use macbook for post processing
- Thread starter jpcc
- Start date
- Status
I used to have 2Ghz macbook with 2GB RAM.
to be frank, the speed is quite slow since i'm using CS which is not universal yet.
If u r using CS3, it's believed to be so much faster. significant different what my friend said.
to be frank, the speed is quite slow since i'm using CS which is not universal yet.
If u r using CS3, it's believed to be so much faster. significant different what my friend said.
Wow, appleinsider has some new updates on the first generation Macbook screens.
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...n_suit_over_macbook_macbook_pro_displays.html
"...The matter is of particular concern to MacBook and MacBook Pro users who rely on the accuracy of the displays for graphic use, such as photography, according to the complaint. It asserts that the displays, even at their highest resolutions, are unreliable for editing purposes. "
Any comments for current macbook/PS users
http://www.appleinsider.com/article...n_suit_over_macbook_macbook_pro_displays.html
"...The matter is of particular concern to MacBook and MacBook Pro users who rely on the accuracy of the displays for graphic use, such as photography, according to the complaint. It asserts that the displays, even at their highest resolutions, are unreliable for editing purposes. "
Any comments for current macbook/PS users
I have used a MacBook Pro for photoshop work and have never really been impressed with any supposed superiority of its screen to any other laptop... seen some impressive laptop screens from Sony though...
I don't think this is a widespread issue, or else it is just blown out of proportion. My wife has a macbook pro and we have no problem with the colour accuracy. Of course, no laptop screen beats a high end CRT for colour critical work, but then all laptops, not just the macbook pro would face the same viewing angle issues in this case.
If you ask me, I'd take the lcd from a macbook or macbook pro for colour reliability over any other brand of laptop currently on the market any day! I do graphic design and I do it on my powerbook lcd screen quite often when I'm not hooked up to my desktop monitor, and it works just fine (calibrated of course).
but sony screen resolution is not that high, and if need good resolution, it becomes more ex then MBP
I'm running a 1.83ghz macbook with with 2GB ram. Running CS3 Photoshop is lightning fast on it. It's in a different league from CS2 Photoshop altogether(non-universal). My CS3 Photoshop starts in about 10 seconds, and runs very smooth. Download the trial version and give it a try.
I'm into small laptops...had a 3kg one previously and didn't enjoy carrying it around...and sony's, like Macs, are not known to be cheap
actually the issues are with regards to two points:
1) the screen is technically not able to show more colour than its competitors screens, contrary to its marketing shpiel...thus a case of misleading customers...
2) it seems to be showing banding and sparklyness where it shouldn't be...which according to another report seems to be fixed when running WinXP via bootcamp...
3) Apple's typical attitude of denying all problems...and sometimes blaming users for misuse...like in the case of the easily scratched iPod Nano screen, random shutdowns of Macbooks...there's a website dedicated to it...
personally, I think it is just another case of the marketing department working harder than the engineering department and getting carried away...
this is still may main concern. the integrated card...
i am still using a acer laptop while at work i use the macpro. of course i am thinking to get one in a very near future.
but with the intel integrated card inside. i am wondering of the performance. anyone running the design premium and aperture on the new macbook ?
well.. ram is cheap now anyway.. :bsmilie:
thought of a reason why Mac screen might be having the problems and why the problems go away when booted into Win XP...might be due to the Mac environment and Mac screen profiling being set at gamma 1.8, whereas most screens nowadays are natively nearer to 2.2... so at non-native gamma, especially for lower bit-depth LCD screens, the contrast and general image quality would be sub-optimal as compared to if the screen were profiled (whether in a Mac or Windows environment) to gamma of 2.2...
Generally, can anyone comment on how is the performance using a macbook compared to iMac? Besides the obvious difference of a larger screen, generally, is photo editing as comfortable or as easy on a macbook?
- Status
