iMac for photography/video business?

[Drozz]

Hi.. First post but long time lurker.

I'm debating on switching over to iMacs from pc's when I move into my first studio in a couple weeks. I currently work on an I7 9gb and an U2711. I own a couple iPads and an iPhone and have always liked the design and performance. How would the iMacs work for the following?

Post processing: CS5, ,Lightroom, DPP
Screen: 27" IPS- how is the glossy screen for editing?
Video editing: I use Vegas Pro now and shoot with a 5d and 7d(1080p)
HD projector: I'd like to wirelessly transmit 1080p video from the computer

Thanks!

 

[drew.bowser]

Hi.. First post but long time lurker.

I'm debating on switching over to iMacs from pc's when I move into my first studio in a couple weeks. I currently work on an I7 9gb and an U2711. I own a couple iPads and an iPhone and have always liked the design and performance. How would the iMacs work for the following?

Post processing: CS5, ,Lightroom, DPP
Screen: 27" IPS- how is the glossy screen for editing?
Video editing: I use Vegas Pro now and shoot with a 5d and 7d(1080p)
HD projector: I'd like to wirelessly transmit 1080p video from the computer

Thanks!

So, I think I could be greatly qualified to answer some of your questions and I am a full time photographer shooting 5D2s for video and stills and editing in DPP, CS5, and Final Cut Studio 3. (I use photomechanic to cull through images for a faster workflow)

The i7 is a great machine, just make sure to have the RAM to keep up with what you need it to do. I ran with 12gb and loved it.

The imac does a great job. I recently went thought a partnership split and had to give up my quad core i5 imac in november. I jumped back to a 2010 mac mini and I didnt realize how much of a difference it would make.


DPP really shined moving from the c2d to the i5 quad...the i7 would be even better. I am in the market for a new imac and will be getting the new model in a few days, once it is released.

I wish canon would release a 64bit update for DPP. Would speed the batch processing up quite a bit.


As for the screen. I dont mind glossy. My office had a lot of natural light (windows. I just tried to sit lower than the display (just a bit) and angle the screen down. I guess as a photographer it helps to understand specular highlights and how they work to place your display. Talking about colors and resolution...it is great, hard to beat a cinema display for image quality.

Video editing...get FCS. It is great compared to vegas.


HD projector. Options. MiniDisplay to HDMI adaptor. Then from there you will have to buy a wireless HDMI transmitter and receiver.

Hope all this helps!

 

[DucktapeFanboy]

From my experience, you don't need half the power you get for simple editing (making your cut) with that native 1080p DSLR source of yours. Actually i am doing that on my mac mini. The little signs of stress my computer is showing me doing this tasks seem to be caused rather by storage performance than cpu/gpu/ram.
If you are doing more intensive tasks like complex compositing you can really benefit from the power of an iMac. An i7 paired with as much ram as you can get and any strong going openCl gpu just rocks in AfterEffects.
If you just wanna get the best performance out of adobe premiere i'de recomend keeping your pc and adding one of the supported nvidia gpus enabling the use of the mercury playback engine.
Well about Vegas... i used to recommend it to people using weak old pc laptops because it was really a nice performer but i alwas thought on a stronger machine the creative suite or the FC Studio was making better use of all the power.

One last comment on the video streaming. I think you're gonna have to get wired to be on the safe side. My AirPort peaks at 2mb/s. Depending on the codec/mbits a 1080p video can be more demanding than that.

Some of what i said is more opinion than fact. But if you read this far you probably noticed

 

[legreve]

For photography you don't even need the newest one (depending on how many layers you work with).
At my fulltime job doing commercial photography, we're stuck on the old white imacs with anti glare screens and 2 gb ram and cs3. But you know what, they still get the job done, albeit a little slower than a new edition.

Having said that, in my own business I had to spoil myself and got this mbp sandy, and I would definately prefer working on a new sandy iMac if I had the money for it and if Apple would just return to offering the Anti-glare for it... Our studio is set up for daylight as well as flash and therefore I cant really turn the computer around to avoid glare.
Also keep in mind that the glossy needs to be calibrated in a near pitch black room to be done properly.

Video wise I have some friends who edit what I shoot and they are currently tied up on the 2010 iMac and apparently they are happy with its power. I myself have edited a little on my own quad pc, and found that equally satisfactory.
The hurdle comes with you start putting in 3d and other heavy post work. I don't doubt that the iMac could handle it, but I would probably get fed up with the slow speed having experienced how smooth a mac pro can run.

So what you need to think about in your case, is pretty much the same as me: How much will I be editing what I shoot? Will I outsource it to get more time to do what's important? If the answer is yes, I wouldn't think twice about getting an iMac. It has more than enough ram to carry out the job of photography.
And for basic drag and cut in FC / Premiere / whatever, it will be fine as well.

So yes, go for it... but please, do wait for the refresh that will come in the next week or so I envy you!