Mac vs. pc for photo work

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

chris wrote:
>
> I don't think iPhoto is that good. It's way over-rated for no obvious

> reason.

The obvious reason is that it comes bundled free with new Mac's, so it
falls into the "don't look a Gift Horse in the mouth" catagory. IMO,
there's little harm in at least trying it before deciding to buy
something else.


> Has it been updated to categorize off-line photos?

I don't know the answer for v5, but since hard drives keep coming down
in prices, buying the hardware to keep the images online may be an
acceptable alternative for some. For example, for the same $200
required to buy iView MediaPro software (which does Archive), you could
instead choose to pick up a 300GB internal SATA hard drive.


> It's set up to easily order prints from APPLE; making their wallet
> puffy by merely sending your order to Ofoto (Kodak) to process.

True, and no one is being forced to do use this option. I've not tried
it yet, but I have seen some people give it fairly high praise, so
there's apparently some people who think that the convenience is worth
the cost; YMMV.


> You can't share photos without the $99 .Mac account.

Sure you can. You just have to do it the old fashioned way: FTP them
up onto your existing website. A nice FTP app to do this is
"Transmit":

http/www.panic.com/transmit/

IIRC, Transmit allows an unlimited number of 10 minute sessions for
free, but it is a program that's worth paying its $25 Shareware fee
IMO.


-hh

PS for Howard: hope that despite all of the Mac/PC tangents of this
thread, you've gotten most of your questions answered.

I can't offer much aid on your Networking question, except that
anecdotally, it seems that most challenges tend to be in basic
configuration stuff which is not particularly unique to any OS. I have
heard some claims that wireless is supposedly "better" on a Mac; my
wireless experience has been to boot up my laptop and watch XP proceed
to claim that the wireless network that was in the previous airport's
waiting lounge is still within range!

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Ron Hunter wrote:
> Little Green Eyed Dragon wrote:
>
>> In article <0knJd.14899$yu6.14020@fe06.lga>,
>> Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>>
>>> Sure, but then I wouldn't have time to respond to 100 or most posts
>>> in various newsgroups every day.
>>
>>
>>
>> Wow that must be all you do.
>
>
> I am retired, and ill. Since October, I haven't been able to get around
> much.
>
>
Well, I am sorry to hear that, Ron.

But I'd sincerely like to keep reading your posts! Look at it this way:
respond to just 90 posts in a day, using the saved time to trim.

You will save each of hundreds of readers a fraction of a second each
post of yours they read.

Net benefit to the NG: 28 minutes of saved time per day....

well, give a few hours, or take 27 minutes...

Get well soon.

--
John McWilliams

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <U7CJd.15692$aK3.7979@fe06.lga>,
Ron Hunter <rphunter@charter.net> wrote:
>nospam wrote:
>>
>> some people love building computers. more power to 'em. have fun. but
>> don't tell the rest of the world that is the 'one true way.' it isn't.
>
>Just like some people like to build their own cars, and wonder why
>everyone doesn't enjoy it. Sigh.

Quite. I've built computers, and have come to the conclusion that I hate
doing it. When the last Athlon Linux system I built finally failed (the CPU
fan died and the processor incinerated itself and part of the motherboard),
I swore "never again" and replaced it with a Powermac G4. Never regretted my
decision.

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I also started to transition off of SCSI a couple of years ago.

For the SCSI PCI card, don't assume that its compatible - - I think
I've seen some comments that there's a risk of frying the Motherboard.
You can go to Adaptec's website to do the research - - they have very
clear documentation as to which of their PCI-based SCSI boards works
with the G5, and which ones don't.

While you're at it, check the peripheral manufacturer's website to find
OS X drivers.

For the printer, its USB plug will be fine, but you'll need to go check
with Canon to see if you need a new driver.

Overall, making sure that your equipment is forward-compatible is part
of any transition plan, be it hardware or software/OS. If worse comes
to worse, you need to buy a new scanner and printer.

Off-the-cuff, I'd recommend considering the following:

Epson Perfection 3200 PHOTO Color Scanner (B11B156011-N). Its
available off of Epson's website Refurbished for $299 and not only is
it a pretty good scanner, but it includes both a USB and a Firewire
ports, and using Firewire not only frees up a USB port for some other
purpose, but Firewire has a lot more throughput, so you'll scan faster.

This URL may or may not take you directly to Epson's refurb page for
it:

http/tinyurl.com/3pf3n


-hh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <1106772866.265426.197610@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
<huntzing@pica.army.mil> wrote:

> Epson Perfection 3200 PHOTO Color Scanner (B11B156011-N). Its
> available off of Epson's website Refurbished for $299 and not only is
> it a pretty good scanner, but it includes both a USB and a Firewire
> ports, and using Firewire not only frees up a USB port for some other
> purpose, but Firewire has a lot more throughput, so you'll scan faster.

you are suggesting he replace his imacon scanner with an epson
flatbed????

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

On 1/25/05 2:58 PM, in article 250120051258119838%nospam@nospam.invalid,
"nospam" <nospam@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> why is it you can't see that most people have *no* interest in building
> computers or any other bit of electronic equippment? whether it is
> lack of ability, lack of time, or simply lack of desire, most people do
> *not* want to bother. they want to take it out of the box, plug it in,
> and start working.
>
> some people love building computers. more power to 'em. have fun. but
> don't tell the rest of the world that is the 'one true way.' it isn't.
There are always the evangelists...
When I was taking care of my late uncle, who suffered from alzheimers as
well as a deteriorating physical condition, I posted on the 35mm newsgroup
asking for recommendations for mail-order labs, since we were 'way out in
the country and the nearest town just has walmart.
What I got were all these "brilliant" suggestions for dark-rooming on my
own...no matter how much I mentioned that I didn't get even 5 minutes by
myself, had no way to set anything, however small, up, and he was
hysterical if I even left the room, it didn't stop the "all you need to do
is" plus, I would only do darkroom if it was the only method left on earth.
I don't like it. Obviously, their zeal overrides their ability to hear
"That's not MY solution!"
Anyway, thank heaven for digital!!! (actually, that's when I decided to
REALLY learn digital.)

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I am taking a course in PhotoShop CS and am being forced to use a Mac.
Personally, I don't like it and see NO advantages. But that said, you
have to factor in what monitor you are using, how much RAM you have,
how fast your PC is, what video card you're using and a lot of other
things so comparisons such as whether a Mac is better than a PC is
almost meaningless. I have seen this argument go on for years
[literally since the first Mac came out] and your are as likely to get
a straight answer as to ask the Bishop of Canterbury and the Pope
whether being Episcopal is better than being Roman Catholic.

Tom

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In article <{NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}rec-scuba2005-
C1876B.07325024012005@news.giganews.com>, {NOSPAM-rm_to_reply}
rec-scuba2005@huntzinger.com says...
> "Mike Henley" <casioculture@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > [-hh] wrote:
> > > Howard wrote:
> > >
> > > I've used the Single Processor version of this machine [1.8GHz G5]
> > > and ~20MB Photoshop files aren't a problem. I did throw a 1GB
> > > photoshop file to see what it would do and while it did cause
> > > it to pause and chew, it did swallow.
> > >
> > > -hh
> >
> > I have an athlon64 i built myself for a fraction of that cost...
>
>
> I'm very sorry, but a pet peeve of mine are DIY'ers who conveniently
> ignore the trade-offs, such as that by paying less, they had to invest
> more of their personal free time to spec, buy & assemble the system.

You didn't spec out the Apple before buying? If you didn't buy
online, you drove to the store and invested your personal time.

>
>
> Personally, I've done DIY's too and generally, I won't bother to do them
> anymore because I'm more time-limited than money-limited. YMMV.

What are you doing sunday afternoon? Making hundreds of dollars
or hanging out watching the game? If you are making hundreds,
you have a valid point. If you are watching the game, you
don't. I'm always amazed at how people think that every minute
of their day is worth the same as their professional
salary/rate. If that were true, most of us would be
millionaires easily. The fact is much of anyone's time is
"free" time, unless you are putting in 80 hrs then I pity you.

>
>
> Any comparison that doesn't try to account for known differences between
> A vs B simply isn't a very good comparison. to that end, a good DIY PC
> assembly will be an all day job IMO, which at 'skilled PC tech rates' is
> easily worth $500 in a comparison.

I've done it twice. Only took about 1.5 hrs the first time, and
I read every bit of the manuals on installing and hooking up the
wires to the right locations. 2nd time I was a "pro" and it
took half an hour. Then pop in XP's disk and let it work for an
hour or so. I'll take your $500 for that if you think it's
worth that much. Pay for my whole system almost.

>
> Now personally, I don't care if you DIY or not. Just please cut me a
> break and try to avoid insinuating that everyone else is wrong if they
> don't do a DIY as you did.

I am not insinuating that here. Just responding to your points
about how a DIY is really not a savings if you have to put in a
few hrs of your weekend.

>
> You may have paid a fraction of the cost, but I paid a fraction of the
> time. YMMV on which one is more valuable.

Again, depends on when the time is spent. Sunday lounging time
is cheap.

>
>
>
> - - -
>
> In any event, I was replying to post some pseudo-benchmarks:
>
> Geek details: 2003 ('Rev 1') Mac G5 SP 1.8GHz, 900MHz frontside bus,
> 1.5GB RAM. Running OS 10.3.7 and Photoshop 7.0.1 w/G5 plug-in.
>
> The 1GB Photoshop file I referred to was slightly larger; around 1.2GB,
> with an image size of (17433 x 11551). It took 1:20 to read it in from
> the hard drive, then a very long 6:60 to do a simple "AutoLevel" on it.
> Resampling it to (3018 x 2000) took 1:35.
>

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

In message <260120051411045471%nospam@nospam.invalid>, nospam
<nospam@nospam.invalid> writes
>In article <1106772866.265426.197610@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
><huntzing@pica.army.mil> wrote:
>
>> Epson Perfection 3200 PHOTO Color Scanner (B11B156011-N). Its
>> available off of Epson's website Refurbished for $299 and not only is
>> it a pretty good scanner, but it includes both a USB and a Firewire
>> ports, and using Firewire not only frees up a USB port for some other
>> purpose, but Firewire has a lot more throughput, so you'll scan faster.
>
>you are suggesting he replace his imacon scanner with an epson
>flatbed????

Nospam, why only four question marks? This reminds me of a cartoon I
once saw. A professor shows a group of medical students a happy
laughing man, but in crutches and with both feet amputated. The prof
says pointing to the missing feet: "His new shoes were tight and gave
him trouble. A simple amputation I performed on him solved the problem,
and made him happy again!" The solution suggested by huntzing is not
very different from the prof's remedy for tight new shoes!
--
nobody

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

kodakfilm@gmail.com wrote:
> I am taking a course in PhotoShop CS and am being forced to use a Mac.
> Personally, I don't like it and see NO advantages. But that said, you
> have to factor in what monitor you are using, how much RAM you have,
> how fast your PC is, what video card you're using and a lot of other
> things so comparisons such as whether a Mac is better than a PC is
> almost meaningless. I have seen this argument go on for years
> [literally since the first Mac came out] and your are as likely to get
> a straight answer as to ask the Bishop of Canterbury and the Pope
> whether being Episcopal is better than being Roman Catholic.
>
> Tom
>

Bottom line is to use whichever you are more comfortable with.


--
Ron Hunter rphunter@charter.net

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

I really do hope it was helpful. I did try to search on "Imacon OS
X drivers" yesterday, but wasn't able to easily turn anything obvious
up...I"m sure it would have helped if I would have known that this was
a drum scanner and not a mundane PC-based flatbed which was what my
off-the-cuff recommendation was based on.

Insofar as a SCSI card that is hardware G5-compatible, on a back-burner
project that I'm fiddling with, I've just recently installed a used
Adaptec PowerDomain 29160N, which has a "Narrow" (50 pin) external SCSI
port. I believe that I can get another one of these cards pretty
cheap, if you're interested (ping me offline).

FWIW, here's Adaptec's webpage on it:

http/www.adaptec.com/worldwide/product/proddetail.html?sess=no&language=English+US&prodkey=APD-29160N

If you do really get stuck with it not being supported under Mac OS X,
your options are probably to go out and find a used Mac G4 that still
allowed dual-boot into OS 9 (Apple just fairly recently stopped selling
these (June 04), so they shouldn't be too hard to find, and less than
$2K), or switch it over to a Windows PC. This appears to be a case
where the peripheral is worth more than the CPU, so accomodations have
to be made.


-hh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Mark Marchie wrote:
> You didn't spec out the Apple before buying?

Sure I did. But the value-added here has nothing to do with their
product and everything to do with their website design, plus being able
to do "one stop shopping" instead of potentially choosing to place
multiple orders to squeeze out that last 5% on price.

FWIW, my wife does this too with car rentals ... she goes searching
through 182 different websites and end up saving a whopping $5 on a
quick weekend trip somewhere, whereas when I do that, I'll look at two
and unless the prices are out of line, pick one and be done with it.


> What are you doing sunday afternoon? Making hundreds of dollars
> or hanging out watching the game?

This past weekend, it was trying to finish up a hefty stack of
proposals.


> I'm always amazed at how people think that every minute of their day
> is worth the same as their professional salary/rate

The real bottom line with all DIY'ing is that its a way of working more
to try to use our money differently, and how much we can earn at the
day job always has to be a consideration because DIY'ing is really
nothing more than volunteering to work Overtime...merely with less
paperwork .

If you're crunched, the last thing you want is more "work" no matter
what form it happens to be in...you want stress relief. This relief
can take many forms: athletic activies such as skiing. Or drinking
beer and watching sports on TV. Or flaming posts on Usenet .
Others find relaxation in going downstairs and building things, be it
woodworking or a DIY PC assembly. What these all have in common is
that they're all different: what may constitute relaxation for one
party is not assuredly universally enjoyable by all. YMMV, but I
rarely hear people saying: "Oh, boy, I just can't wait to go home
tonight and defrag my HD and install Service Release 8".


> I've done it twice.

Rookie ;-) All I can say is that perhaps in time, you'll come to hate
it.


-hh

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thank you huntzing, the information is valuable and I acted on it,
changing my Imacon for an Epson would be extremely hard for me!
Take care,
Nobody

In message <1106772866.265426.197610@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
huntzing@pica.army.mil writes
>I also started to transition off of SCSI a couple of years ago.
>
>For the SCSI PCI card, don't assume that its compatible - - I think
>I've seen some comments that there's a risk of frying the Motherboard.
>You can go to Adaptec's website to do the research - - they have very
>clear documentation as to which of their PCI-based SCSI boards works
>with the G5, and which ones don't.
>
>While you're at it, check the peripheral manufacturer's website to find
>OS X drivers.
>
>For the printer, its USB plug will be fine, but you'll need to go check
>with Canon to see if you need a new driver.
>
>Overall, making sure that your equipment is forward-compatible is part
>of any transition plan, be it hardware or software/OS. If worse comes
>to worse, you need to buy a new scanner and printer.
>
>Off-the-cuff, I'd recommend considering the following:
>
>Epson Perfection 3200 PHOTO Color Scanner (B11B156011-N). Its
>available off of Epson's website Refurbished for $299 and not only is
>it a pretty good scanner, but it includes both a USB and a Firewire
>ports, and using Firewire not only frees up a USB port for some other
>purpose, but Firewire has a lot more throughput, so you'll scan faster.
>
>This URL may or may not take you directly to Epson's refurb page for
>it:
>
>http/tinyurl.com/3pf3n
>
>
>-hh
>

nobody

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

Thanks hh, following your recommendation I went to the adaptec site, and
they do have two scasi cards, 29160 (as you said) and 39160 which are
supported by OSX. I should therefore be all right, hopefully. Thanks
again.
Nobody

In message <1106835035.625933.175610@c13g2000cwb.googlegroups.com>,
huntzing@pica.army.mil writes
>I really do hope it was helpful. I did try to search on "Imacon OS
>X drivers" yesterday, but wasn't able to easily turn anything obvious
>up...I"m sure it would have helped if I would have known that this was
>a drum scanner and not a mundane PC-based flatbed which was what my
>off-the-cuff recommendation was based on.
>
>Insofar as a SCSI card that is hardware G5-compatible, on a back-burner
>project that I'm fiddling with, I've just recently installed a used
>Adaptec PowerDomain 29160N, which has a "Narrow" (50 pin) external SCSI
>port. I believe that I can get another one of these cards pretty
>cheap, if you're interested (ping me offline).
>
>FWIW, here's Adaptec's webpage on it:
>
>http/www.adaptec.com/worldwide/product/proddetail.html?sess=no&languag
>e=English+US&prodkey=APD-29160N
>
>If you do really get stuck with it not being supported under Mac OS X,
>your options are probably to go out and find a used Mac G4 that still
>allowed dual-boot into OS 9 (Apple just fairly recently stopped selling
>these (June 04), so they shouldn't be too hard to find, and less than
>$2K), or switch it over to a Windows PC. This appears to be a case
>where the peripheral is worth more than the CPU, so accomodations have
>to be made.
>
>
>-hh
>

nobody

 

[Guest]

Archived from groups: rec.photo.digital (More info?)

nick c wrote:
> Howard wrote:
> > I'm an old pc person but tempted by the new mac stuff. I just
looked at
> > Picasa and was impressed. On the other hand, I keep hearing how
wonderful
> > the Mac osX is on media stuff, etc. Any suggestions would be
appreciated.
> > Best,
> > Howie
> >
> >
>
> I'm a Mac and PC user. I have two Mac's and two PC's and often switch
to
> one or the other when I'm going to process photos. The recent
computer
> addition was the Sony VGC-RA826G, which is what I'm using now. It's
> water cooled and in normal operation it's as silent as silent can be.

> Much quieter than my Mac's. The only time I can hear a whir is when
I'm
> copying a CD or a DVD.
>
> AFAIC, I don't see a difference in speed between my PC and G4 Mac (I
> don't have G5's). If one is a couple of milliseconds faster than the
> other, I couldn't care less.
>
> I have Photoshop in one of the Mac's and also in the Sony PC. I have
> filters in the PC that are not available for the Mac although the
most
> popular major filters can be had for both systems. I have photo
programs
> that are not available for the Mac installed in the Sony.
>
> I've been a Mac user for some 16 years and a PC user for about a
year.
> When looking at my finished photos, no one can tell me which machine
was
> used to process the photos and I find the PC (at least my Sony
> VGC-RA826G) to be just as good as my Mac's (might even be better).
>
> Once upon a time, Mac commanded 10% of the computer market. About the

> time OS X came out, Mac's commanded 7% of the computer market (not
> because of OS X), I learned yesterday, Mac's now command 3% of the
> computer market. Mac's big money maker has been the Ipods.
>
> When comparing the build of Mac computers to PC, Mac's have been
> top-notch. However, top line PC's (such as my VGC-RA826G) is built
every
> bit as good as Mac's and it even has a diskette slot built in.
>
> I still use diskettes to store various correspondence which usually
max
> out at about 3K per. Diskettes can hold a lot of correspondence.
>
> Mac people seem to be dedicated to Mac's (I know I was) but there's
> always folks like me who can break the habit. IMO, high end PC's are
> just as effective as Mac G4 or G5's. Not only is there a variety of
PC's
> to chose from, you could build one yourself to meet your spec needs.
> Generally you'll find PC's are cheaper.
>
> If you're thinking about getting a Mac, take a couple of Aspirins,
sleep
> on it for a while, then forget it.
>
> Ya got my opinion.
>
> nick

Thats funny, I am an old time PC user (since XT days) and I build
highend systems myself for photo editing gaming and I tried a Mac and I
am going to budget my PC money this year for a dual CPU G5 1.8 system

I fell in love with OSX pretty quick, it is so elegant and much nicer
that XP. C1 PRO is much better on the MAC and the Mini at 1.4Ghz seems
to process RAWs as fast as my 2.4Ghz which I find interesting.

Also that multi windows (entorage) is real nice especially since I like
keeping many things running.

 

[turbovette426]

I am a Graphic Designer and run both Mac and PC using Photoshop, Illustrator, Picasso etc. I recently upgraded my Mac computers from G4 dual 500 to G5 dual 2.0 ghz. Mac is by far easier and more maintanence free than the PC. Keep in mind the multi processors need 64 bit processing to take full advantage of the multi processors. This being said Windows would have to be the 64 bit versions and will not then run the older software you have spent money on. The Mac does run 64 bit processing and also runs the 32 bit programs you have. Even with the cost of the Macs being high the savings will come from the included software, the 64 bit processing and the almost bomb proof OS X. My preference is Mac and the learning curve to operate the Mac is not that hard as some seem to think. I am self taught on the Mac but had to take coarses when I started in computers to run Windows. Your choice.