Hi guys,

As my girlfriend, a photojournalist, approaches her birthday, I am planning to buy her a new computer. She uses a Canon 5d mk II, often in RAW mode (20-30 MB files), and 90% of time she just runs photoshop (the remaining would be dedicated to basic wordprocessing, excel and internet navigation).

Do you think an IMac, 24" screen, 2.66 GHz, 4 GB Ram would be enough for a smooth workflow on CS4?

What's your experience with this combo?

Thank you in advance,

C

Photojournalist/ f she s doen'talready have one a Macbook or two (the secondas a spare). For her office bound work, a Mac pro casue it has more room to grow.

Also a copy of Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 2.5

It might be enough at first but eventually it would get sluggish.

She has a Macbook pro, but needs a desktop for long editing sessions.

But, I quite do not understand the IMac upgrade issue. I mean, untill she uses the same camera/software on a pc/mac which runs smoothly, why upgrade it? It seems more a tech-geek issue. At the end of the day, most of people just get a new pc when the first one is too old for the job... I am just thinking...

C

I guess people are more reticent to just get a new PC when each one is $2500-4500.

mac pro, best one you can afford. Also NEC LCD 2690WUXi2-BK-SV for the monitor as it will outperform anything in the apple monitor lineup...

dear C,

i use an Imac and im very happy about it...next to it i have a 23"ACD attached to it with an A3 tablet for the final photoshop work since the Imac screen is not fantastic (IMHO) - i don't think you can beat the Imac in respect to affordability in combination with performance (i assume you are on a budget and don't want to spend thousands on her bday prezzy)

hope this helps
lucky

climnof wrote:
She has a Macbook pro, but needs a desktop for long editing sessions.

But, I quite do not understand the IMac upgrade issue. I mean, untill she uses the same camera/software on a pc/mac which runs smoothly, why upgrade it? It seems more a tech-geek issue. At the end of the day, most of people just get a new pc when the first one is too old for the job... I am just thinking...

C




Not so much an upgrade issue as an expandability isue; Mac pro towers have 4 internal hardware bays and with the quad core version os the current Mac Pro towers hold up to 16Gb RAM, while the eight core can handle up to 32Gb RAM. if she is a working photojournalist it is likely that at some point in the near feature she will likely start shooting some video and that is really when you need all of that RAM and HDD capacity.

I do the same kind of work. I use a MacPro with 16Gb of RAM and 5 monitors. I couldn't get along with 4 Gb of RAM.

climnof wrote:
She has a Macbook pro, but needs a desktop for long editing sessions.

But, I quite do not understand the IMac upgrade issue. I mean, untill she uses the same camera/software on a pc/mac which runs smoothly, why upgrade it? It seems more a tech-geek issue. At the end of the day, most of people just get a new pc when the first one is too old for the job... I am just thinking...

C



The problem is the iMac is a laptop in a desktop chassis. She's not gaining anything (or very little) moving to one of those from a MacBook pro. You may as well just buy her an amazing 24" screen for her MBP if you were going to get her an iMac.

I thought going for 16GB of ram for my workstation was overkill. I shoot a 5DMK2 as my personal camera and a RAW file from one of those plus my usual workflow will send me flying over 4GB ram usage easy. Though without knowing her personal workflow it's harder to say. Though as has been mentioned if she's a PJ she could well be moving onto video soon, and that 1080p stuff from the 5DMK2 requires some mustard! Certainly isn't any fun on less than a quad core.

As was said above, the macpro is not significantly faster than the imac (for photo editing). I compared them using a 300 mb scanned file when I switched and the speed difference was not enough to justify the macpro. HAving said that, I got the macpro because it is more expandable for internal storage and memory. I also already had a 24" monitor.

climnof wrote:
Hi guys,

As my girlfriend, a photojournalist, approaches her birthday, I am planning to buy her a new computer. She uses a Canon 5d mk II, often in RAW mode (20-30 MB files), and 90% of time she just runs photoshop (the remaining would be dedicated to basic wordprocessing, excel and internet navigation).

Do you think an IMac, 24" screen, 2.66 GHz, 4 GB Ram would be enough for a smooth workflow on CS4?

What's your experience with this combo?

Thank you in advance,

C

Unfortunately, 4GB of ram is not enough memory to work with large number's of 5D Mark II RAW Files. I had to move to 8GB of RAM.

I went from 2GB to 4, to 8, and then to 12GB. 8 or 12 is cool. But I would think a MBP would make a better gift for a photographer - unless she was working mostly in a studio or something.

Get the new 27" iMac with an IPS display panel, and upto 16GB RAM and an intel Quad Core i7

I think that the Mac Pro is a better choice for several reasons: 1) the glossy screen on the iMac is useless for photography; 2) the expansion capability of the MacPro in terms of internal hard drives is very convenient; 3) I bought mine with the Quad core which with certain RAM configurations actually outperforms the dual core 4) the dual core is heavy duty for still photography while the dual core would be great for editing video; 5) at this stage Photoshop CS4 still utilizes less than 4GB of RAM-I purchased mine with 6GB of RAM which seems adequate for editing still images. I use a large internal hard drive for scratch memory for Photoshop.

So I would get the quad core MacPro with 6 GB of RAM (not 8GB). This configuration could be upgraded in the future if necessary. I would find a good non-glossy screen (EIZO or NEC?) to complement the MacPro.

MTCW.

Gary Eckhardt wrote:
I think that the Mac Pro is a better choice for several reasons: 1) the glossy screen on the iMac is useless for photography; 2) the expansion capability of the MacPro in terms of internal hard drives is very convenient; 3) I bought mine with the Quad core which with certain RAM configurations actually outperforms the dual core 4) the dual core is heavy duty for still photography while the dual core would be great for editing video; 5) at this stage Photoshop CS4 still utilizes less than 4GB of RAM-I purchased mine with 6GB of RAM which seems adequate for editing still images. I use a large internal hard drive for scratch memory for Photoshop.

So I would get the quad core MacPro with 6 GB of RAM (not 8GB). This configuration could be upgraded in the future if necessary. I would find a good non-glossy screen (EIZO or NEC?) to complement the MacPro.

MTCW.



As an owner of the latest MacPro Nehalem, I would say get her one of the new i7 iMacs. The glossy screen is a little annoying, but the overall size of the screen, the impressive internal specs, simplicity, and price all conspire to make an iMac the best value, even for someone with relatively high-power needs.

Arka C.

Agree. There's a thread on that here: http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=805934 some good discussion there.

I tend to agree. For me the best (as a gift) would go:

#1 - MacBook Pro (or other Laptop)
#2 - Home Built PC
#3 - The New iMac
#4 - Mac Pro.

Mac Pro comes in dead last. In 2009 they really screwed their customer base. They crippled the machine, defeated self-upgrading tinkerers, and overpriced the units by about $2,000 across the board. All in one fell swoop. 2008 MacPros are still kewl tho.