Looking at getting a Macbook

[Irishwhistle]

I'm going to be doing photography to try and make some money, but there are two things I'm going to need: a better camera and a better computer for postwork. I'm planning on a Canon Rebel XTi for the camera, but the Macbook (which is the laptop I'm pretty decided on getting) is what I have a question about. Will a Macbook with:

• 2.1GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
• 1GB memory
• 120GB hard drive
• Combo drive
• Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

be fast enough to run Gimp (and at some time maybe Photoshop) while editing say 2 or 3 full size (10.1 Megapixel) photos and while running a couple programs in the background? If not would I just have to get more RAM (say add another GB) to get it running fast enough? Thanks! I haven't had much experience with Leopard... only Tiger and OS 9.

 

[Geoff]

Leopard is pretty similar to Tiger, as for the computer as you noted you need more then 1GB of RAM, 2GB at minimum. The 120GB hard drive will probably fill up quickly as well. Honestly, the MacBook Pro with a dedicated video card, 250GB HD, 2GB of RAM, and 2.4GHz CPU would be much more suited for what you want, but they do cost quite a bit.

 

[Kill Bill]

Leopard is pretty similar to Tiger, as for the computer as you noted you need more then 1GB of RAM, 2GB at minimum. The 120GB hard drive will probably fill up quickly as well. Honestly, the MacBook Pro with a dedicated video card, 250GB HD, 2GB of RAM, and 2.4GHz CPU would be much more suited for what you want, but they do cost quite a bit.

Eh no remember photo editing is 2D work and Leopard isn't as power hungry as XP/Vista

I think that MacBook you pointed is fine and the OS it'self really just use 6GB OF HDD and the 120GB is really like 105GB then you have 99GB left to rule the world so in my opinion it will be fine.

 

[Irishwhistle]

Leopard is pretty similar to Tiger, as for the computer as you noted you need more then 1GB of RAM, 2GB at minimum. The 120GB hard drive will probably fill up quickly as well. Honestly, the MacBook Pro with a dedicated video card, 250GB HD, 2GB of RAM, and 2.4GHz CPU would be much more suited for what you want, but they do cost quite a bit.

OK... I was afraid I was going to hear that. I really can't afford a Macbook Pro... the Macbook is expensive enough. Would the iMac with:

2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
250GB hard drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

be better? It has the 2.4GHz CPU and a bigger hard drive... not to mention a bigger display which would be better for photo editing anyway. Of course it's not a laptop so it's not quite as portable, but isn't it portable enough so that when I'm on vacation or something I can pack it fairly easily?

 

[Irishwhistle]

Eh no remember photo editing is 2D work and Leopard isn't as power hungry as XP/Vista

I think that MacBook you pointed is fine and the OS it'self really just use 6GB OF HDD and the 120GB is really like 105GB then you have 99GB left to rule the world so in my opinion it will be fine.

OK... what do you think about the iMac mentioned above? The faster and the bigger the display the better. Thanks!

 

[Kill Bill]

OK... I was afraid I was going to hear that. I really can't afford a Macbook Pro... the Macbook is expensive enough. Would the iMac with:

2.4GHz Intel Core 2 Duo
2GB memory
250GB hard drive
8x double-layer SuperDrive
ATI Radeon HD 2400 XT with 128MB memory
Mac OS X 10.5 Leopard

be better? It has the 2.4GHz CPU and a bigger hard drive... not to mention a bigger display which would be better for photo editing anyway. Of course it's not a laptop so it's not quite as portable, but isn't it portable enough so that when I'm on vacation or something I can pack it fairly easily?

Thats not possible how would you fit it in a suit case. Honestly the entry level macbook will do your photo editing no problem.

 

[Geoff]

The laptop you posted will work fine, I guess if your just starting out then it will do everything you need, but if you decide to go professional then I would seriously look into the MacBook Pro. As for the iMac, I wouldn't do it, you would be happier with a laptop since you can bring it with you.

 

[Irishwhistle]

Thats not possible how would you fit it in a suit case. Honestly the entry level macbook will do your photo editing no problem.

Well, I know the back of a suburban is big enough to hold it and it doesn't have to fit in a suitcase. What I'm saying is there are only three parts: the computer itself, the mouse, and the keyboard... it's a lot more portable than a normal desktop because you don't have a big tower AND a monitor, but the computer and monitor are built together. It's small enough to reasonably be able to pack it in a car... maybe even in the original box. And besides the portability issue there's no downsides to the iMac... it's got a much bigger display (13" is really pretty small), it's faster, and it's got a bigger HD.

I just want to make sure we're on the same page... I'm talking about editing BIG photos taken with a professional digital camera and hopefully get some income from locals who want portraits taken. I'm not talking about your average editing pictures for the family photo album. Beside that I want to make sure of one more thing... have you done this kind of photo editing on Mac? Or even on Windows? My reason for asking is because Omega has the same camera I'm getting so he's had experience with this kind of photo editing... even if it's not on mac. You see, I'm going to be working with high resolution photos in Gimp and probably be doing some RAW editing as well.

Now I know that the entry level Macbook can HANDLE the photo editing (I've done it in Vista with 1GB of RAM and an Intel Core Duo CPU), my question is, will it do it WELL? Thanks!

 

[Irishwhistle]

The laptop you posted will work fine, I guess if your just starting out then it will do everything you need, but if you decide to go professional then I would seriously look into the MacBook Pro. As for the iMac, I wouldn't do it, you would be happier with a laptop since you can bring it with you.

OK... now would that be the 1GB RAM or 2GB? For desktop editing (with a bigger display) I assume it has a standard monitor port so I can plug it into my 17", does it? Yeah... someday I'll hopefully get a Macbook Pro, but as all the money is coming out of my own pocket I can't afford it now.

Oh, and what happens if the LCD, for instance, goes bad and I don't have the paid for protection plan?

 

[tlarkin]

depending on the level of photo editing depends on what hardware you need. If it is not professional level a macbook should do fine. Photo editing is all processor and ram performance. I have 5,500 C2D macbooks on my network and I have deployed CS3 Premium on about 200 of them. Never had a complaint that it wouldn't run, and these are stock macbooks with only 1 gig of RAM.

 

[Irishwhistle]

depending on the level of photo editing depends on what hardware you need. If it is not professional level a macbook should do fine. Photo editing is all processor and ram performance. I have 5,500 C2D macbooks on my network and I have deployed CS3 Premium on about 200 of them. Never had a complaint that it wouldn't run, and these are stock macbooks with only 1 gig of RAM.

Well, I'm hoping to do professional level editing where my photos are worth paying for...

Maybe it would be best if I upgraded to 2GB?

 

[`PaWz]

Don't buy RAM from their website.

 

[Geoff]

depending on the level of photo editing depends on what hardware you need. If it is not professional level a macbook should do fine. Photo editing is all processor and ram performance. I have 5,500 C2D macbooks on my network and I have deployed CS3 Premium on about 200 of them. Never had a complaint that it wouldn't run, and these are stock macbooks with only 1 gig of RAM.

Well CS3 runs on my Acer Celeron M 1.86GHz, 1GB of RAM and Vista

I would strongly encourage upgrading to 2-4GB of RAM.

 

[Irishwhistle]

Don't buy RAM from their website.

Because it's too expensive you meen? Where should I get it?

 

[`PaWz]

Yes, they overcharge them. You can get good notebook memory on newegg for much cheaper

 

[tlarkin]

Well CS3 runs on my Acer Celeron M 1.86GHz, 1GB of RAM and Vista

I would strongly encourage upgrading to 2-4GB of RAM.

Yeah it should run, depending on the load you put on it depends on how well it will run.


Just get third party ram, ram is ram these days.

 

[Geoff]

Eh no remember photo editing is 2D work and Leopard isn't as power hungry as XP/Vista

I think that MacBook you pointed is fine and the OS it'self really just use 6GB OF HDD and the 120GB is really like 105GB then you have 99GB left to rule the world so in my opinion it will be fine.

depending on the level of photo editing depends on what hardware you need. If it is not professional level a macbook should do fine. Photo editing is all processor and ram performance. I have 5,500 C2D macbooks on my network and I have deployed CS3 Premium on about 200 of them. Never had a complaint that it wouldn't run, and these are stock macbooks with only 1 gig of RAM.

Wrong. Adobe Photoshop CS4 is moving more of the graphics work to the GPU, which will allow you to zoom, pan and move across incredibly large images at full detail with little to no lag time (assuming you have a decent video card).

 

[Irishwhistle]

Wrong. Adobe Photoshop CS4 is moving more of the graphics work to the GPU, which will allow you to zoom, pan and move across incredibly large images at full detail with little to no lag time (assuming you have a decent video card).

Well, at the moment I'm using Gimp and the new feature wont decrease speed on bad graphics cards will it?

 

[tlarkin]

Wrong. Adobe Photoshop CS4 is moving more of the graphics work to the GPU, which will allow you to zoom, pan and move across incredibly large images at full detail with little to no lag time (assuming you have a decent video card).

That still doesn't take a top of the line GPU. In reality if you are rendering really high quality digital data, you want to probably get a Quadro or some other sort of work station render card.

Gaming cards still will have very small effect. With processors improving so rapidly they will still be the bread and butter of performance with photo or film editing.

Once you dabble into the 3rd rendering world, where you are rendering actual 3D objects and not 2D photos, then the GPU starts to shine.

So, it be may true, but it is also relative and subjective.

 

[speedyink]

I assume it has a standard monitor port so I can plug it into my 17", does it?

Correct me if I'm wrong, but someone brought in their macbook into the store looking for a monitor cable, and it had some crazy messed up port on it. I dunno if it's a standard mac connection or something, but it definately wasn't VGA.