Don't worry about answering this. I have talked myself out of getting a mac after reading some other threads in here. My issue is the size and cost difference between the power mac and the mac book. I can't afford the pro model, but the mac book is not quite enough to make me happy. I wonder why they don't have the intermediate sizes anymore? Anyway, no need to answer the question about iPhoto. I might look into lightroom.
Don't worry about answering this. I have talked myself out of getting a mac after reading some other threads in here. My issue is the size and cost difference between the power mac and the mac book. I can't afford the pro model, but the mac book is not quite enough to make me happy. I wonder why they don't have the intermediate sizes anymore? Anyway, no need to answer the question about iPhoto. I might look into lightroom.
Pssst: LR runs on a Mac
What are your needs? Macs may be a few bucks more when you compare apples to apples (!) but those few bucks are worth it in terms of zero headaches. Ever.
Don't worry about answering this. I have talked myself out of getting a mac after reading some other threads in here. My issue is the size and cost difference between the power mac and the mac book. I can't afford the pro model, but the mac book is not quite enough to make me happy. I wonder why they don't have the intermediate sizes anymore? Anyway, no need to answer the question about iPhoto. I might look into lightroom.
If the current MacBook Pro is out of your price range, perhaps the previous generation of MBP is closer? Keep an eye on the refurb and clearance section of the apple store, there are occasionally some very nice surprises in there, but they don't last long. A couple weeks ago a buddy of mine picked up a 17" MBP 2.0Ghz for around $1450.
Does the included iPhoto software allow me to do most of what elements does? I mostly just fiddle contrast, lighting and colours. Basic stuff really. Thanks.
It won't do most of what Elements does, but it will do the few specific things you mentioned, but not as precisely as Elements. If you just want to make overall corrections, then yes, iPhoto can do that. But it's pretty basic. You might have to buy Photoshop Elements on the Mac side to do pixel editing.
Or graduate to Lightroom or full version Photoshop on either platform, or Aperture on the Mac side.
Edit: Oh, you don't need the answer anymore. Oh well. I feel your pain. There is a big hole in the middle of the Mac line. I chose to buy a refurbished Mac Pro tower to save a couple hundred dollars. The iMac is now a decent Photoshop machine, since it can now take 4GB of RAM and you can attach a second monitor, but it wasn't that way at the time when I bought. For some, the un-customizable glossy screen may be a dealbreaker. Yes, many people are wondering where the capable headless midrange Mac box is, many articles have been written about that.
Does the included iPhoto software allow me to do most of what elements does? I mostly just fiddle contrast, lighting and colours. Basic stuff really. Thanks.
Here's a shot of some of the options iPhoto 7 (in iLife '08) can do, more details are at apple's site. http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/#editing If that's all you're doing, I suspect you'll be happy with iPhoto. Plus the smugmug uploader can hook right into it to simplify your upload workflow.
but those few bucks are worth it in terms of zero headaches. Ever.
um...can I get an AMEN! hahaha! There's no joking that Apples are SO much less trouble than PCs...it's amazing. Go for it - get an apple...then come back in a few months and thank us : )
My Equipment: Canon EOS 5D w/ battery grip Backup Canon EOS 30D | Canon 28 f/1.8 | Canon 24 f/1.4L Canon 50mm f/1.4 | Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DI Macro | Canon 70-200 F/2.8 L | Canon 580 EX II Flash and Canon 550 EX Flash Apple MacBook Pro with dual 24" monitors
Domke F-802 bag and a Shootsac by Jessica Claire
Infiniti QX4
Possibly the fact that it's not a laptop, which seems to be what GlphSub wants.
Where does that come from? A Mac Pro (which is most definitely NOT a laptop) and a MacBook Pro were mentioned.
People keep hoping for a mid-sized headless desktop from Apple... something between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro. Steve has noted quite a few times how he really likes the "all in one" form factor and it's how the Macs started out... so I wouldn't hold my breath. Use the iMac and hook up an external monitor and get 2 screens worth of real estate. Well, that is if you can handle the glossy screen
Just retrofit the entire back side of the room with dark velvet :ivar
I bought a glossy screen iMac for my wife, and it's great. I wouldn't want to use it for serious photo work, but it's a sweet machine. The 2nd monitor would solve that. Sounds like Giphsub might even already have one.
People keep hoping for a mid-sized headless desktop from Apple.
No one we know. Nope. Too bad the comments on that post went to hell in a handbasket so quick. I swear digg turns any site into /. quality comments once it's on the front page.
SmugMug Sorcerer - Engineering Team Champion for Commerce, Finance, Security, and Data Support http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
Where would you buy a Mac in NYC? I need to buy one for someone in Brooklyn, and I'm wondering if I should buy it at some place like B&H or just online from Apple. Support (or at least the ability to return it) is potentially important.
I should add that I live in Wisconsin, so my ability to deal with anything in person is limited.
1. There is an Apple store in the West Towne Mall in Madison. Stop by and visit. In New York City there are Apple stores on 5th Ave. and in SOHO.
2. Join NAPP and get a discount on buying an Apple online. Could save you more than the cost of the membership. wink
Thanks guys! In fact, I spoke with my brother in law (a mac freak for many years) and he does a lot of music processing on an older g4 (??) using less ram than the new mac books. He said he would be very surprised if the new ones would be insufficient for anything at all that I could throw at it. So the screen size is the only factor. Screw it I'll get an external screen to hook up. SO, I talked myself back into it and ordered a mac book with 2G ram (that was one of my worries after reading a few opinions). Should get it this week sometime!:D
Cheers for all the comments. No doubt I'll be saoking up a lot of the knwledge already floating around in here about macs over the coming months...
calibrating a MAC G5 screen
I have now read user reviews of both the Spyder and Eye One product line. Users of both say neither work with a MAC LCD.
I have an iMAC G5 OS X Tiger and getting non-matching colors out of my printer (Epson R1800 using profiles for Epson paper). This machine was specifically mentioned as having issues with the Spyder.
I'm ready to step up to monitor calibration but what really works? Are these people nuts or is it a real problem calibrating a MAC LCD screen? These two brands seem to be the biggest dogs on the block. Is there a dark horse out there I should be trying?
Thanks!
Terry
BTW, they cite "failures" in reading the monitor as the reason why.
I calibrate my 23 in Cinema Display with a Spdyer2 Pro, print with an Epson Stylus Pro 4000, and my prints match my monitor perfectly in color and B&W.
My box is a Power Mac dual 2.5 G5 with a Radeon 9800 XT video board.
The matching between print and screen is so routine that I expect it, and only soft proof infrequently.
I am not aware of difficulties calibrating Apple displays. I calibrate my Mac Book Pro with the same Spyder2 Pro colorimeter, and it matches my Cinema Display as well. Laptop screens are less reliable than desktop screens for a number of reasons. Lighting, body position, etc. The lighting for my desktop never changes. My prints I evaluate under an Ott light that is full spectrum.
Before I calibrated my monitor, matching print and screen was always an exercise in futility.
First, what's a MAC LCD screen? Are you talking about the Apple Cinema Display?
Second, I've used the Eye One for a couple years with my Cinema Display -- when it was attached to a G5, and now attached to a Mac Pro. It works great.
a Mac newbie question - glossy screen?
Well, I'm not actually a Mac newbie yet, but we're looking into getting one. I've been following a lot of the discussions around here about the glossy screen on the iMac (which I think is a very nice looking display), and I'm getting somewhat confused. For one thing (this is probably a really dumb question), why wouldn't callibrating the monitor work to help it display more accurately? By more accurately, I guess I mean make it match how the prints turn out, since making it look right on everyone else's screen is impossible.
I'm mostly a portrait photog, so I don't want something to mess with skin tones or the subtleties of a B&W photo. We're considering getting an iMac and just plugging in a second "photo editing" monitor. Is this my best option? Is the glossy screen really going to cause me problems? If Macs have been a favorite with photographers and graphic designers, why have they only offered a glossy version of the latest screen?
Any feedback or links appreciated!
Elaine
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
The biggest problem with the new iMacs (as well as any glossy screen) is the fact that the finish will intrinsically over-saturate the colors. You can thus have the monitor calibrated all you want, but what you see is hardly going to be what you get.
There have been a number of discussions on Mac-specific forums as to why Apple did this with the new iMacs. The consensus is that they are trying to push more people towards the pro machines (MacPro with a 23" ACD). One of the possible work-arounds is what you suggested- getting a second monitor, and doing the color corrections on it. I actually decided to go for portability and got the MBP, which I hook up to a monitor when I'm editing photos. The two computers essentially have the same guts, save for the fact that the iMac has more HD space, and a better graphics card.
And I'll add, the calibration won't matter if say there's light from a window or overhead light glaring off the screen which is an issue with the glossy screens (mac or pc). I use a MacBook for my day job, but mostly with an external monitor. The external monitor is beautiful, the MacBook screen is a bit glary and shiny for photo editing (we have overhead fluorescents that I can't turn off).
If you can afford a second monitor, that's the way to go, IMHO. The iMac screen exaggerates saturation and contrast. I've seen it at the Apple store, and it's like my Macbook's glossy screen, which I've discovered, the hard way, I simply can't use for editing. When I look at the finished product on a non-glossy screen (in my case, a fancy CRT) it's not at all similar.
I suspect one reason for the glossy screen, is that for folks who do not edit pictures, the deep saturation and gloss look "better" than a matte screen. It is only after working with a matte screen for a while that you really see and appreciate the virtues of a matte surface. I think Apple is merely trying to grab some computer newbies from the Windows world, but I could be wrong.
A second screen seems like a great solution - you still can keep your brushes and palette wells on the glossy screen. Lots of us used two monitors for Photoshop before the much larger monitors were affordable.
Thanks for the help! If I understand it correctly, callibrating actually adjusts stuff going on inside the monitor, and with the new iMac screen, the glossy outer coat will always make it look different than it's "supposed" to look. Is that a simplified way of saying it, or am I still way off?
Hmm...I'm not sure if I'll like actually using two monitors. I guess I could get used to it. I'm interested to know more about getting a MacBook and then being able to plug that into a nice (unglossy) monitor. Having a laptop sounds appealing, but I know I don't want to do my editing on that screen either.
I don't know what to do.
Elaine
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
The nice thing about going the way of the MB/MBP with a large monitor is obviously portability. The MB lacks a real video card, and thus will eat up some of the RAM from the machine. That being said, it will push a 24" (1920 X 1200) without a hitch. The MBP has a dedicated GPU, and can push up to a 30" monitor. When I'm editing with it, I usually have it hooked up to my 24" Dell, and keep the brushes and tools on the MBP screen, while the image occupies the external monitor.
There are downsides to going mobile of course. For one, it's more expensive. A 15" MBP will run you a little more than the 24" iMac, with less than half the HD space. External HDs are going to be a requirement, but given the fact that I have a couple of firewire 800 drives, it's never been an issue, in terms of speed.
It's a tough call for you. If I had enough money, I'd spring for a MacPro (2.66), and a decent monitor, and add better graphics cards, HDs and RAM over time. If price is a problem, however, it's tough. One thing you should remember though, is that if you're split between the MBP and the iMac- they are essentially the same computer.
Comments
http://www.michaelhelbigphotography.com
http://www.thewildpig.blogspot.com
What are your needs? Macs may be a few bucks more when you compare apples to apples (!) but those few bucks are worth it in terms of zero headaches. Ever.
Portfolio • Workshops • Facebook • Twitter
What's wrong with an iMac?
Possibly the fact that it's not a laptop, which seems to be what GlphSub wants.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
It won't do most of what Elements does, but it will do the few specific things you mentioned, but not as precisely as Elements. If you just want to make overall corrections, then yes, iPhoto can do that. But it's pretty basic. You might have to buy Photoshop Elements on the Mac side to do pixel editing.
Or graduate to Lightroom or full version Photoshop on either platform, or Aperture on the Mac side.
Edit: Oh, you don't need the answer anymore. Oh well. I feel your pain. There is a big hole in the middle of the Mac line. I chose to buy a refurbished Mac Pro tower to save a couple hundred dollars. The iMac is now a decent Photoshop machine, since it can now take 4GB of RAM and you can attach a second monitor, but it wasn't that way at the time when I bought. For some, the un-customizable glossy screen may be a dealbreaker. Yes, many people are wondering where the capable headless midrange Mac box is, many articles have been written about that.
Here's a shot of some of the options iPhoto 7 (in iLife '08) can do, more details are at apple's site. http://www.apple.com/ilife/iphoto/#editing If that's all you're doing, I suspect you'll be happy with iPhoto. Plus the smugmug uploader can hook right into it to simplify your upload workflow.
ETA: 100% agree with what colourbox said.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
um...can I get an AMEN! hahaha! There's no joking that Apples are SO much less trouble than PCs...it's amazing. Go for it - get an apple...then come back in a few months and thank us : )
- Ross
www.rossfrazier.com/blog
My Equipment:
Canon EOS 5D w/ battery grip
Backup Canon EOS 30D | Canon 28 f/1.8 | Canon 24 f/1.4L Canon 50mm f/1.4 | Sigma 50mm f/2.8 EX DI Macro | Canon 70-200 F/2.8 L | Canon 580 EX II Flash and Canon 550 EX Flash
Apple MacBook Pro with dual 24" monitors
Domke F-802 bag and a Shootsac by Jessica Claire
Infiniti QX4
The glossy screen.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
Just retrofit the entire back side of the room with dark velvet :ivar
Where does that come from? A Mac Pro (which is most definitely NOT a laptop) and a MacBook Pro were mentioned.
People keep hoping for a mid-sized headless desktop from Apple... something between the Mac Mini and the Mac Pro. Steve has noted quite a few times how he really likes the "all in one" form factor and it's how the Macs started out... so I wouldn't hold my breath. Use the iMac and hook up an external monitor and get 2 screens worth of real estate. Well, that is if you can handle the glossy screen
I bought a glossy screen iMac for my wife, and it's great. I wouldn't want to use it for serious photo work, but it's a sweet machine. The 2nd monitor would solve that. Sounds like Giphsub might even already have one.
Dgrin FAQ | Me | Workshops
I read this sentence:
to mean Giphsub was comparing the two laptop models. But in re-reading I can see either interpretation.
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
Apple it is.
1. There is an Apple store in the West Towne Mall in Madison. Stop by and visit. In New York City there are Apple stores on 5th Ave. and in SOHO.
2. Join NAPP and get a discount on buying an Apple online. Could save you more than the cost of the membership.
GreyLeaf PhotoGraphy
http://local.yahoo.com/details;_ylt=Alk07wAGEc32P0xL2y3gYMiHNcIF?id=11353024&lsrc=results&p=McDonalds&csz=Brooklyn%2C+NY&fr=&lcscb=CEPLxQc4I52
XTi, G9, 16-35/2.8L, 100-300USM, 70-200/4L, 19-35, 580EX II, CP-E3, 500/8 ...
DSC-R1, HFL-F32X ... ; AG-DVX100B and stuff ... (I like this 10 years old signature :^)
Thanks guys! In fact, I spoke with my brother in law (a mac freak for many years) and he does a lot of music processing on an older g4 (??) using less ram than the new mac books. He said he would be very surprised if the new ones would be insufficient for anything at all that I could throw at it. So the screen size is the only factor. Screw it I'll get an external screen to hook up. SO, I talked myself back into it and ordered a mac book with 2G ram (that was one of my worries after reading a few opinions). Should get it this week sometime!:D
Cheers for all the comments. No doubt I'll be saoking up a lot of the knwledge already floating around in here about macs over the coming months...
http://www.michaelhelbigphotography.com
http://www.thewildpig.blogspot.com
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
http://www.michaelhelbigphotography.com
http://www.thewildpig.blogspot.com
http://wall-art.smugmug.com/
I have now read user reviews of both the Spyder and Eye One product line. Users of both say neither work with a MAC LCD.
I have an iMAC G5 OS X Tiger and getting non-matching colors out of my printer (Epson R1800 using profiles for Epson paper). This machine was specifically mentioned as having issues with the Spyder.
I'm ready to step up to monitor calibration but what really works? Are these people nuts or is it a real problem calibrating a MAC LCD screen? These two brands seem to be the biggest dogs on the block. Is there a dark horse out there I should be trying?
Thanks!
Terry
BTW, they cite "failures" in reading the monitor as the reason why.
Pro User
http://www.terrypytlarz.com
http://www.integrated-color.com/cedpro/coloreyesdisplay.html
My box is a Power Mac dual 2.5 G5 with a Radeon 9800 XT video board.
The matching between print and screen is so routine that I expect it, and only soft proof infrequently.
I am not aware of difficulties calibrating Apple displays. I calibrate my Mac Book Pro with the same Spyder2 Pro colorimeter, and it matches my Cinema Display as well. Laptop screens are less reliable than desktop screens for a number of reasons. Lighting, body position, etc. The lighting for my desktop never changes. My prints I evaluate under an Ott light that is full spectrum.
Before I calibrated my monitor, matching print and screen was always an exercise in futility.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Second, I've used the Eye One for a couple years with my Cinema Display -- when it was attached to a G5, and now attached to a Mac Pro. It works great.
Well, I'm not actually a Mac newbie yet, but we're looking into getting one. I've been following a lot of the discussions around here about the glossy screen on the iMac (which I think is a very nice looking display), and I'm getting somewhat confused. For one thing (this is probably a really dumb question), why wouldn't callibrating the monitor work to help it display more accurately? By more accurately, I guess I mean make it match how the prints turn out, since making it look right on everyone else's screen is impossible.
I'm mostly a portrait photog, so I don't want something to mess with skin tones or the subtleties of a B&W photo. We're considering getting an iMac and just plugging in a second "photo editing" monitor. Is this my best option? Is the glossy screen really going to cause me problems? If Macs have been a favorite with photographers and graphic designers, why have they only offered a glossy version of the latest screen?
Any feedback or links appreciated!
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Elaine Heasley Photography
There have been a number of discussions on Mac-specific forums as to why Apple did this with the new iMacs. The consensus is that they are trying to push more people towards the pro machines (MacPro with a 23" ACD). One of the possible work-arounds is what you suggested- getting a second monitor, and doing the color corrections on it. I actually decided to go for portability and got the MBP, which I hook up to a monitor when I'm editing photos. The two computers essentially have the same guts, save for the fact that the iMac has more HD space, and a better graphics card.
Portland, Oregon Photographer Pete Springer
website blog instagram facebook g+
Catapultam habeo. Nisi pecuniam omnem mihi dabis, ad caput tuum saxum immane mittam
http://www.mcneel.com/users/jb/foghorn/ill_shut_up.au
A second screen seems like a great solution - you still can keep your brushes and palette wells on the glossy screen. Lots of us used two monitors for Photoshop before the much larger monitors were affordable.
Moderator of the Technique Forum and Finishing School on Dgrin
Hmm...I'm not sure if I'll like actually using two monitors. I guess I could get used to it. I'm interested to know more about getting a MacBook and then being able to plug that into a nice (unglossy) monitor. Having a laptop sounds appealing, but I know I don't want to do my editing on that screen either.
I don't know what to do.
Comments and constructive critique always welcome!
Elaine Heasley Photography
There are downsides to going mobile of course. For one, it's more expensive. A 15" MBP will run you a little more than the 24" iMac, with less than half the HD space. External HDs are going to be a requirement, but given the fact that I have a couple of firewire 800 drives, it's never been an issue, in terms of speed.
It's a tough call for you. If I had enough money, I'd spring for a MacPro (2.66), and a decent monitor, and add better graphics cards, HDs and RAM over time. If price is a problem, however, it's tough. One thing you should remember though, is that if you're split between the MBP and the iMac- they are essentially the same computer.