAS with sufficient speed
could fix these problems for me.

I agree with you both: 1GBE should theoratically suffice. But using a Scratchdisk in apps like
Photoshop is really giving a speed boost to the workflow.

I think @WST16 is right about wishing a DAS in a NAS. It is possible, but one has to
weigh the costs for convenience. And I think 10GBe is just not at the price point a single
user will benefit both speed wise and investment wise. In my case at least.

I just don't understand the i7 point in your conversation. In fact: I don't mind what kind of
CPU the NAS has. As long as it does what it has to do

I purchased a 1TB Cal-Digit Tuff Nano (just out) for working away from my desk. It's not Thunderbolt, but it's fast at 1055MB/s read speeds. My OWC 4M2 on my desk is even faster with a four-drive NVMe PCIe SSD array with T3. So my working files are easy to get to as fast as I like. And then I sync that to my Synology. Keeping things in sync is the challenge obviously. But once you get it down, it's a good way to go since Synology's philosophy is to avoid direct attachments for the most part other than Ethernet.

 

[Zathras]

Lessons learned from this case

...

And definitely yes: for such operation (mentioned from beginning of this thread) you don't need more than 4GB RAM in your Synology and more than 2x1Gbps NIC. Because it's enough for such case.

Then Thunderbolt 3.0 is absolutely out of pragmatic discussion.

But final decision is always up to you.

When SD cards are not in the mix, but CFxpress cards are, then things change I would suspect. But it would be interesting to see how much of a difference.

 

[jeyare]

but don't forget, that you need support from PCIe 3.0 for such speedy CFxpress card, otherwise it will be just slow motion

 

[Zathras]

but don't forget, that you need support from PCIe 3.0 for such speedy CFxpress card, otherwise it will be just slow motion

My card reader is Thunderbolt 3 from A-Data. (Blackjet) It's stupid fast. That's partly why I have my working files on a T3 DAS RAID (four NVMe SSD drives in a RAID 10 configuration). Right now my files are 24mp from a Nikon Z6, but I expect that to increase with future models.

 

[jeyare]

I purchased a 1TB Cal-Digit Tuff Nano (just out) for working away from my desk. It's not Thunderbolt, but it's fast at 1055MB/s read speeds. My OWC 4M2 on my desk is even faster with a four-drive NVMe PCIe SSD array with T3. So my working files are easy to get to as fast as I like. And then I sync that to my Synology. Keeping things in sync is the challenge obviously. But once you get it down, it's a good way to go since Synology's philosophy is to avoid direct attachments for the most part other than Ethernet.

really nice stuff, it was one of my favorite, but I bought this one - Sabrent Rocket Nano 1TB USB 3.2

Back to the performance of you device (send here pls. some real tests):
1055MB/s is a quoted speed from vendor, but reviewed sequential read is about 1035MB/s write 977MB/s (T3) , really fast.
To be sure: The Sequential read and write tests are always the ones with the highest results, but are not always representative of real world performance. The in real tests with 4KiB block size and Random read it can decrease to 130MB/s.

Identical performance you can get from Sabrent Rocket Nano 1TB USB 3.2 and you can save almost 40% of the price.
But maybe I will pay a beer for you!

 

[Zathras]

really nice stuff, it was one of my favorite, but I bought this one - Sabrent Rocket Nano 1TB USB 3.2

Back to the performance of you device (send here pls. some real tests):
1055MB/s is a quoted speed from vendor, but reviewed sequential read is about 1035MB/s write 977MB/s (T3) , really fast.
To be sure: The Sequential read and write tests are always the ones with the highest results, but are not always representative of real world performance. The in real tests with 4KiB block size and Random read it can decrease to 130MB/s.

Identical performance you can get from Sabrent Rocket Nano 1TB USB 3.2 and you can save almost 40% of the price.
But maybe I will pay a beer for you!

I'm a big fan of Cal-Digit. I have their T3 Plus dock, and it works great with my i9 MacBook Pro. I've been a long-time Mac Pro user, so this is my first foray into a MacBook Pro, and it's been a smashing success. Thunderbolt 3 is a major part of that.

Cheers!

 

[jeyare]

now I finally understand all your points re T3 everywhere
for me is T3 really interesting technology, but I can calculate that in real situations we can’t utilize more than 25% of the T3 capacity (NVMe, PCIe 3.0 is must), frequently up to 10% of the T3 capacity with fast SSD, even less.
With significant distance limitation up to 2m with certified cable, otherwise up to 0.5m.
Too many limitations for me.

 

[Zathras]

You should test the technology in the real world. Whatever limitations T3 has, the same can be said for USB 3.0 v s, which is fast (as my Tough Nano can desmonstrate). But T3 doesn't suffer some of the over head complications of USB 3 of any flavor, and the ability to daisy chain is significant, including 4K and 5K monitors.

But to each his/her own. I only buy certified T3 cables and hardware.

I have a favorite site that tests all sorts of cool hardware.

www.barefeats.com

It's a guy here in San Diego who simply tests gear for the fun of it. You should see the results from thew new Mac Pro beast he's testing now.

 

[Furbz85]

Hi ya'll, after thinking and thinking and thinking I've managed to make a decision.
And I think I owe you all the current status so we all learn from each other.

I bought a DS1621+ in combination with a 10GB original Syno NIC 10gbe and a OWC thunderbolt3 to 10gbe converter. Right out of the box (after installing the NIC) the OWC works like a charm on my Mac. Speeds between 500/800MB a second read and write. I am not to concerned about any discrepancies between to two since they are both well above the 112MB/s mark.

So, photo editing. Well, at this moment I really haven't done any real work so'll keep you up to post with how that work. But I ran into some issues. Perhaps you guys can advise me on that:

1. In my capture one app moving files from one folder to the other (on the NAS) is painfully slow. DSM says it's about 10MB a second. And as we speak I'm moving 100GB... Well above one hour remaining. Anyone an idea how to fix this? I've set my JUMBO to 9000.

2. Connection the NAS seems a bit complicated. The NAS is connected to my router via 1gbe and connects through SMB://nameofmynas. It also connects directly to my main editing Mac SMB://IPadres of the NIC.
In Finder it shows the IP as a share, but I really would like to prioritizate the LAN. So, first 10gbe if not than 1gbe. In most ideale situation: always as smb://nameofmynas. Anyone got any clue how to get this right?

I'm still a bit mind boggled about the difference between a speed test (AJA and Black Magic Disk speed) and the moving speed. I've moved a 8GB file from my Mac to the nas in 8 sec. So that speed is not bottlenecked. It seems like te Capture One app is capping the speed.

Would love to hear from you guys!

ps: excuse me for the English. I'm struggling with autocorrect since my Mac is not set on English.

 

[Rusty]

1. In my capture one app moving files from one folder to the other (on the NAS) is painfully slow. DSM says it's about 10MB a second. And as we speak I'm moving 100GB... Well above one hour remaining. Anyone an idea how to fix this?

So let me get this straight. You are moving files on your NAS from one location to the other but using an "app" outside your NAS (like your PC) or did I miss read this?

Anyone got any clue how to get this right?

If you create an SMB connection to your NAS 10G adapter static IP address and your Mac main adapter is the 10G interface, then it will talk to your NAS on 10G. Don't use the nameofmynas. Stick with static ips from your 1 and 10G adapter to be certain that the traffic is going to the correct interface.

 

[fredbert]

The Mac's network interface priority is set in System Preferences / Network...

By default and where nothing else indicates, the top item, when connected, will take priority over any connections lower down. But if your destination is an IP address that is on a lower item's subnet then the Mac will connect using the lower priority interface.

The Internet will be accessed via the highest priority, connected interface. So if you can't access the Internet via the Mac's 10G interface then don't put this at the top.

You may consider adding a 10G capable switch and then connect both NAS and Mac to that. Then a 1G connection to the router. The Mac wouldn't need it's 1G connection.

 

[Furbz85]

So let me get this straight. You are moving files on your NAS from one location to the other but using an "app" outside your NAS (like your PC) or did I miss read this?

Yes, I am @Rusty ! The whole idea of my photo culling (sorting out the photo's) is to do that in my editing software. It is way to complicated to add stars, rename en move them in DSM. That is not working for me: takes too much effort and time. I've tried to move other files in another photo catalog and that seems to go faster then before. Probably some errors in the catalog or something. I'll keep you posted.

I have favorited the SMB://ip in macOS but it doesn't seem to auto-mount. Got to find a way to get that working again.
Thanks @fredbert for your comment. I meant to prioritize the LAN's in the Nas. Do you know something about that?
So Lan1 = 1GBE and LAN5 = 10GBE. I'd like the Synology to first use LAN5, if not working than LAN1. It seems possible for LAN1/4 but not with the NIC.

You're right about the switch. But since I only use 10GBE on 1 computer I thought the switch wouldn't justify the cost. And since it works with a direct link I thought: let's try that .

 

[fredbert]

I’m sure in ages past that dropping the network mounted folder into Login Items used to work. Haven’t tried it and I may be wrong.

Otherwise an Automator app that mounts the share. Then add that to Login Items?

You're right about the switch. But since I only use 10GBE on 1 computer I thought the switch wouldn't justify the cost

Fair point. It’s a jump to get 10G capability and that’s before adding the plugs.

 

[Rusty]

I’m sure in ages past that dropping the network mounted folder into Login Items used to work. Haven’t tried it and I may be wrong.

Still works. I use several of them that way.

Yes, I am @Rusty ! The whole idea of my photo culling (sorting out the photo's) is to do that in my editing software. It is way to complicated to add stars, rename en move them in DSM. That is not working for me: takes too much effort and time. I've tried to move other files in another photo catalog and that seems to go faster then before. Probably some errors in the catalog or something. I'll keep you posted.

Well why not edit of the nas directly but then when you are ready to shift the data on the nas just do that operation without the need to do it using your Mac. Just log into your Nas and move the data using File station

 

[Furbz85]

@Rusty File station does not recognize the star rating en color tags of Cap1. Ik batch edit and cull approx 3000/4000 files. Ik rate them and the selects are moved to a folder. I can change the filenames, but its just an extra step.

but I am willing to try