iMac 27" advise required, by a windows photog

[colourperfect]

Hi,

Now I have always been a windows user but have been tempted by the iMAC 27" screen i5 ( compared to a 30" DELL + i5 750 + 6G RAM) and promise of stable OS. XP is starting to become unreliable and slow

Requirements are pretty much defined by PS CS3 + Lightroom

My questions are directed towards the owners / users of the new iMac's

Can the screen be dimmed sufficiently to allow accurate calibration (i1pro)?

Does the large reflective screen cause any issues (currently have 2 x 19" Monitors under windows)

Does anybody have any comparative indications of stability and speed vs Windows 7?

Is the absence of eSATA for external drives containing Lightroom databases and photo's a disadvantage when compared to Firewire 800

Is it correct that Snow Leopard needs less RAM than a windows box for equivalent performance

Does running PS3 on Windows XP on the iMac work should Photoshop and its plugins not be transferable to Mac OS?

Many thanks

Ian

[Jonathan Wienke]

I use both Windows and Mac, and both have issues--they're just different. I'd strongly advise against a new Mac anything running Snow Leopard for photo work until Apple pulls its head out of it's behind regarding Snow Leopard and color management; right now printer and display calibration/profiling is broken and Apple has yet to issue a fix.

Macs are competent tools that can do the job just fine, but they are not magically less susceptible to problems than Windows machines.

[PierreVandevenne]

Now I have always been a windows user but have been tempted by the iMAC 27" screen i5 ( compared to a 30" DELL + i5 750 + 6G RAM) and promise of stable OS. XP is starting to become unreliable and slow
Requirements are pretty much defined by PS CS3 + Lightroom
My questions are directed towards the owners / users of the new iMac's
Can the screen be dimmed sufficiently to allow accurate calibration (i1pro)?
Does the large reflective screen cause any issues (currently have 2 x 19" Monitors under windows)
Does anybody have any comparative indications of stability and speed vs Windows 7?
Is the absence of eSATA for external drives containing Lightroom databases and photo's a disadvantage when compared to Firewire 800
Is it correct that Snow Leopard needs less RAM than a windows box for equivalent performance
Does running PS3 on Windows XP on the iMac work should Photoshop and its plugins not be transferable to Mac OS?

1) XP is, in many standard cases, faster than both Windows 7 and Snow Leopard. That begins to change when you have apps that can reliably use more than 4GB RAM (technically, 4GB minus something, that something being defined mostly by your BIOS and video card memory and access method). Adobe hasn't been very quick to jump on the 64 bit train (see for example http://blogs.adobe.com/scottbyer/2006/12/64_bitswhen.html) and Apple's 64 bit support has been, until very recently more marketing than reality. A fresh XP install, in order to clean "dll rot" will be _amazingly_ fast with a SSD if you don't need more than a few GB RAM.

2) I believe Jonathan answered the color management issue.

3) reflective screens are always an issue, regardless os size, but that is of course somewhat a matter of taste.

4) eSata is a clear winner over FW800 imho.

5) I'd say that in many cases Mac and Mac programs use memory more efficiently than Windows machines. BUT, and that's a big but, that is mostly dependent on the applications used. There's a tendency, for some developers on Windows boxes to be a bit sloppy. Quick apps are easy to code, and it isn't that rare to see poorly written programs allocate and use 100MB for a weather widget. Also, on Windows, every manufacturer/developer seems inclined to add his accelerator/update checker/whatever to the bunch of programs that are started. Doesn't help.  OTOH, it is usually still a bit cheaper and easier to add RAM to PCs and some Mac apps are less than efficient ports from the PC. Last but not least, Mac applications will crash more readily when they run out of memory.

6) Macs make very decent, in some cases impressive, Windows machines.  

No clear generic one size fits all winner imho (I use 3 Mac and 5 PCs... for my purpose Mac notebooks are clearly better than PC notebooks, PC desktops are better than Mac desktops in the mid range, and surprisingly; at the right point in time, Mac Pros can actually be very good value provided you are able to upgrade disk/video/ram by yourself).

(background: developing the same set of programs for both OSes since almost 10 years now)

[Theresa]

Well, before you switch system types, try Windows 7 64 bit if you have more than 3.5 GB of Ram and your system is compatible.  If you really need a new system it is not difficult to assemble your own system, I am a female geek though so take that with a grain of salt.  I used an iMac for several years, having switched from XP and the polish of its operating system was impressive but the hardware was mostly second rate, especially considering its price.  Don't compare it with a the economy Dells though, they have third rate hardware, especially their power supplies which are'nt powerful enough to handle any real upgrades other than RAM.  You can't really expect to get a good computer for less than $1,400.  The iMac did the job and it certainly was ahead of XP.  But it got old, literally, it couldn't be upgraded in any real way and to replace it with a current Mac (although this was before the 27" iMac with i5 or i7 came out)  and a modern processor (an i7), with a current video chipset (at least an ATI 4850) and it did not come with enough hard disk space, it was just too expensive.  I would have had to get a Mac Pro which is outrageously expensive.  My current system is blazingly fast using any photoediting/processing program and has 2.5 Terabytes of storage, an ATI 4870 video card, and 6 gigs of triple channel ram.  I am very pleased with Windows 7 too.  The one lack is that the Epson printer driver doesn't do 16 bit on Windows but does on OSX.   Of course it is easier to just go buy a top of the line iMac, but that costs money I don't have.  Keep in mind too that the current 27" iMac is having lots of problems with its screen and Apple is being a bit of an @ss about fixing them, even sending people another computer with the same problem.  When one pays over a couple of grand for a system it should be supported like the luxury product it is.  Also, with a Mac, you get to join the fanboys who get to abandon all rationality and evangelize for their system, which usually just gets a knowing look from Windows users.  You also get a great looking design and a great OS but Windows has caught up in almost all areas.  It is possible, but incredibly difficult, to run OSX on a PC and I have seriously considered it but it just isn't the Mac versus MSDOS days anymore so I am satisfied.

[gaholba]

I use both Windows and Mac, and both have issues--they're just different. I'd strongly advise against a new Mac anything running Snow Leopard for photo work until Apple pulls its head out of it's behind regarding Snow Leopard and color management; right now printer and display calibration/profiling is broken and Apple has yet to issue a fix.

Macs are competent tools that can do the job just fine, but they are not magically less susceptible to problems than Windows machines.

Hi everyone

Ian - I'm in exactly the same position as you and have been considering the 27" iMac (with i7). Currently I have my data drive connected via esata to my PC motherboard and encrypted (Trucrypt); I run XP SP3 32bit. So I was really pleased you have set the questions you have, as I face exactly the same issues. I have a very technical friend who has confirmed that the esata option is available in a Mac Pro (additional board required) and that the Firewire alternative is not as good (lower throughput), but still very usable. In considering the move I have decided that the best way of getting the same accessibility etc is to go for the 2T drive upgrade to the iMAC and encrypting part of it (Trucryt again). Then I will add a new external back up drive. Not quite the flexible external RAID 0 I have now but it will probably do.

Jonathan - I'm sorry for asking about the basics, but is the colour management issue you refer to a screen or OS issue? Can you direct me to any relevant threads that describe it or explain what is wrong.

Thanks
Greg

[John S C]

Ian

I have a 27" iMac i5, and have had it about 6 weeks.

I don't have any problems with screen brightness. The brightness control within System Preferences- Displays allows me to set the brightness  to my required level ( it's currently at about 50%). Which gives me 130cd./m2 measured on the screen.

I'm using an eye-one Display 2 puck with ColourEyes Dispaly Pro software. This calibrates the monitor to  an average deviation of about 0.4 and a max of 0.8.

The glossy screen could be a problem in some environments but I don't have any problems at all. I suppose it's where your main light is coming from. I have a MBP which also has a glossy screen and before that a Compaq laptop which also had a glossy screen, so maybe I just got used to it.

The "Wide Screen" format does give you a lot more real estate to work with, and although I do have a second 24" monitor I haven't felt the need to use it.  With Lightroom I can use the 'second screen" option on the iMac, lock the image and use that as a reference when I need to match colours for such things as fabrics

Can't comment about printing problems as most of my work goes out to magazines,as files,  but I do have several printers, including a Epson 2880 for doing the odd print . I tend to use it with Ilford paper and find that I do get a good  screen to print match when soft proofed in Photoshop using the Ilford canned profiles.

Thing to watch out for though is a problem some people have had apparently with a the bottom of the screen having a yellow bias . I think I might have it but it is so slight that it really doesn't affect my work. Sometimes I see sometimes I don't, and that's on a grey background, so it may be me. But worth checking.

I wish they had put an ExpressCard34 slot on the machine, as this would have been useful for running addition drives via an eSata interface. However there is a FireWire 800 which isn't too bad I suppose

Hope this helps

John C

[kers]

Hi everyone

Ian - I'm in exactly the same position as you and have been considering the 27" iMac (with i7). Currently I have my data drive connected via esata to my PC motherboard and encrypted (Trucrypt); I run XP SP3 32bit. So I was really pleased you have set the questions you have, as I face exactly the same issues. I have a very technical friend who has confirmed that the esata option is available in a Mac Pro (additional board required) and that the Firewire alternative is not as good (lower throughput), but still very usable. In considering the move I have decided that the best way of getting the same accessibility etc is to go for the 2T drive upgrade to the iMAC and encrypting part of it (Trucryt again). Then I will add a new external back up drive. Not quite the flexible external RAID 0 I have now but it will probably do.

Jonathan - I'm sorry for asking about the basics, but is the colour management issue you refer to a screen or OS issue? Can you direct me to any relevant threads that describe it or explain what is wrong.

Thanks
Greg

hello- I am using a macpro- my sister uses the imac 27 inch Icore7.
The imac is far more elegant but not easy to upgrade...and you have a beautiful ledscreen with beautiful deep colours- ( about adobe RGB)
the speed of the Firewire is about 80mb/second- esata can be depending on the Harddisk( Raid0)  80-250mb/second
what i have noticed about the colorsync issue is that in 10.6 colorsync is organized different from 10,5 -and  because of that some third-party colormanagement software is not working- We are waiting for the updates to come...

[marcmccalmont]

I just purchased an imac 27, my last mac was in 1984 so I'm getting used to mac osx. I purchased the imac because of the hardware, i7 16 gb ram etc
It is a nice machine, glossy screens don't bother me it calibrated fine with eye one match. I also upgraded my laptop to a dell studio 17 i7 w 8 gb ram again because it was the best hardware choice (for me).
The imac has hung a couple of times DxO 6, vmware fusion. windows7 and finder large pano file and osx. overall win7 has been more stable than osx but I'm learning osx so I could be inducing problems. Overall both machines are nice for there intended purpose. Imac for photography and entertainment in an apartment (apple tv, belfen hdmi converter and a stereo) the dell for a general purpose transportable computer. So as I see it for now, either OS is fine one not better than the other, for hardware the dell was $1000 cheaper than an apple laptop and the imac was much higher performance than the other all in one pc's. The cost for apple software has been VMware fusion $70, Windows 7 oem $200 and CS4 mac $350 full version. wish I could find the equivalent of downloader pro and breezebrowser pro for the mac.
Marc

[PeterAit]

Hi,

Now I have always been a windows user but have been tempted by the iMAC 27" screen i5 ( compared to a 30" DELL + i5 750 + 6G RAM) and promise of stable OS. XP is starting to become unreliable and slow

Consider an upgrade to Win 7 64 bit - you'll get stable and fast without having to learn a new OS and you'll save a bundle of money.

[jasonrandolph]

I just upgraded to the dual-core 27" iMac from XP this past week, and I can say that Snow Leopard is incredibly fast.  In XP, my LR catalog backups and loading took sometimes 5-10 minutes.  On the Mac, where I used a backup of a Lightroom catalog I made in XP and RAW files written to an external drive that I plugged into my iMac, my catalog loads in under a minute (haven't timed it though).  Printing on my Epson 3800 is much faster as well.

The learning curve for Snow Leopard isn't as steep as some suggest.  It's very intuitive, at least for someone like me who is more focused on applications than on the "under-the-hood" functionality.  And scrolling through my LR catalog with just a swipe of the finger on the Magic Mouse is great.

For me, the screen was the main impetus for my switch.  It's absolutely amazing.  Especially when editing photos, the extra screen real estate really helps.  Glare hasn't been an issue for me at all, although I set it up so it's facing toward the center of the house rather than a window.  With the Hawaiian sun blazing in, that would probably be an issue if I flipped it around.

I say go for it.  It's an amazing machine that won't improve your photography, but I think it sure makes things a heck of a lot more convenient.