Mac versus PC for digital photographers?

[eddx]

I have had my MacBook Pro for two years. I still use a PC for gaming but when I was just using a PC I would be formating it every 6 months and rebuilding / replacing it every 18 months.

I can see my MacBook Pro lasting another 18 months at least and so far have had nothing but joy from the machine (apart from a bad battery which was replaced).

My dad (also a professional photographer) recently moved from a PC to an iMac and loves it, he says he works a lot faster and I have less questions from him about computer problems.

I can't recommend Macs highly enough and if your asking on this forum I am sure your not alone. Go and get a make and stop worrying - you won't regret it I promise!

 

[jimmer-uk]

We were last talking about this in February… why dig it up again?

If you don't like it i've dug it up (by mistake I may add!!) then don't comment and move on

 

[termina3]

If you don't like it i've dug it up (by mistake I may add!!) then don't comment and move on

Eh, my question arose from more of idle curiosity than ire.

 

[maestrokev]

I'll add another endorsement for Aperture. I started with Lightroom, but then switched to Aperture mostly because of its handling of dual monitors. I then found lots more to love about Aperture. I'd say it's reason enough to go with OS X.

FWIW, I had been an Adobe diehard since 1989, so the switch to Aperture was no small matter for me. I hated iPhoto and heard bad things about the first version of Aperture. I was reluctant for a long time to pack up all my photos and move them (minus all my carefully entered keywords) to Aperture, but I have never looked back since I did.

Can't Aperture read the keywords from IPTC data? That's the biggest deal breaker for me, having colour corrected, keyworded and rated 10,000+ RAW images in LR, I'm loathe to switch and redo this exercise all over again. Wish there was a simpler way to convert.

 

[termina3]

Wish there was a simpler way to convert.

I'm pretty sure there is. Look around for one of the many "Aperture to Lightroom" or "Lightroom to Aperture" threads.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Can't Aperture read the keywords from IPTC data? That's the biggest deal breaker for me, having colour corrected, keyworded and rated 10,000+ RAW images in LR, I'm loathe to switch and redo this exercise all over again. Wish there was a simpler way to convert.

I think you are better off sticking with LR and waiting for the 2.0 ver to come. Then decide if the update to LR meets your expectations first. Aperture is a wonderful app, but it has it's issues in my book... it's no Photo Mechanic when it comes to culling through images and adding metadata quickly.

LR is supposed to be adding the minor features that everyone loves about Aperture, including dual monitor support, so it may be worth your while to wait.

And being a dual switcher myself, (LR Beta > Aper. > LR > Aper. ) I can say that there isn't an easy full proof way to switch from LR to Aper., it can be done and done well, but you may end up loosing the edits you have unless you export each photo as a version.

 

[Westside guy]

The only reason to go with Windows could be price. However, if you buy a Mac right after a refresh, the price is either competitive or even cheaper. However, over the following months Dell, HP etc would reduce prices steadily, but Apple would keep the same price for a long time, often until the next hardware update. Of course, Macs sometimes have other advantages that you cannot see on a spec sheet, such as quiet fans or better speakers etc. Unfortunately, you cannot reduce the price by removing features you don't want either. You have to get that webcam, Firewire ports etc.

It really depends what you're looking for. When I was looking for a new laptop for my wife, I found a lot of big heavy low-cost PC laptops. She wanted something small and light, though; and other than Averatec (a crap brand, at least based on my recent experience) I didn't really find anything. When I put comparably priced PC laptops head-to-head with a Macbook, the Macbook won on features provided - 802.11n networking, built-in bluetooth, weight, etc. Plus as you said, the Macbook's construction subjectively seems to be of much higher quality.

My intention was to just install XP on it, since that's what she's used to; but she said - with no prodding from me - she's was perfectly happy to try the Mac side of things. So we're currently letting her experiment with using VMware for her Windows-only software; but for most everything else she's using OS X. Her biggest adjustment is realizing how the VMware shared folders work (and that's not too difficult).

 

[Roy Hobbs]

First things first -- Macs are indeed great for photography workflows (I'm an advanced hobbyist), however I really loathe Aperture. I have a friggin 8 core Mac Pro with 8 GB RAM and Aperture still runs like crap. I've found Lightroom to be so much quicker and more responsive.

are you still running version 1.0?? 1.5 and 2.0 run very well on less hardware than you have

 

[Consultant]

Mac running OS X.

Try open 100 5mb pictures at once in windows and you'll see why.

 

[-hh]

One of the best things I like about Mac joined with digital photography is iPhoto. Although it's a simple program compared to Aperture or Lightroom, the UI is just unbeatable. Full screen view comes in handy, and even the built-in editing tools are enough for the casual photographer. I have about 8,500 photos on my computer, at it would probably take me 10 seconds or less to find a photo I'm looking for using iPhoto.

I'm frequently surprised at just how good of a tool iPhoto is for generic home photography. Granted, I will occasionally jump over to Adobe Photoshop to do some serious image manipulation, but the UI of iPhoto for "just doing stuff" ...and OS X's color management that "just works"...just makes it all so pleasant to use.

I'm sure that equivalent software tools exist for Windows (including photo album book publishing) but probably not quite as utterly painless. Ditto for how the iPhoto libraries are easily leveraged for use in iWeb for throwing a quick hundred images up onto a website, or for building & burning a quick slide show with music (from iTunes) background, etc. Sure, its only an 80% solution, but that takes you surprisingly far.

And FWIW, my image library's over 15,000 images (and 59GB) and still chugging along fine on a 2003 vintage G5 PowerMac.


-hh

 

[ChrisA]

One other thing about PCs vs. Macs I noticed.

My brother and I are working on scanning and restoring some old family photos. He took about 400 of them back to his place to do the scans. I went over and looked at how he was doing. Man, what a hassel it is to use a PC (About 2.4 Ghz, 1GB and running XP) we are doing all the scans at 1200 dpi and 16 bits per channel. The normal viewer built into Windows can't even display the files. He had to get a tird party photo browser.

If you are just working with .jpg files and don't care about color managment then the PC is OK but after you have to know what you are doing to design a quality high color depth workflow.

Yes he is workingthrough the stack of photos but it would be so much easier on my iMac. But I've go my own huge backlog of photo related projects

 

[Digital Skunk]

If any shooter is experiencing slow operation of Aperture on any machine after 1.5.6 or version 2.0 then you are doing something wrong. It's just not true anymore.

When I did reference my images with 1.5 it improved performance greatly, now that 2.0 is out I have all my current work stored in Aperture and it's running smoothly. It's only 35GB of photos, but it's not giving me any problems whatsoever, and can run my 17" Penryn MBP on battery power with Aperture and Photoshop open, full screen brightness and still get up to 3 hours of battery life, so please don't pull the "it's a power hog" excuse either.

Both Aperture and LR run like butter on most of the machines I put them on.

 

[AlaskaMoose]

The only reason to go with Windows could be price. However, if you buy a Mac right after a refresh, the price is either competitive or even cheaper. However, over the following months Dell, HP etc would reduce prices steadily, but Apple would keep the same price for a long time, often until the next hardware update. Of course, Macs sometimes have other advantages that you cannot see on a spec sheet, such as quiet fans or better speakers etc. Unfortunately, you cannot reduce the price by removing features you don't want either. You have to get that webcam, Firewire ports etc.

That's true. However, for photo and video editing, only the lack of cash would restrict the way one can load a Mac or not. For example, if you look at the Mac Pro (desktop) at B&H, you will notice that the price ranges from around $2,000 to $7,000 or more (just the computer).

With the Mac Pro, Air, and iMac there is not too much you can refuse, but with the Pro (desktop) there are a few options available.

 

[termina3]

if you look at the Mac Pro (desktop) at B&H, you will notice that the price ranges from around $2,000 to $7,000 or more (just the computer).

Why are you looking at B&H? Just go straight to Apple…

 

[AlaskaMoose]

Why are you looking at B&H? Just go straight to Apple…

Well, that's true. I buy Apple products with the educational discount. But B&H has PC's and Macs already set-up for photographers and video editors. I just like to look at how these computers are set-up, but all I have is an iMac PPC G5

 

[maestrokev]

And being a dual switcher myself, (LR Beta > Aper. > LR > Aper. ) I can say that there isn't an easy full proof way to switch from LR to Aper., it can be done and done well, but you may end up loosing the edits you have unless you export each photo as a version.

Thanks for the info Digital Skunk. After switching from CaptureOne to RawShooter and finally to LR I'm not keen to re-edit photos again, too much work when you have over 10,000 images. With digital photography you shoot more than film so it's important to be able to keyword and edit faster.

 

[nburwell]

Why should that make a difference? Seem to work equally well between both.

Just and FYI, if you have purchased LR or CS3 for Windows, and you change over to Mac, you can call Adobe and they can send you the CD or you can download either application for Mac. I don't know how they do it since I have not done it myself, but a few fellow photographer friends of mine did this and they just called Adobe up.

 

[Digital Skunk]

Thanks for the info Digital Skunk. After switching from CaptureOne to RawShooter and finally to LR I'm not keen to re-edit photos again, too much work when you have over 10,000 images. With digital photography you shoot more than film so it's important to be able to keyword and edit faster.

Indeed keywording has been one of the many additions to the digital workflow that have saved me from having to cull through thousands of images looking for the pick.

After I import, I sort and rate and cut. Then I just ask the app to show me the 2 star and up and close all stacks then BAM! I get 300 choice images out of 2500 and then ask for all the images keyworded "Wedding" and BAM! Instant web gallery.

 

[maestrokev]

Indeed keywording has been one of the many additions to the digital workflow that have saved me from having to cull through thousands of images looking for the pick.

After I import, I sort and rate and cut. Then I just ask the app to show me the 2 star and up and close all stacks then BAM! I get 300 choice images out of 2500 and then ask for all the images keyworded "Wedding" and BAM! Instant web gallery.

Do you cull in Photo Mechanic or Aperture? I'm using David R's Controlled Vocabulary in Lightroom, but it is tedious to keyword. When you switched from LR to Aperture did you just redo all your photo corrections again?

 

[Digital Skunk]

Do you cull in Photo Mechanic or Aperture? I'm using David R's Controlled Vocabulary in Lightroom, but it is tedious to keyword. When you switched from LR to Aperture did you just redo all your photo corrections again?

I used to cull in Photo Mechanic when I am at the paper. Now that Aperture runs a little smoother (though it wasn't a problem in ver 1.5.2 even with older tech) I cull in Aperture.

When I switched from LR to Aperture I exported my edits and my masters and sucked them back into Aperture, but referenced them since the library almost doubled in size. Shortly after though I just cleaned my library out of old images and redundant shots and put then in a "bone yard" folder that isn't in Aperture at all.