The newest iMacs - suitable for Photoshop work?

[Frank Petronio]

For the next six months you could probably have the smokingest G5 Quad for peanuts AND get the fastest CS2 performance on the block. The problem is that the resale of the G5 will plummet next year, and they are even hard to give to kids (Students) since they are so large and unportable...

But then again, it's not really like you get work done twice as fast even when the machine's specs double in speed. It is something more like 10-20% better performance at getting work done, with greater performance gains from working with giant files.

The real performance boost comes from learning how to use the software efficiently and working with the approproate sized files (most people try to work too large and bog down.) I've seen good users get more out of a lowly old iBook compared to inept users fumbling away on Quad Towers.

[medform-norm]

Well if you guys can afford Eizos then what is the point of being on this thread?

Ha, I didn't tell you what model Eizo we have....not exactly the most expensive or newest one ;-) Other than that, wouldn't you think the OP might profit from our experiences?

[Rider]

One thing to consider, is that Memory for the iMac is NOT cheap, IMHO.

Memory is cheap these days and represents the biggest and most visible upgrade you can get.

[Marko]

One thing to consider, is that Memory for the iMac is NOT cheap, IMHO.

Memory for the Mac is the same as for the PC and its price depends on the brand and source. In the case at hand, 24" iMac Intel Core Duo, it is 667MHz DDR2-SDRAM (PC2-5300).

[Rider]

Memory for the Mac is the same as for the PC and its price depends on the brand and source. In the case at hand, 24" iMac Intel Core Duo, it is 667MHz DDR2-SDRAM (PC2-5300).

Marco, the issue is not Mac v. PC. Due to its smaller form, the iMac does not have as many memory expansion slots as a true desktop, and this forces you to buy the denser, more expensive memory boards to achieve a given amount of RAM.

[Ken Lee]

"If you see a pattern here it is this: IMHO, hard disk space trumps CPU speed and/or RAM. Personally, I think many people make the mistake of biasing "speed" over storage space and redundancy".

Good point. Having a physical Drive 1 for the operating system and program, and a physically separate Disk 2, dedicated to scratch files, is very important. This way, each disk drive can operate concurrently.

If you have a laptop or other "closed box" machine, then you can't add another hard drive, but you can add an external drive. If you dedicate the external drive for use as a swap file, this should speed things up quite a bit... no ?

[Brian K]

Well if you guys can afford Eizos then what is the point of being on this thread?

We come here for the camaraderie. Actually I'm thinking of getting an iMac for use as a print server.

[Henry Ambrose]

Y'all are killing me.........

But thanks for all the information!

I'll have to research this a bit more. The iMac screens seem to have good specs and they looked good to me in the store. But I guess this a bit subjective.

I know folks who switched early to LCD Mac screens and loved them. I hated the first LCDs when compared to my good CRTs. These are folks who do highest level, demanding, advertising photography work - and they were happy with LCDs.

Anyway, the newest iMacs are really something for the money. I'd still like to hear any experiences with them doing Photoshop work, so ramble on.

300 MB is about as big as I ever work with. That's enough to make as big a print on my 7600 as I can make. If anyone needs size more, good for you, but I don't. And on the rare occasion that I need a bigger file, well I can just watch that progress bar creep.

Fast processor, fast system bus, fast big SATA drive, 2 or 3 Gb of fast memory, fast video card, plenty of Firewire and USB, big screen. Its all so much better spec'd than a 6-7 year old G4. (which actually does the work and was expensed off long ago and now costs nothing but the electricity to run it. (that may answer my question right there!)

I know about specifiying a Mac for PS, heck people used to pay me to tell them that stuff - my burning question is the screen of the newest 20 & 24 inch iMacs.

[Marko]

Marco, the issue is not Mac v. PC. Due to its smaller form, the iMac does not have as many memory expansion slots as a true desktop, and this forces you to buy the denser, more expensive memory boards to achieve a given amount of RAM.

I didn't think it was. It's just that many people are really not aware of the fact and think they have to buy from Apple, when they don't.

1 GB sticks are actually the sweet spot, these days. iMac, at least the model I have, has two slots and can take 2 GB max.

[CXC]

PC Magazine recently posted a review:

http://www.pcmag.com/article2/0,1895,2018044,00.asp

Regarding the monitor and photoshop, they say:

"Its 24-inch display dwarfs that of the 17-inch iMac, and because its bezel is much smaller relative to the screen, the 24-inch model looks more balanced, visually, than the 17-inch. The screen is about as bright as that of the standalone 23-inch and 30-inch Apple Cinema displays, so the iMac could easily work for a layout editor or other midlevel graphics pro. And since it's so powerful, it could also be a good system for the Adobe Photoshop interns in your art studio."

I don't normally read this magazine, so I don't know how good their reviews are...