Comments

1. #1

   pat

   why would you backup to the same machine :S

   how bout dual 3 ghz ;)

2. #2

   Glenn Wolsey

   Why not the 3Ghz? Aperture or Lightroom don’t need that much power to function well. The 340Mhz increasement is not worth the extra $800 in my eyes for a photographer using Photoshop and Aperture.

   For a video editor, different story.

3. #3

   Hans Spicar

   And don’t forget to calibrate your displays! Check out GretagMacbethEye-One Display 2 or Pantone Spyder 2.

4. #4

   Kevin

   I dont know… Aperture seems to run like junk on everything I have tried it on. I have a top of the line Macbook Pro and I don’t find Aperture’s performance acceptable. I would definitely recommend Lightroom. Aperture is pretty and has awesome dual display support… but all the waiting is not cool. oh and the hangs suck too :p

5. #5

   Jens jacob jensen

   Screen: If every dollar counts, try Dells 24″ TFT. It uses the same panel as Apples 23″ Cinema Display (have one myself).

   Mac Pro: It’s not two Quads, it’s two “Core 2 Duo”’s, making it four cores total.

   MacBook Pro: it’s not two “Core Duo” processors, it’s one processor with two cores :-)

   Software: “Capture One” from “Phase One” has the best raw converter in the industry. So if you want your pictures to look their best, you need Capure One too…

6. #6

   Jonathan Huyghe

   I don’t know if bluetooth would be the ideal way to transfer your photos, especially not 8MP and more. Maybe that WiFi couold be an alternative, as it has a much greater speed

7. #7

   Jay

   Considering you’re only fourteen years old, your career description is impressive.

   However, you knowledge of Macs is not so, its already been mentioned, but dual core is not the same as multi-processor – One CHIP, two CORES. This could be confusing for people who don’t know better.

   Respect for a very nice website though.

8. #8

   Glenn Wolsey

   @ Jay

   Changes made, thanks for the tip :-)

9. #9

   Thomas

   “It features an Intel Quad Xeon processor up to 3Ghz in speed.”

   More accurately, “It features two Intel Xeon dual-core processors up to 3 Ghz in speed.” The Clovertown true quad-core processors will be out at the end of the year. The statement in the article suggests that there is only one physical processor in the system and yet is somehow ‘quad’ implying 4. Anyways, I just want to help you be as accurate as possible.

   You’re way beyond where I was at your age (1995). I was just then publishing my first site (which no one frequented since there were so few internet users). Those were the days; back then, we were hand-coding HTML because WYSIWYG editors were not out yet ;-). Anyone else remember HotDog and the first time Java was used on CNet.com?

10. #10

    C. Albertson

    This reads like an add written by Apple. Yes Apple Cinima displays are nice but how do they ompare with lower priced displays from Dell or Samsung? Why Photoshop? OK maybe that is the thing to get but why? You don’t say. At least compare it to other producs like it or say what yu might use PS for after you buy it. You might also want the check the copyright on some of the photos on this site. Is it really OK to re-publish them here? What about used Apple equipment? Seems resonable as PS is not yet out in a Universal Binary. What about color managment? Should offer some advice on 3rd party equipment to calibrate screens, scanners and printers … Just trying to be contructive here. to really make a great site it has to add something over and above an Apple advertisment

11. #11

    Christopher

    The Mac Pro can handle more than 2×30″ Cinema Displays – just upgrade the video card(s).

    I agree with the above poster – you need to acknowledge companies other than Apple, especially for your display section.

12. #12

    Lloyd

    I couldnt agree more. Im so pro apple its quite sickening and although any laptop desktop or monitor I would choose to buy would be one you mentioned above you still need to show that there are many other companys around. Dell monitors are known to be very impressive for there price tag and youve just got to mention other things like colour calibration. And as said above mention that PS isnt universal. Right now this is just an apple advertisement in disguise. My true company of choice. But not everyones. Let people know theres other options and choices. This really is written through a tunnel vision outlook. Nice site though.

13. #13

    Nathan

    What are the feelings for photographers regarding a MacBook Pro with a glossy or matte screen?

14. #14

    Jeff

    you can also just get a mac mini with the core duo processor and 2 gigs of ram. i mean come on its just PHOTOS…not video. why do people always think they need so much more power, is it an ego thing or what???

15. #15

    bob

    This article sucks…”if you are on a budget, get a 23in. monitor” bullshit…get a crt on craigslist

16. #16

    Justin

    Apple cinema displays are pretty, but any photographer worth her salt wouldn’t trust it do demanding color work. The same goes for most monitors from Dell, Sony, etc. Many photographers still use high-end CRTs because they offer accurate reproduction of wide gamut color spaces and much better black levels. If an LCD is a must, something like the Eizo S2410W would be much better suited to photography (higher contrast ratio than the apple displays, better black levels, more consistent backlighting, etc.) Or if you really wanted to break the bank, an NEC 2180WG-LED.

17. #17

    Ender78

    I have to strongly disagree that a 30″ is great for multitasking. Appls like Aperture are full screen apps. Two 23″ displays [or two Dell 24"'s ] are ideal. A photo can be displayed full screen on one monitor while editing and controls are on another.

18. #18

    Michael

    I’d also recommend getting an external hard drive if you go the MacBook Pro route, so you have a place to back up your originals and also an external drive to take advantage of Time Machine in leopard.

19. #19

    Richard

    I’m not a fan of Lightroom or Aperture, but Bibble Pro is a great RAW workflow, cheaper than C1 with more features, and runs on OS X, Windows, and Linux (in case you have that whole Boot Camp thing going for other photography purposes, such as running Photoshop CS2 under Windows rather than Rosetta).

20. #20

    Geardos

    Even those budget systems are too pricey for me. What about an Imac? The 17 inch would be good for a photographer on a budget.

21. #21

    Jose

    A 23″ ACD is hardly budget.. try a 20 inch dell widescreen MAYBE. This article is all wrong. |A macbook hooked up to a larger display is more than powerful enough with a 2ghz core duo. And to be honest all of this crap is wrong because Adobe CS2 isn’t a UB so a REAL photographer would use a Quad G5 setup..

22. #22

    Racketboy

    Congrats on the Digg! I have to say I’m very impressed by your work. Your writing, design, and photography is all very impressive. I thought I had some decent skills at 14 yrs old, but you blow me away in many respects at age 26.

    Keep up the great work!

23. #23

    Elliot

    I don’t think any of these new intel macs are really suitable for a demanding photographer.

    The Mac Pro is very slow with Photoshop – about half the speed of my G5 2.3 dualcore.

    Ok, sometime next year, when Adobe releases CS3, then the new macs should be very fast.

    But until then?

    Well, I don’t think they can be recommended.

    However, the Cinema Displays are excellent for photo-editing.

    (I briefly owned a 24″ Dell – a terrible monitor for photography as it has a very narrow viewing angle. I hear the 20″ Dell is better.)

24. #24

    Etan

    I’m not entirely sure on the point of your article.

    Yes there are macs. They are expensive, and they are pretty and can be used for photography.

    So can a cheap 2ghz pentium4. I bet your photos will still look the same.

25. #25

    Jens jakob jensen

    Etan said: “So can a cheap 2ghz pentium4. I bet your photos will still look the same.”

    Actually they will probably not look the same. You adjust the look according to what you see on your monitor. Macs and PCs traditionally have different gamma, and apart from that they will possibly be calibrated slightly different.

    Also, if you are using Apples RAW converter on the Mac, you will use a different RAW converter on the PC – so your pictures will definitely *not* look the same…

26. #26

    Jens jakob jensen

    Elliot_N said: “briefly owned a 24″ Dell – [..]has a very narrow viewing angle”

    That must have been a long time ago. Mine has an excellent viewing angle. In fact it’s the exact same panel as Apple is using. ArsTechnica did a review and comparison of them both.

27. #27

    Brad

    As an adjunct, here’s what we recommend for a basic Photo Journalist Mac: MacBook Pro with MacOS X CameraBits PhotoMechanic Photoshop CS2 Panic Transmit Zterm HSDPA card Take, ingest, tweak, caption, send – sorted

28. #28

    Elliot_N

    ‘That must have been a long time ago’

    About 8 months ago. I owned a 24″ Dell for ten days before exchanging it for a 20″ Apple Cinema Display.

    Apple don’t make a 24″ display, so the Dell can’t use the same panel as Apple.

    (It is the 20″ Dell that is said to use the same panel as the 20″ Cinema Display.)

    All Apple displays use S-IPS technology, which is the only type of LCD suitable for photography.

    The 24″ Dell is an MVA/PVA panel. Great for gamers, not for photographers. Move your head a couple of inches to the left or right whilst looking at the shadow tones of an image on the 24″ Dell. They will change significantly (lighten as you go off axis).

    Not good.

    No such problem with the Cinema Displays.

29. #29

    Jiminey

    BAD ADVICE

    1. Cinema displays are not good for color critical work. Uneven backlighting, color casts. If you are a pro, you go with EIZO coloredge CG displays, or LACIE/NEC.

    2. Aperture is not ready for prime time yet. For cataloging go with iView media pro or extensis. For editing use Photomehcahnic or Bridge if your camera is not supported under photomechanic.

    3. Get a refurb quad G5, faster then mac pro at photoshop. http://www.barefeats.com/quad06.html

    4. Lightroom. No pro would use a beta program while on a job.

    5. No need to get a macbook pro or mac book. Save your money and use a mac mini. Can burn dual layer dvd’s and have socket processors, meaning you can upgrade when the 64 bit merom processors come out.

30. #30

    Ted

    No offense, but this reads like Apple porn.

31. #31

    Mario Ferreira

    Dear Glenn What a great website from a 14 years old!

    I don’t totaly agree with you on this matter, if you’re on a budget you can always buy a 20″ iMac with 2Gb of RAM and Aperture, it’s enough for the vast majority of amateurs out there. Believe me, i have one. You can add a second 20″ display later if you wish. Aperture is a very good app from Apple but was is own “ifs”, its slow and it lacks some features that are essencial to edit your photos. Of course you can always buy another application and use it as an external editor in Aperture. LightRoom seems a very good promise from Adobe but as said is a beta tester and NO ONE should trust it his beloved photos yet. When it comes out, let’s see how it performs, now it’s to soon.

    I’m a recent user of Apple products and i share your entusiasm about Apple, a pleasure you discover when you use one for the first time.

    Greatings from Portugal Glad to meet you!

32. #32

    Glenn Wolsey

    Dell Displays & Other Competition:

    I apologize to all for only including Apple products in this write up, attention will be paid next time to include other options for different products.

    Thanks for all the helpful advice! I’ll be sure to take it all in and use it to become a better writer.

33. #33

    Zim Mcmallan

    Hey Little Guy!

    Wow you are growing up so fast! I have been watching your blog for a while now and every day it seems like you are getting a bit more mature! That’s great. How was your 14th birthday bud? I know being 14 can be tough with puberty and all, but in about 5 years you’ll be laughing at the cracking voice and pubes like it was a bad joke!

    That’s awesome that you got your parents to buy you a new Mac again! Wow bud what a great set of parents you have to buy you all this computer stuff! Computer’s are so fun for kids these days huh?? Writing on your blog must be a ton of fun! Do you have a Xanga account too?

    Alright little guy, goodluck with your parents, use clearsil if the zits get bothersome, and enjoy your new Mac toys! Mac’s are so fun, when you are all grown up you can use them for work and stuff too! They’re great!

    Zim McMallan @ funpocket

34. #34

    Glenn Wolsey

    im, wouldn’t it be nice if my parents did have money they could spend on my gears..oh, only in my dreams…

    I work hard for all of my technology gear. I write for a Mac magazine in New Zealand, work for Inventive Software on their application iClip, I’ve worked for MacZOT.com previously, along with MacsimumNews.com. I work extremely hard for what I have and I resent been called “loaded” or having “rich parents”. I pay for my gear, full stop.

35. #35

    Charlie

    Thanks for this guide, I’m considering a Mac soon, although I’m still based on Windows, (depressing I know)…!

    thanks again.

    Charlie -

36. #36

    Shreedhan → appleication.com

    Very nice guide - you should do more.

37. #37

    shredders → www.shredderwarehouse.com/shredders.html

    To be honest all of this crap is wrong because Adobe CS2 isn’t a UB so a REAL photographer would use a Quad G5 setup.

38. #38

    A.W.Thentic

    Good effort Glenn, but this ended up being one of those pages where I go, “damn it but I just wasted 10 minutes of my life!” The numerous contributors who are obsessed with what a “REAL” photographer would use are only highlighting their ignorance and sounding like pubescent blog-flies. The gear is a tool to a pro nothing more. 99% of them don’t care one whit about whether it’s a purple, fuzzy hammer or a silver, flexible one as long as it can drive a nail every single time. Damn! There I go again…another 8 minutes just gone!