![]() |
| |||||||||||||||
|
||||||||||||||||
Hi, I won't buy a computer for editing, but just out of curiosity, would be better buying a mac or assembly a good PC?
julio cesar
It would be cheaper getting a PC even if it is a custom build unless you go hog wild.
But if you are used to using a Mac get one of them. If you are going to do a lot of processing a large screen helps a LOT. Minimum pf 20", a 24" screen works well for me.
Over achievers make the rest of us look bad.
J. Coyle
Macs are great, but not so great for photography, mainly because of how difficult it is to accurately calibrate a Mac monitor. If you really, really want a Mac and you want to use it for photography, I recommend a MacMini with a third party monitor, such a Dell's Ultrasharp U2410. For about the same amount of money you pay for a MacMini, you can buy a significantly more powerful PC, which may or may not be necessary. However, what with camera sensors coming with higher and higher pixel counts, which mean large picture files, I'd tend to get a big ol' 64-bit PC with lots of RAM and a Core i7 processor.
I never have a modern Mac. The Mac that I had was up to the Mac plus only. I saw most Mac were used in businesses like printing and photography where monitor calibration is a must. I don't see Mac's are used in business for other applications. So how do these people calibrate their monitor. Although I saw some LaCie monitors but many Apple monitors were used also.
Chan Tran
Mac would be preferable if you are using it in case of printing and photography. But if you require computer just for editing, an assembled PC would obviously be a good option compared to MAC.
Life is too short to bother with the criminally inane.
RF-Photography Website/Blog
The Vicarious Traveler
I'm curious for more elaboration from JesseJones on his advice, given WRon's mention of the difficulty in calibrating the Mac's monitor. Monitor calibration is essential for proper printing.
I use a PC for all my needs, never a problem. I've always said that, for the price of an Apple desktop, one could buy a desktop PC and have enough cash left over for a laptop or other piece of equipment.
Ron, I too would like some additional insight into the problems properly calibrating a Mac monitor. That's not something I've heard before.
Life is too short to bother with the criminally inane.
RF-Photography Website/Blog
The Vicarious Traveler
From what I have heard and read (I have no personal experience), it is difficult to calibrate an iMac monitor owing to the inherent brightness of its LED screen. I know an avid Mac user who is a photographer, prints his work, and uses a MacMini with a Dell U1024 monitor. He says that he gave up his iMac because he could never satisfactorily calibrate it. As I understand it, he had much trouble with too-dark prints because of the iMac's brightness. I wish I could tell you more, but, as I say, I'm only reporting what I've heard and read.
The inherit brightness on an iMac can be turned down. The short time I had one that was the only adjustment I needed to make. I used the A-Z scale that is shown on the bottom of the page of dpreview,s and adjusted the screen until I could define each square. I did the same thing with my new monitor. The reason I got rid of the Mac, aside rom the fact that it was broken when I got it,
was because I am not only a computer nerd, I had learned what little I know on a PC and I was unable to figure out how to use it properly. There are more steps in some areas that only takes one key stroke on a PC. I am sure that there are areas where the Mac will do the same thing and be easier than the PC. I have also found that many professional DO use Macs for their work. But most of them have never used a PC because they started with the Mac which back then was "easier and better" to use than a PC for photography.
Over achievers make the rest of us look bad.
J. Coyle