U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Computers
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 08-04-2008, 10:52 AM
 
Location: chicago
60 posts, read 158,881 times
Reputation: 50

Advertisements

I am trying to find a mac or pc to do the best work for my photography and photoshop editing...dont want to spend more then $2,500 any suggestions will be great

Thank you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 08-04-2008, 01:06 PM
 
Location: Detroit Downriver
620 posts, read 1,884,188 times
Reputation: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by chitown97 View Post
I am trying to find a mac or pc to do the best work for my photography and photoshop editing...dont want to spend more then $2,500 any suggestions will be great

Thank you
Any Mac with a 20" or better display is the best choice functionally speaking. A generic PC will get you there cheaper, but you'll get less work done and your color calibration will be hit or miss depending on the monitor and care in set up. Apple gives you iPhoto, a very capable photo management and light touch up software. For heavier lifting, you'll want Apeture 2, $199.

Apple Store (U.S.) - Welcome to the Apple Store
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2008, 01:09 PM
 
Location: chicago
60 posts, read 158,881 times
Reputation: 50
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bull Winkus View Post
Any Mac with a 20" or better display is the best choice functionally speaking. A generic PC will get you there cheaper, but you'll get less work done and your color calibration will be hit or miss depending on the monitor and care in set up. Apple gives you iPhoto, a very capable photo management and light touch up software. For heavier lifting, you'll want Apeture 2, $199.

Apple Store (U.S.) - Welcome to the Apple Store

Thank you
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2008, 02:23 PM
 
5,115 posts, read 4,721,701 times
Reputation: 4380
Do your homework on the MacIntosh displays. I've read reports on-line that there are issues with color gradience, with 'yellowing' of the image, and with less color resolution than implied.

None of these factors may be important to you, but for the professionally employed graphic artists here at my job, they're deal killers.

For photography work, get a Mac...but be certain to get a good display monitor that's up to your requirements.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-04-2008, 05:59 PM
 
Location: Detroit Downriver
620 posts, read 1,884,188 times
Reputation: 403
Yes, there was a gaff about the 20" iMac's display units not actually being able to produce millions of colors. I have one of those and really can't tell the difference, but that's not the point of controversy. If the company says it will produce millions of colors, it should produce millions of colors. Buy the 24" if it's a concern. You'll be fine.

The facts are, every LCD monitor produces only red, green and blue, because if you examine the screen under a microscope or a really strong magnifying glass, you'll see that each pixel has 3 liquid crystals to light it up. They all light up equally, and you'll see white light. The eye is fooled into seeing white, because the lights are really close together and together make up the full spectrum of light. Should we start a class action suite because of this? I don't think so.

Hue, saturation and luminance are modulated to get the various colors of the spectrum from the tri-color pixels and work together to fool the eye into seeing a lot more than 3 colors. How much more is the bone of contention.

LCD monitor manufacturers make LCDs of three different variants in the technology. The cheapest of these is TN, which is 6 bits per color. A bit is a single binary address and therefore has only two states, on or off. Saying it is a 6 bit monitor means that 6 binary addresses are dedicated to each color of each pixel. So 2 to the 6th power shows us there are 64 possible combinations of a six bit word. Therefore, each color has only 64 levels. Since there are 3 colors to every pixel, you then raise 64 to the 3rd power and you get 262,144 possible color combinations from a single pixel. That's the cheap TN LCDs.

The initial 20" iMac used IPS screens which are 8 bits per color. 2 to the 8th power is 256 possible color levels, raised to the 3rd power is 16,777,216 possible combinations from a single pixel.

The controversy arises over the claim in the advertising that the monitors display millions of colors. Originally, all of the LCD iMacs did display millions of colors, but the suite alleges that Apple slipped the cheaper display into the product mix with the introduction of the 20" aluminum iMac. In other words, it's all over the 20" aluminum iMac. The 24" aluminum iMacs still use the 8 bit IPS LCDs.

As far as the yellowing phenomena, that is a problem with the backlighting of ALL LCD monitors with age. If you want premium quality, none of this should scare you away from a Mac. It's not anywhere near the minefield of what could go wrong trying to put together a PC for photography service.

Last edited by Bull Winkus; 08-04-2008 at 06:14 PM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2008, 03:42 PM
 
1,956 posts, read 4,824,853 times
Reputation: 1113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bull Winkus View Post
Yes, there was a gaff about the 20" iMac's display units not actually being able to produce millions of colors. I have one of those and really can't tell the difference, but that's not the point of controversy. If the company says it will produce millions of colors, it should produce millions of colors. Buy the 24" if it's a concern. You'll be fine.

The facts are, every LCD monitor produces only red, green and blue, because if you examine the screen under a microscope or a really strong magnifying glass, you'll see that each pixel has 3 liquid crystals to light it up. They all light up equally, and you'll see white light. The eye is fooled into seeing white, because the lights are really close together and together make up the full spectrum of light. Should we start a class action suite because of this? I don't think so.

Hue, saturation and luminance are modulated to get the various colors of the spectrum from the tri-color pixels and work together to fool the eye into seeing a lot more than 3 colors. How much more is the bone of contention.

LCD monitor manufacturers make LCDs of three different variants in the technology. The cheapest of these is TN, which is 6 bits per color. A bit is a single binary address and therefore has only two states, on or off. Saying it is a 6 bit monitor means that 6 binary addresses are dedicated to each color of each pixel. So 2 to the 6th power shows us there are 64 possible combinations of a six bit word. Therefore, each color has only 64 levels. Since there are 3 colors to every pixel, you then raise 64 to the 3rd power and you get 262,144 possible color combinations from a single pixel. That's the cheap TN LCDs.

The initial 20" iMac used IPS screens which are 8 bits per color. 2 to the 8th power is 256 possible color levels, raised to the 3rd power is 16,777,216 possible combinations from a single pixel.

The controversy arises over the claim in the advertising that the monitors display millions of colors. Originally, all of the LCD iMacs did display millions of colors, but the suite alleges that Apple slipped the cheaper display into the product mix with the introduction of the 20" aluminum iMac. In other words, it's all over the 20" aluminum iMac. The 24" aluminum iMacs still use the 8 bit IPS LCDs.

As far as the yellowing phenomena, that is a problem with the backlighting of ALL LCD monitors with age. If you want premium quality, none of this should scare you away from a Mac. It's not anywhere near the minefield of what could go wrong trying to put together a PC for photography service.
I've read the same reports as you have and ultimately went with a 24" iMac. Just picked it up yesterday and couldn't be happier!!

The screen is quite large, and even if you don't do a lot with photos and graphics, it's wonderful to be able to have a web browser and a word processor open side by side without compromising visibility (not possible with the 20").

For $1799 (starting price for 24" iMac), this is quite simply the best computer on the market in my humble opinion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2008, 08:17 PM
 
Location: Detroit Downriver
620 posts, read 1,884,188 times
Reputation: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneOne View Post
I've read the same reports as you have and ultimately went with a 24" iMac. Just picked it up yesterday and couldn't be happier!!

The screen is quite large, and even if you don't do a lot with photos and graphics, it's wonderful to be able to have a web browser and a word processor open side by side without compromising visibility (not possible with the 20").

For $1799 (starting price for 24" iMac), this is quite simply the best computer on the market in my humble opinion.
CONGRATULATIONS! That is a great computer to own and use. I'm sure it will give you many years of excellent service. You may not ever have to buy another. At least it's hard to imagine any strides in personal computer technology that would be compelling enough to warrant spending for an upgrade. SWEET!

And, don't you just love the fact that it is all right there behind the LCD with no bulky air box sitting on the floor or in a desk bay? You look at it from the side and it almost disappears.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2008, 08:49 PM
 
1,956 posts, read 4,824,853 times
Reputation: 1113
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bull Winkus View Post
CONGRATULATIONS! That is a great computer to own and use. I'm sure it will give you many years of excellent service. You may not ever have to buy another. At least it's hard to imagine any strides in personal computer technology that would be compelling enough to warrant spending for an upgrade. SWEET!

And, don't you just love the fact that it is all right there behind the LCD with no bulky air box sitting on the floor or in a desk bay? You look at it from the side and it almost disappears.
Yes, there really is nothing to complain about with this computer! I suppose if money were no issue whatsoever, I would outfit my home office in such a way that I could hide the Mac Pro tower and hook up two of the 30" Apple cinema displays.

But I'll be more than happy with this one for a LONG time. It's by far the biggest computer screen I've ever used, and you're right, from any other angle in the the room (other than straight on), it looks very modestly sized on my desk.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2008, 10:23 PM
 
Location: MO Ozarkian in NE Hoosierana
4,679 posts, read 10,952,667 times
Reputation: 6903
Curious as to feelings on matte vs. glossy, esp. of the iMac's and/or Apple displays?

I've the older [ie: 2 yo white version] 24" iMac - and have been also looking at newer versions, so wonder what impressions those here have?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 08-05-2008, 11:29 PM
 
Location: Detroit Downriver
620 posts, read 1,884,188 times
Reputation: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by ShadowCaver View Post
Curious as to feelings on matte vs. glossy, esp. of the iMac's and/or Apple displays?

I've the older [ie: 2 yo white version] 24" iMac - and have been also looking at newer versions, so wonder what impressions those here have?
I have a 20" white G5 model as well. It has the matte screen, and I must say that I prefer matte over glossy. With glossy, the room lighting has to be just right if you're doing any visual work with photos or you'll get glare. The images may be a little crisper, but IMHO it's not worth the trade off. I waited for awhile before buying the aluminum iMac, hoping for a release with the matte screen availability. Hasn't happened yet.

If there is any gripe I have with Apple, it's that despite amazing technological improvements in both form and function with each new permutation, the newest Mac is never quite perfect. They always change something that was better the way it was before, or hang on to some outdated idealistic nonsense like the one button mouse. I can buy a Logitech mouse to replace the flimsy OEM mouse, but I have to adjust my expectations to live with the glossy screen. It's a minor issue, sure. But, it could and should have been a choice for ME to make.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Computers
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:57 PM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top