Your Photo Editing Computer

[Lynnzora]

Ok I've been looking through threads to see if I could find an answer to this question.... but no such luck.

I would love to know the type of computer you all use to edit your photos. Is it important? I'm trying to get a new one. I have an old Dell Inspiron 6400 with Windows Vista... I'm wondering if I should just get another Dell with a duel prosessor.

A lot of people say that Mac is the best for editing... but I've never used a mac in my life... and if it's not that big of a difference... I'll just stick with windows.

Also if I stick with a windows laptop, should I get Vista again? It has its good and bad issues.

 

[DRoberts]

Of course you want lots of memory or an external storage device. You want as much speed as possible for batch operations. But the most important aspect to me is a good monitor. One that can be calibrated, and high resolution.
For photos Mac vs Windows is not that big of an issue. Of course the Mac users will tell you diferent. For video or sound production then yes a Mac is the way to go.
Most photo programs are catching up or have updates for Vista, so Vista is fine.

 

[mrodgers]

Also if I stick with a windows laptop, should I get Vista again? It has its good and bad issues.

If you are looking at getting Vista again, what happened to the current laptop? It shouldn't be all that old if it had Vista.

I use a PC from 2005, very old (Athalon64 3500+, ATI x1650 gfx, 1 gb ram) and it does quite well. Some of the heavier plugin stuff runs a bit slow, but it works with several 40 mb TIFF files opened up quite easily. I would think that anything current would be fine.

I won't touch Dell. We are contracted at work with Dell because we supply packaging material to them. I've never seen so many junk computers in one place. They are constantly breaking down on us.

I also get a supplier discount from Dell for my personal equipment. Funny thing is, my supplier discount calculates out to always $30 HIGHER than I can get straight from their website. Thus, I have a Compaq at home and thanks to my boss who went behind the scenes to get me a laptop, I have an HP laptop for work instead of a Dell.

 

[manaheim]

Mac or PC doesn't matter. Pick what you prefer. I prefer PCs.

Dell is fine... not significantly better or worse than any other PC manufacturer, though I will say that last I checked the Lenovo boxes were really exceptionally well put together. (assuming you are going laptop, of course)

In general, you're going to get more bang for your buck (not to mention more expandability) in a desktop rig.

When going multi-core, keep in mind that not all applications are really designed to handle this well. I haven't checked on Photoshop CS4 yet, but CS3 does a *reasonable* job of taking advantage of the multiple cores.

Lots of fast RAM and some good fast local disk is your friend. SCSI rocks if you can afford it. Nothing better. However, the newer SATA drives perform admirably.

My personal rig is kind of obnoxious. I have one of the pre-production Intel Skulltrail machines. Dual proc, Quad Core Xeon Extreme 3.0 GHz chips overclocked to 5 GHz. 4 gigs of server RAM (don't recall the speed), SCSI drives, yadda yadda. My machine cost about $18K new. Last I looked you could buy it for closer to ~$12K. I bet it's more like $6K now. Don't ever buy an uber uber machine. Waste of money. Awesome when one is handed to you, but total waste of money otherwise.

 

[ksmattfish]

Mac vs PC doesn't matter, but you'll be able to buy a lot more PC power for the same money.

Get a fast processor, 4 gb ram, and lots of ram on the vid card. I recently got a 3+ghz Core Duo, 4gb ram, and 1gb on the vid card for under $1000.

My research indicated that if I wanted a vid card and monitor specialized for 2D graphics work it was going to be $1000+ each for those items. I went the cheap route sticking with an old but reliable CRT monitor, and as much ram on the vid card as I could afford.

I don't know how my computer would do if really tested or if loaded up with the latest video games, but it seems super fast with Photoshop and Lightroom to me. I can't move/work any faster even if it could. I was using a pretty old computer (1ghz Pentium, 2gb ram, 256k ram vid card), and the new one has cut my processing time to 1/4th what it used to be. It's by far the most productive gear upgrade I've done in a while. Even better than a new camera.

I have a hard time processing on my laptop. Tilting the screen effects what I'm seeing radically. I was told that unless I can afford a really good monitor designed for photography I should stick to a calibrated CRT. I have, and it's served me well. I calibrate every 2 weeks, and order my prints with no corrections. They always look just like I expect them to.

 

[manaheim]

Kmatt eludes to a point I forgot. Keep some money reserved for a Spyder or similar hardware calibration tool. It's well worth the money. The uber one costs ~$400, but you can get away with a lesser one for $100 for now. I actually use a very old one which isn't perfect for the newer screens, but it does the job.

Cheap CRTs are generally your better bet for color accuracy than a cheap LCD panel. Cheap LCD panels can be hell on wheels for color. You can make them work, but you're going to have a few migraines in the process.

 

[chrisburke]

i use mac, but thats my personal preference.. I know some people dont like mac.. I love it, because I like not getting viruses, and I like that I've been using it for about 7 years and have never had the thing freeze or have to force a shut down, but thats just me!

if you are going to go with another dell, please don't get a low end one.. the low end dells really don't last that long, our staff bought low end dells, and had to replace them 2 years later.. and they use computers properly.

As for "more power for less money" with pc.. its true, it is less money for a more powerful pc, but IMO they arent good computers.

 

[jlykins]

Not trying to plug my blog, but I did an article about this very subject yesterday. You can read it here: http://jlykinsphotos.blogspot.com/2009/02/mac-vs-pc.html I just don't feel like retyping it to be honest.

 

[robbie_vlad]

Anyone have any experience with the capabilities (storage, PP, ect.) of Macbooks (laptops)? I'm looking into getting my first laptop and I've read some good things about them, but would like to hear from some actual users (please state what model you use).

 

[Big Mike]

Get a fast processor, 4 gb ram, and lots of ram on the vid card. I recently got a 3+ghz Core Duo, 4gb ram, and 1gb on the vid card for under $1000.

My research indicated that if I wanted a vid card and monitor specialized for 2D graphics work it was going to be $1000+ each for those items. I went the cheap route sticking with an old but reliable CRT monitor, and as much ram on the vid card as I could afford.

I've read and been told that (for the most part) the video card doesn't affect the performance for photo/image editing. Good video cards are much more benefit for gaming where the display is constantly changing. For photo editing, you are much better to save money on the video card and put that into the processor or RAM (or a good monitor).

That being said, Photoshop CS4 is the first version with built-in hardware acceleration which lets the hardware (I don't know exactly what) handle some of the processing, which speeds up how the program runs overall.

 

[jlykins]

I've read and been told that (for the most part) the video card doesn't affect the performance for photo/image editing. Good video cards are much more benefit for gaming where the display is constantly changing. For photo editing, you are much better to save money on the video card and put that into the processor or RAM (or a good monitor).

That being said, Photoshop CS4 is the first version with built-in hardware acceleration which lets the hardware (I don't know exactly what) handle some of the processing, which speeds up how the program runs overall.

You don't need a top of the line video card or SLI. But if you have a monitor of any considerable size, you need a graphics card that can handle it.

 

[chrisburke]

Anyone have any experience with the capabilities (storage, PP, ect.) of Macbooks (laptops)? I'm looking into getting my first laptop and I've read some good things about them, but would like to hear from some actual users (please state what model you use).

i use a macbook and a mac mini... as for capabilities, i'm not sure what your asking.. capabilities of storage??? basically if it fits in the computer, it will work.. plus you can use external drives as well.. as for pp.. macs were made for graphic design.. that is what they excel at... I use a pretty ram intensive work flow when doing editing, and i've still yet to freeze my computer... I've actually tried to freeze it.. but I just cant!!

 

[Samanax]

I would love to know the type of computer you all use to edit your photos.

I just built a new computer for photo editing (my old one finally died after 5 years of use). It's a WinTel (Windows/Intel) based computer with the following specs...

Intel Core 2 Duo E8500 Wolfdale 3.16GHz LGA 775 Dual-Core Processor
ASUS P5Q LGA 775 Intel P45 ATX Intel Motherboard
CORSAIR 4GB 240-Pin DDR2 SDRAM DDR2 800 Dual Channel Kit
SeaSonic SS-500ET 500W ATX12V V2.2 / EPS12V V2.91 Power Supply
SAPPHIRE 100264L Radeon HD 4350 512MB PCI Express 2.0 x16 Video Card
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 500GB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD
Seagate Barracuda 7200.11 1TB 7200 RPM 32MB Cache SATA 3.0Gb/s HDD
LITE-ON Black 20X SATA DVD Burner - Retail
My old Antec case
WinXP Home

Is it important?

Yes, you need a computer to edit photos with (just kidding...not sure what you mean by this question).

I have an old Dell Inspiron 6400 with Windows Vista... I'm wondering if I should just get another Dell with a dual prosessor.

How old is your current computer? I went from a 2.8GHz single core processor w/3GB of RAM to a 3.16GHz Dual Core processor w/4GB of RAM and it made a big difference in how fast Photoshop performs. The difference in speed isn't much, the difference in performance comes from the 2 technologically advanced cores that can do calculations more efficiently than the older processor. Amount of RAM wasn't a factor since 32 bit WinXP Home only "sees" 3GB anyway.

A lot of people say that Mac is the best for editing... but I've never used a mac in my life... and if it's not that big of a difference... I'll just stick with windows.

Go with what you know.

Also if I stick with a windows laptop, should I get Vista again? It has its good and bad issues.

Which Vista are you using? I heard Vista Basic is kinda lame but Vista Premium is supposed to be pretty good. I'm still using WinXP Home since I already had it and I don't like how some things are harder to locate in Vista. I'm waiting to see how Windows 7 performs before I upgrade from WinXP Home.

 

[rufus5150]

I've read and been told that (for the most part) the video card doesn't affect the performance for photo/image editing.

From what I've read, CS4 farms quite a bit of horsepower out to the video card. I don't have any experience with that yet though.

 

[jlykins]

I'm running Vista Home premium. I turned off the Aero interface crap, along with the sidebar. I don't care about any of that stuff and they are just Ram hogs... I don't mind Vista at all. I have found though, that people who have a newer computer with Vista preinstalled, seem to have better luck than the people who try to "upgrade" to it.