Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: Using Mac for photo editing

  1. #21

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    when it comes to getting an Apple machine, always stick to standard memory config. Just accept the stock RAMs and source your upgrades elsewhere. I still remember Apple charges close to $600 to upgrade from the stock 4GB to 8GB on my Mac Mini... I bought my RAMs from SL Square for less than $100 =.="

    iMac uses PC3-10600 1333MHz SODIMMs, the same memory modules as typical 2011 laptops. Installation video: iMac Memory Installation Video at OtherWorldComputing.com

    Heck I just realize you can even dump 32GB of RAM into an iMac
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  2. #22

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by walkfaster View Post
    Oh. So I assume that goes for hard disk and Gfx card as well?
    for HDD and GPU you need to decide when you buy your iMac. These 2 components are not upgradable by end user... HDD on iMacs comes with proprietary sensors and GPU are hard-soldered onto the motherboard.
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  3. #23

    Default

    Wow. Thanks guys for the info!

  4. #24

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by walkfaster View Post
    I thought adding ram on iMac is expensive? Like hundred over at the apple store
    Just a plug for a long-time supplier here

    Apple store's ram prices have always been high (sometimes ridiculously so). SGL (at Sim Lim) has long been a popular vendor for all things Mac. Their RAM comes with a lifetime warranty (Apple's is one-year, IIRC). I've exhanged RAM twice, no probs.

  5. #25

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by walkfaster View Post
    so if im using a imac. the 4gbram is sufficient ?
    for photo editing, more than enough on a Mac. not a windows machine.

    the only thing I ever felt the need for more than 4gb on a mac is Final Cut.

  6. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    420

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Is there an upcoming computer fair? I got my iMac last year from the fair and rams are thrown in free with some other barang barang....
    A camera a day keeps me happy!
    Flickr me!

  7. #27

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Hello people. I'm also considering getting a 27" imac for my next upgrade to replace my desktop PC. Want to ask mac users if you guys have experienced any heat issues and typically imac can last how many years for heavy usage?

  8. #28

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yangzw
    Hello people. I'm also considering getting a 27" imac for my next upgrade to replace my desktop PC. Want to ask mac users if you guys have experienced any heat issues and typically imac can last how many years for heavy usage?
    Am a Mac user for a long while, not using iMac though. Had a friend using it for years in industrial studio environment, not air-con and dusty. Serving him for at least 4 years already. Have not come across any articles on iMac having heat issues, except the older mbp and the newer mbp since i7 core.

    I don't think iMac are any more durable than PC. The weakest link would be the hard disk. CPU and monitor are quite robust nowadays. Perhaps 5years? By then you might already be opting for an upgrade.
    D3S|N70-200|N24-70|N24-85|N50f1.4|N35f2|SB800|SB900|Yashica GS|S95
    www.flickr.com/photos/davidktw

  9. #29

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    just sent a Macbook Pro (that was under the 3 year Applecare) for servicing. The screen wasn't really spoilt (just that the adhesive was coming off, and I just wanted them to glue it back for me). Turns out that they replaced the screen FOC (usual cost of US$400+). Also, they noticed that the battery had "expanded" (my battery was about 2.5 years old), I told them I wasn't sure whether I would want to buy a new one yet. It turns out, that after the servicing, they simply decided to give me a new battery (otherwise I would have to pay $99). Very happy with the service--did not ever imagine that they would cover the cost of replacing a battery, as it's quite possible that a battery won't last the full 3 years of the warranty.

  10. #30

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by nathaniel View Post
    just sent a Macbook Pro (that was under the 3 year Applecare) for servicing. The screen wasn't really spoilt (just that the adhesive was coming off, and I just wanted them to glue it back for me). Turns out that they replaced the screen FOC (usual cost of US$400+). Also, they noticed that the battery had "expanded" (my battery was about 2.5 years old), I told them I wasn't sure whether I would want to buy a new one yet. It turns out, that after the servicing, they simply decided to give me a new battery (otherwise I would have to pay $99). Very happy with the service--did not ever imagine that they would cover the cost of replacing a battery, as it's quite possible that a battery won't last the full 3 years of the warranty.
    Thanks for sharing Nathaniel! I was just about to ask if its worth buying the apple care. Anyway I checking out macrumors and guessing that it will be better to wait for imac next update? My uncle was told me that imac's screen is a little too bright for photoediting and I was thinking if it will be better off with mac mini instead. Ha, but there's no option to upgrade the graphic card to better one like in 27" imac. Haiz makes choosing difficult!

  11. #31

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    I think graphics card should be your least concern on a Mac. Macs do not run well on games and certainly most games are not developed with Mac platform in mind. Jut like comparing Starcraft II on both Mac and Windows, most of us rather play our games on Bootcamp instead of on native Mac platform.

    I thought Mac Mini 2011 has AMD 6-series graphics card?
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  12. #32

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by Yangzw View Post
    Thanks for sharing Nathaniel! I was just about to ask if its worth buying the apple care. Anyway I checking out macrumors and guessing that it will be better to wait for imac next update? My uncle was told me that imac's screen is a little too bright for photoediting and I was thinking if it will be better off with mac mini instead. Ha, but there's no option to upgrade the graphic card to better one like in 27" imac. Haiz makes choosing difficult!
    the screen might be bright because the display is glossy (rather than matte). not sure which models have the matte option, though.

  13. #33

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by SAMUELS View Post
    for photo editing, more than enough on a Mac. not a windows machine.
    .
    I call complete and utter BS on that, with my own DIY PC running off a Wolfdale-based Celeron processor clocked at 1.6GHz and 1GHz of DDR2 memory (667MHz frequency) running both Photoshop x64 AND Premiere Pro concurrently as proof.

  14. #34

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Kirei
    Hi anyone have experience with using Mac for photo editing? Care to share your experience? Windows user here using lightroom as my main workhorse. Am thinking of switching to mac but would appreciate any views provided. Thanks in advance.
    Mac is good only because of the display panel, it still crash once a while .. Dun bother, for the same price you can built a faster pc than mac, just get a ips lcd panel or the apple display.

    I jump from pc to mac, now back to pc. Cos for apple, everything is exp once things start to fail and you have no choice but to go back to them for repair.

  15. #35

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by Miao View Post
    Mac is good only because of the display panel, it still crash once a while .. Dun bother, for the same price you can built a faster pc than mac, just get a ips lcd panel or the apple display.

    I jump from pc to mac, now back to pc. Cos for apple, everything is exp once things start to fail and you have no choice but to go back to them for repair.
    Sorry I have to disagree on this. Macs are good (subjectively) because of the OS, not just the panel. Some of the best Mac machines out there do not even ship with any monitors attached. In fact I personally find Apple perform badly in terms of display. no matte offering, difficult to calibrate via external calibration tools, lack of input options...

    One can argue that for the same $$ you can get a better spec PC. Technically this is true but Macs are not about being how superior in the context of hardware specifications, but the entire system and ecology around its solid core. Just like comparing an iPhone with those quad-core Androids... iPhone may be technologically inferior but in terms of user experience it is on-par with its direct competitors.

    In terms of hardware failure I guess this depends on what component failed... modular components are usually user-serviceable and this applies across both Windows and Mac machines. Both are decent platforms, it boils down to user experience and acceptance that's all matters.
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  16. #36

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by yrh0413 View Post
    Sorry I have to disagree on this. Macs are good (subjectively) because of the OS, not just the panel. Some of the best Mac machines out there do not even ship with any monitors attached. In fact I personally find Apple perform badly in terms of display. no matte offering, difficult to calibrate via external calibration tools, lack of input options...

    One can argue that for the same $$ you can get a better spec PC. Technically this is true but Macs are not about being how superior in the context of hardware specifications, but the entire system and ecology around its solid core. Just like comparing an iPhone with those quad-core Androids... iPhone may be technologically inferior but in terms of user experience it is on-par with its direct competitors.

    In terms of hardware failure I guess this depends on what component failed... modular components are usually user-serviceable and this applies across both Windows and Mac machines. Both are decent platforms, it boils down to user experience and acceptance that's all matters.
    So can I say that the basic mac mini with its Intel HD Graphics is sufficient for working with photoshop?

  17. #37

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by yrh0413 View Post
    Sorry I have to disagree on this. Macs are good (subjectively) because of the OS, not just the panel. Some of the best Mac machines out there do not even ship with any monitors attached. In fact I personally find Apple perform badly in terms of display. no matte offering, difficult to calibrate via external calibration tools, lack of input options...

    One can argue that for the same $$ you can get a better spec PC. Technically this is true but Macs are not about being how superior in the context of hardware specifications, but the entire system and ecology around its solid core. Just like comparing an iPhone with those quad-core Androids... iPhone may be technologically inferior but in terms of user experience it is on-par with its direct competitors.

    In terms of hardware failure I guess this depends on what component failed... modular components are usually user-serviceable and this applies across both Windows and Mac machines. Both are decent platforms, it boils down to user experience and acceptance that's all matters.
    If you want an operating system with a sold Unix backing, FreeBSD trashes OS X upside down in every manner such as data management, built-in filesystem security and memory access control. Heck, even most Linux distros with a kernel of 2.6.26 and later all outperform OS X where it matters most; stability and resource allocation. (and mind you; kernel 2.6.26 is 3 years old, today's Linux kernel 3.1 leaves OS X in the dust completely).

    Not to mention that OS X ships with a cripped *NIX-based kernel that gives a user no control over the intricate hardware aspects of the computer - a cardinal sin for any *NIX-based OS.
    Last edited by Etna-sama; 15th November 2011 at 12:05 AM.

  18. #38

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Quote Originally Posted by Yangzw View Post
    So can I say that the basic mac mini with its Intel HD Graphics is sufficient for working with photoshop?
    Definitely, I am using a Mac Mini (2010) with Intel graphics myself. Bear in mind that Photoshop does not utilize much on graphics card unless you churn out 3D renderings.

    Quote Originally Posted by Etna-sama View Post
    If you want an operating system with a sold Unix backing, FreeBSD trashes OS X upside down in every manner such as data management, built-in filesystem security and memory access control. Heck, even most Linux distros with a kernel of 2.6.26 and later all outperform OS X where it matters most; stability and resource allocation. (and mind you; kernel 2.6.26 is 3 years old, today's Linux kernel 3.1 leaves OS X in the dust completely).

    Not to mention that OS X ships with a cripped *NIX-based kernel that gives a user no control over the intricate hardware aspects of the computer - a cardinal sin for any *NIX-based OS.
    Say, in reference to the relevance of this thread how does one run Photoshop/ Lightroom on a non-Mac, non-Windows platform? just pulling your leg... let's not dive into yet another OS-bashing thread. Cheers.
    Fujifilm X-Pro2 Graphite, X-Pro1
    XF 14/2.8, 18/2, 23/2, 35/1.4, 56/1.2, 60/2.4, 55-200/3.5-4.8

  19. #39
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Singapore
    Posts
    605

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Seriously, Mac vs PC contention will go on and on and on...

    TS should just decide on which platform he/she feels more comfortable working on and then just buy it and move on. Crashing systems, hanging, memory problems are just facts of life everyone has to deal with whether running on MacOS or Windows.
    Family | Health | Happy-ness. . . my Flickr here

  20. #40

    Default Re: Using Mac for photo editing

    Thanks guys for all the contributions with your valuable feedback. Just to highlight I'm not here to start another war flaming thread. As quoted by LifeinMacro "Crashing systems, hanging, memory problems are just facts of life everyone has to deal with whether running on MacOS or Windows." In general, Mac and PC both have their pros and cons and this is something we have to live with and deal with it. My main objective is looking at the user experience in photo editing while other factors are just minor part of it. Therefore I'm closing this thread to prevent further complications.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •