PC Video card

Aaron WilsonAaron Wilson Registered Users Posts: 339 Major grins
edited December 29, 2005 in Digital Darkroom
I read in a photo mag. about a video card they had recumended... I can't find that mag any more :(... They said it was the best card for working on photos vs. like a gamming card. Can any one recumend a good video card? I have a old navida card right now. Also... those color correcters they sell... do they really work? I see them for 199+, they have a suction cup for the onitor and then plus into the usb... any and all feed back be great!
www.dipphoto.com
All feed back is welcomed!!

http://www.dipphoto.com/

:lust :lust

Comments

  • gusgus Registered Users Posts: 16,209 Major grins
    edited December 26, 2005
    Im no computer boffin...i'll establish that fact 1st. I have found that any vid card that has a bit of punch to ok. To my understanding once the shot is opened on the screen then there isnt a whole lot happening ' if '.. processing is not taking place. I would expect a $150 128 meg card to render a photo about the same to a human eye as a $2550 1024 meg Doom3 special.

    If you want to talk about monitors then that is different.
  • David_S85David_S85 Administrators Posts: 13,246 moderator
    edited December 26, 2005
    If you're not into gaming or HD video editing, the the video card doesn't need to be a rocket. Even most motherboard based integrated graphics chips can do 1920 x 1200 x 32-bit color these days. That said, it wouldn't be a bad idea to go with a discrete video card, so the on-board memory can help with the speed a little bit (the speed you don't really need if photos are the only concern).

    The main thing is DVI out. One output is good (and necessary), two is better if you'll ever add a second digital only monitor to your machine. I'm not too sure on this next fact, but calibration might be an issue if all you have is analog out.
    My Smugmug
    "You miss 100% of the shots you don't take" - Wayne Gretzky
  • babybluetx23babybluetx23 Registered Users Posts: 150 Major grins
    edited December 26, 2005
    You can get a monitor Calibration Kit http://cgi.ebay.com/COLORVISION-SPYDER-2-PLUS-LCD-CRT-MONITOR-CALIBRATION_W0QQitemZ7205885394QQcategoryZ51344QQssPageNameZWDVWQQrdZ1QQcmdZViewItemCalled Spyder 2. Im looking at getting one so I dont have to constantly recalibrate my monitor.
    Cynthia Cox
    Arlington, Tx
    http://www.innovativeillusionsphoto.com/
    OMP member #: 173034

    Canon EOS 5D : Bogen 3051 tripod : Bogen Monopod : Bogen 3030 head unit : Canon Speedlight 580EX : Canon EF 28-200 F3.5 : Canon 70-200 f2.8L : Canon 24-70mm F2.8L and other Canon Gear

    The camera doesn't make a bit of difference. All of them can record what you are seeing. But, you have to SEE." - Ernst Haas
  • TserrofTserrof Registered Users Posts: 17 Big grins
    edited December 29, 2005
    I agree with what David and Humungus have said. Unless your a total qualityphile, the difference between onboard graphics and a dedicated card are negligable. Personally, I can't really tell the difference between the 6600 GT in my desktop and the IEG2 in my laptop.

    Just for the record though, the latest offerings from Nvidia have higher HQV test scores than those of ATI or Intel.
    Custom Rig Desktop (P&V editing)....Digicams
    P4EE 3.73 GHz ............................Sony DSC-M1 5.1
    OCZ 2GB DDR2-533 (2 x 1GB) ........Sony DSC-P31 2.0
    128MB Leadtek Winfast 6600GT

    Gateway Lappy (P&V editing on the go)......Software
    P4 HT 532 ..........................................Photo E 4.0
    OCZ 1.5 GB SC DDR RAM.....................Premiere E 2.0
    64MB IEG2..............................................PSP 7
Sign In or Register to comment.