I use Canon DPP and photoshop to edit my picture. My friends said that Mac system is better for image editing. I am wondring what are the advantages of Mac system. Since the hardware part are all Intel-based, the differences must come from the operating system. Is it more user friendly or efficient using DPP and Photoshop in the Mac system??
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
What are the advantages of using Mac over PC in editing pictures??
- Thread starter picar
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Thats kind of a myth really. Its all personal preference (although I will say that my mbp runs lightroom much faster then my higher speced windows machine.
IMO Mac OS is just easier to work with for multimedia stuff. I dont have to download a bunch of programs and such just to see thumbnails of various image formats, the OS actually remembers where I am saving things unlike windows that shows a new random folder anytime I click save. Backup is nice and automatic with time machine (although it shouldnt be your only backup). Theres probably a million other little reasons but I cant think of any right now.
IMO Mac OS is just easier to work with for multimedia stuff. I dont have to download a bunch of programs and such just to see thumbnails of various image formats, the OS actually remembers where I am saving things unlike windows that shows a new random folder anytime I click save. Backup is nice and automatic with time machine (although it shouldnt be your only backup). Theres probably a million other little reasons but I cant think of any right now.
Its all about your preference in the OS. I use Mac now but being a recent convert I initially found that my windows machine ran LR and PS faster than the Mac did (among other programs) and they were configured the same, 2.6 dual core, 4 gigs ram, 500 gig 7200 drive.
I have a Mac Pro arriving today and I'm hoping it will speed things up a little. full size 5D MKII files are seriously dragging LR down. 2.6 quad, 8 gigs RAM, 640 gig HD @7200RPM.
I have a Mac Pro arriving today and I'm hoping it will speed things up a little. full size 5D MKII files are seriously dragging LR down. 2.6 quad, 8 gigs RAM, 640 gig HD @7200RPM.
System-wide color profile management. (I know that's not quite accurate for users who do not have a properly calibrated screen - and I leave it up to you how you interpret 'properly').
I don't think either platform as an advantage over the other in so far as software. You like using a pc then use a pc, if you like a mac use a mac.
I prefer a mac because OSX is a superior OS, in that its more stable, has less security problems. It doesn't phone home, or validate that I'm not a thief, i.e., Windows Genuine Advantage.
All in all the tools are the same. For instance, you can use photoshop on either platform, you can use LightRoom. OSX has aperture windows does not, but then windows has applications for editing/managing images that osx does not.
Use what you want.
I prefer a mac because OSX is a superior OS, in that its more stable, has less security problems. It doesn't phone home, or validate that I'm not a thief, i.e., Windows Genuine Advantage.
All in all the tools are the same. For instance, you can use photoshop on either platform, you can use LightRoom. OSX has aperture windows does not, but then windows has applications for editing/managing images that osx does not.
Use what you want.
OS X
Better multi tasking. Doesn't slow if you have many apps open.
Doesn't slow down to a crawl if you open lots of large images at the same time.
No need for manually defrag / maintenance.
No need to wait while virus scan is making your computer slow.
Better multi tasking. Doesn't slow if you have many apps open.
Doesn't slow down to a crawl if you open lots of large images at the same time.
No need for manually defrag / maintenance.
No need to wait while virus scan is making your computer slow.
One thing that definitely won me over is expose, the ability to switch windows or have them all go away to access the desktop via a mouse click. With expose, I can switch between mail, firefox, itunes, aperture, flash, dreamweaver, and fireworks at the same time at the click of my mouse button! Well, it is also easier with my 30" acd too. 
OS X is just faster, easier, more intuitive, and predictable in my opinion. Plus I love Apple's design.
OS X is just faster, easier, more intuitive, and predictable in my opinion. Plus I love Apple's design.
One thing that definitely won me over is expose, the ability to switch windows or have them all go away to access the desktop via a mouse click. With expose, I can switch between mail, firefox, itunes, aperture, flash, dreamweaver, and fireworks at the same time at the click of my mouse button! Well, it is also easier with my 30" acd too.
OS X is just faster, easier, more intuitive, and predictable in my opinion. Plus I love Apple's design.
Yeah. OS X's expose document views are great.
Yes, and it directly ties into what you said about multi-tasking and efficiency. Simply jaw dropping how fast and easy it is to switch between apps, as well as drag and drop.
The myth persists about Macs being better for photo editing and graphics/creative work, and one time that was very true, back in the early-late 90s when Macs were 32-bit and Windows was just a 16-bit dog. Think 4 channel color, CMYK or RGB and transparency - no go on early versions of Windows, while Macs handled all this stuff. That's why the publishing industry all went Mac back in those days, and all those apps you use on Windows today, many of them originated as Mac apps, Photoshop, Illustrator, Quark and the whole early desktop publishing industry. Ironically, even the original MS Office apps, Word and Excel were Mac only... you have to remember PCs ran DOS back then... so in many ways, by being able to develop for Mac, Microsoft learned enough about WYSIWYG GUIs to cobble together Windows as a shell on top of DOS, largely copying the concepts, but implementing them backwards... they still got sued, though. Anyway... a bit off topic, but interesting historically..
Since then, Windows has caught up in capability, and both platforms run on basically the same hardware, so it's really a matter of taking your choice. To me, the OS's look and feel makes a huge difference, and once someone settles into Mac for a while, it usually feels more integrated, less edgy and jittery... that's the best way I can describe the feeling. More natural, a simpler interface that doesn't get in your way nearly as much - but... that's my opinion. Others are free to disagree, and more power to them.
Bottom line: for photo editing, OS really doesn't matter as much as color management and software, as well as memory and GPU power. But, for overall experience, OS matters.
Since then, Windows has caught up in capability, and both platforms run on basically the same hardware, so it's really a matter of taking your choice. To me, the OS's look and feel makes a huge difference, and once someone settles into Mac for a while, it usually feels more integrated, less edgy and jittery... that's the best way I can describe the feeling. More natural, a simpler interface that doesn't get in your way nearly as much - but... that's my opinion. Others are free to disagree, and more power to them.
Bottom line: for photo editing, OS really doesn't matter as much as color management and software, as well as memory and GPU power. But, for overall experience, OS matters.
Personally because I do very high resolution work (16k x 16k pixel images) that can easily reach large file sizes I use Windows now on my primary image editing computer because CS4 is only truly 64-bit on Windows for now.
The hardware is also less expensive for a high power desktop. I refuse to pay what Apple is asking for a Mac Pro, and my aging iMac just isn't up to the task.
It works well enough, I don't have any of the "common" issue that so many people grip about, no virus software installed, no maintenance, no slowdowns, no crashing, ect. Maybe I am just special.
Both offer the same set of tools, and to me the minor differences in the function of the OS swing both ways. There are a number of things that I commonly use on my Windows machines that I wish were available on my Macs, and vice versa. Ultimately it all comes down to what you're comfortable using, and which allows you to make the fullest use of the hardware you can afford. For me that means running Vista x64 on a homebuilt Core 2 Quad machine.
The hardware is also less expensive for a high power desktop. I refuse to pay what Apple is asking for a Mac Pro, and my aging iMac just isn't up to the task.
It works well enough, I don't have any of the "common" issue that so many people grip about, no virus software installed, no maintenance, no slowdowns, no crashing, ect. Maybe I am just special.
Both offer the same set of tools, and to me the minor differences in the function of the OS swing both ways. There are a number of things that I commonly use on my Windows machines that I wish were available on my Macs, and vice versa. Ultimately it all comes down to what you're comfortable using, and which allows you to make the fullest use of the hardware you can afford. For me that means running Vista x64 on a homebuilt Core 2 Quad machine.
While I love using OSX, it bogs down the same way any windows machine ever did. Whether you use OSX or Windows, if you don't have enough RAM or processing speed, your waiting.
The advantage created by using mac vs. pc to edit your pictures comes down to this.....
Whatever amount of time you would have spent editing your pictures on a pc - can now be spent with the much friendlier, more beautiful, more classy, just makes you wanna smile computer that is a mac.
Or edit your pictures on a PC - and be grumpy and miserable. Either way you - your pictures will be the same.
(Until you lose them on your pc from a virus)
Whatever amount of time you would have spent editing your pictures on a pc - can now be spent with the much friendlier, more beautiful, more classy, just makes you wanna smile computer that is a mac.
Or edit your pictures on a PC - and be grumpy and miserable. Either way you - your pictures will be the same.
(Until you lose them on your pc from a virus)
I would suggest that Macs are more stable than PCs. I say this partly from my own experience and partly from watching others and listening to their experiences. Certainly there are those who claim they never have problems on windows, God bless them. It is just that I hear and see of a lot of cases where people are in the middle of something and the program crashes or the OS decides to shut down and everything is lost. I can't say why this happens. We get it several times a day on software that I use provided with some instrumentation. I can't say why this is. Perhaps something is set wrong and if we had the time to track it down things would be better?
Personally I find using windows a struggle. It seems like the OS is always fighting me. I keep getting these nagging messages popping up in the lower right that I don't want to see. File icons won't stay where I put them on the desktop. If I copy a file to an open folder the name doesn't appear unless I find the refresh command somewhere. Conversely, on the Mac things just seem to flow in the direction I'm going. I kind of get pulled in and get more creative because I'm happy about what I'm doing. I love the way Spotlight helps me find almost anything really quickly. After a while I've gotten to trust that the Mac will do what I expect or that I can soon find a way to make it work. On windows I'm always suspicious that the next mouse click will lead to disaster or at least a big problem.
There is more uniformity between applications on the Mac. Pretty much every program uses the menu and icons in a consistent way. Some don't, like Adobe, which is kind of annoying. On windows everyone wants to reinvent the interface.
I also find that the mouse seems to behave more smoothly on a Mac and I can position the cursor more precisely. On PCs the cursor seems to jump about frenetically. Perhaps there is a better setting for this than the ones I've tried.
Personally I find using windows a struggle. It seems like the OS is always fighting me. I keep getting these nagging messages popping up in the lower right that I don't want to see. File icons won't stay where I put them on the desktop. If I copy a file to an open folder the name doesn't appear unless I find the refresh command somewhere. Conversely, on the Mac things just seem to flow in the direction I'm going. I kind of get pulled in and get more creative because I'm happy about what I'm doing. I love the way Spotlight helps me find almost anything really quickly. After a while I've gotten to trust that the Mac will do what I expect or that I can soon find a way to make it work. On windows I'm always suspicious that the next mouse click will lead to disaster or at least a big problem.
There is more uniformity between applications on the Mac. Pretty much every program uses the menu and icons in a consistent way. Some don't, like Adobe, which is kind of annoying. On windows everyone wants to reinvent the interface.
I also find that the mouse seems to behave more smoothly on a Mac and I can position the cursor more precisely. On PCs the cursor seems to jump about frenetically. Perhaps there is a better setting for this than the ones I've tried.
Only difference is a Quad Core PC is way cheaper then a quad core mac, in software and such for editing PC=Mac.
It all comes down to preference. A skilled photographer/editor can create equally stunning/better pictures using a Mac or Windows-based machine.
Neither machine is faster, as both can be upgraded until you pass-out from fan-boy hot air - so using that argument is a dead-end.
So the preference? Well it comes mainly down to work-flow process, short cuts, file management and UX - and to a degree, legacy from previous machines/backups/databases which can involve - in lessening degres - client/industry preferences, disk formats (ntfs/hfs+), software and file formats. You use what you're comfortable with, which you feel will give you the best results.
The two 'advantages' I would say using a Mac, are ease of workflow and industry/client preference.
The only real decisive hardware difference, doesn't come in the form of the computer - but in this context for photography, the Monitor. The rest are niggles, but shouldn't effect the outcome/product if you're good.
(sorry if long winded/repetition - have only just had a coffee which hasn't kicked in yet)
Neither machine is faster, as both can be upgraded until you pass-out from fan-boy hot air - so using that argument is a dead-end.
So the preference? Well it comes mainly down to work-flow process, short cuts, file management and UX - and to a degree, legacy from previous machines/backups/databases which can involve - in lessening degres - client/industry preferences, disk formats (ntfs/hfs+), software and file formats. You use what you're comfortable with, which you feel will give you the best results.
The two 'advantages' I would say using a Mac, are ease of workflow and industry/client preference.
The only real decisive hardware difference, doesn't come in the form of the computer - but in this context for photography, the Monitor. The rest are niggles, but shouldn't effect the outcome/product if you're good.
(sorry if long winded/repetition - have only just had a coffee which hasn't kicked in yet
)there are no real advantages. both are basically the same now, minus the OS.
i don't know why people claim working in mac osx is 'better' than working in windows. you can't even cut and paste in mac finder, which is completely idiotic.
'expose' is hardly a substitute for a good task manager/bar like the one in windows. and if you really wanted a virtual desktop manager, there are about a billion and one freeware ones you can get for windows. its funny when you see mac people who have only generally used macs try to talk about these 'amazing' features, when tons of these things have been available for windows for years now.
its true that back then, macs were the industry standard in this field, but this is changing. my graphic design firm (arcadeagency.com) has recently switched over to all PC's with dell monitors. we saved approximately $30,000 if we had decided to stick with apple products.
right now, you can only get 64-bit photoshop for PC, not mac. that right there should tell you why pc's are *currently* a step ahead for photo editing.
i don't know why people claim working in mac osx is 'better' than working in windows. you can't even cut and paste in mac finder, which is completely idiotic.
'expose' is hardly a substitute for a good task manager/bar like the one in windows. and if you really wanted a virtual desktop manager, there are about a billion and one freeware ones you can get for windows. its funny when you see mac people who have only generally used macs try to talk about these 'amazing' features, when tons of these things have been available for windows for years now.
its true that back then, macs were the industry standard in this field, but this is changing. my graphic design firm (arcadeagency.com) has recently switched over to all PC's with dell monitors. we saved approximately $30,000 if we had decided to stick with apple products.
right now, you can only get 64-bit photoshop for PC, not mac. that right there should tell you why pc's are *currently* a step ahead for photo editing.