Mac vs. P.C – Which is Best for Digital Photography?

AW
Posted By
Alan Wonsowski
Jan 6, 2004
Views
737
Replies
17
Status
Closed
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Alan

Master Retouching Hair

Learn how to rescue details, remove flyaways, add volume, and enhance the definition of hair in any photo. We break down every tool and technique in Photoshop to get picture-perfect hair, every time.

F
Farlo
Jan 6, 2004
Alan Dubya <awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote:

I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion

Not really. It’s been done to death.
Do a little research.


Farlo, the Urban Fey Dragon
T
tom187
Jan 6, 2004
Alan Dubya <awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote:

I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion.

So you admit in advance that it’s a troll; that you’re trying to open a pointless can of worms.

It is my
understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color.

Certainly those conditions would help, yes. Talent, technique, experience, subject matter and opportunity (to name only a few attributes) are also important.

I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs.
Mac’s for this purpose.

You can search the archives of this group for dozens of endless previous and ongoing such debates. There is always a Mac/Wintel argument to read there and most often they end up resolving nothing. There is no need to start another one.

Use what you like. Your true ability will be neither enhanced nor diminished by either choice relative to the other.

Thanks,

Welcome.
——————————-
Tom

Unsolicited advertisements cheerfully ignored.
MR
Mike Russell
Jan 6, 2004
Alan Dubya wrote:
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

I’ll be at MacWorld tomorrow and will ask around for you. —

Mike Russell
www.curvemeister.com
www.geigy.2y.net
J
JJS
Jan 6, 2004
"Alan Dubya" <awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote in message
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. […]

I realize this answer will piss you off, so why don’t you save yourself the grief and surf the archive. Or just throw multicolor jello on your mirror and call it a monitor, for all the good it would do to answer here.
JG
James Gifford
Jan 6, 2004
"Mike Russell" wrote:

Alan Dubya wrote:
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

I’ll be at MacWorld tomorrow and will ask around for you.

Ah: humor. Too bad none of the devoutees there have any. But then, they have so little to be humorous about.

🙂


| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So… your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein stuff at: www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah |
R
RTM
Jan 7, 2004
You are the one that has to pay for it.
You are the one that has to use it.
You are the one that has to decide.


Ron.

Alan Dubya <awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote in message
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Alan
JG
James Gifford
Jan 7, 2004
"RTM" wrote:
You are the one that has to pay for it.
You are the one that has to use it.
You are the one that has to decide.

But that’s always true, isn’t it? The OP was asking for data on which to base his decision.


| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So… your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein stuff at: www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah |
R
RTM
Jan 7, 2004
The machine has no bearing on the user’s creativity. That comes from the person, not the machine.
He will be just as creative whichever he chooses.


Ron.

James Gifford wrote in message
But that’s always true, isn’t it? The OP was asking for data on which to base his decision.
JG
James Gifford
Jan 7, 2004
"RTM" wrote:

The machine has no bearing on the user’s creativity. That comes from the person, not the machine.
He will be just as creative whichever he chooses.

I wouldn’t say it has NO bearing, as a poorly selected machine would be a hindrance. An underpowered Mac with a too-small display would be as limiting as a PC with poorly chosen characteristics – although to be fair, there are a lot more bad choices to be made on the PC side.

If he chooses a suitably powerful and properly equipped system, there is next to no difference between the Mac and PC for Photoshop and general imaging use. Some professional advice, such as from a turnkey imaging systme builder, might be in order.


| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So… your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein stuff at: www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah |
A
Alvie
Jan 8, 2004
About the only real difference between Macs and PCs is the cost. If you feel having an Apple might somehow suit you better, buy one. If on the other hand you see the plethora of accessories for PCs as being more beneficial, buy that instead.

As for which one is easier to use? Neither or both, depending on your outlook! The quality of photos Photoshop will produce is a no contest… Either platform will do as good (as bad?) as the other. My person attitude after using both platforms for several years is that PCs are the easiest to get fixed and to buy accessories for. The only real positive a Mac has is that Macs and Adobe Postscript are like bread and butter. So, if your final work is going to a printer (as in print magazines) Buy the Mac because the whole industry runs on Macs. Otherwise… Hey, do they have it in blue? ABC

"Alan Dubya" <awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote in message
I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Alan
R
RTM
Jan 8, 2004
James Gifford wrote in message
I wouldn’t say it has NO bearing, as a poorly selected machine would be a hindrance. An underpowered Mac with a too-small display would be as limiting as a PC with poorly chosen characteristics – although to be fair, there are a lot more bad choices to be made on the PC side.

Getting the results you want from’unsuitable’ equipment *is* being creative. I suspect that (like many others) the OP thinks that by buying a more expensive, newer system he will automatically become a better photographer, but that comes from the person not the machine.

If he chooses a suitably powerful and properly equipped system, there is next to no difference between the Mac and PC for Photoshop and general imaging use. <snip a line>

The machine has no bearing on the user’s creative ability. The machine is only a tool, as is the software. The end result depends on how the tools are used.



Ron.
JG
James Gifford
Jan 8, 2004
"RTM" wrote:
The machine has no bearing on the user’s creative ability.

If ya says so. You’re still using PS 3 under Win 3.1 on a 386 with a 14- inch monitor, I take it?


| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So… your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein stuff at: www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah |
R
RTM
Jan 8, 2004
Yup, black & white display too.


Ron.

James Gifford wrote in message
"RTM" wrote:
The machine has no bearing on the user’s creative ability.

If ya says so. You’re still using PS 3 under Win 3.1 on a 386 with a 14- inch monitor, I take it?


| James Gifford * FIX SPAMTRAP TO REPLY |
| So… your philosophy fits in a sig, does it? |
| Heinlein stuff at: www.nitrosyncretic.com/rah |
ML
Mike Latondresse
Jan 10, 2004
James Gifford wrote in
news::

"RTM"
wrote:
You are the one that has to pay for it.
You are the one that has to use it.
You are the one that has to decide.

But that’s always true, isn’t it? The OP was asking for data on which to base his decision.

No he was asking for opinions, free opinions and he was going to get what he paid for…except I must admit this NG has shown admirable restraint and not upped that canard.
B
Bobs
Jan 10, 2004
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:26:46 -0500, Alan Dubya
<awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote:

I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Alan

I’ve used both, and for all intents and purposes (with Photoshop) there isn’t a whole lot of difference, price differences aside. The more important question might relate to what else you may plan to do with the machine, apart from graphic work. If this machine may be used for a variety of applications, the choice should not be difficult.
SM
Steve Moody
Jan 10, 2004
In article , Bobs
wrote:

I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Best for digital photography? Simple. A digital camera.
SP
Steve Peake
Jan 17, 2004
This used to be a big deal, but my opinion is that platform is no longer that critical, since most of the major software packages work about the same in Windows or Mac OS. As far as the platform I prefer, I love Mac — always have always will — but I also do the bulk of my billed work in Windows, and with no problem whatsoever related to platform. For me, it’s all about the available applications and good results, and I can get both on either platform…

"Bobs" wrote in message
On Tue, 06 Jan 2004 15:26:46 -0500, Alan Dubya
<awonsowatattglobal.network@> wrote:

I realize this question will evoke considerable discussion. It is my understanding that in order to be creative with digital photography, I would need monitors and systems that would display images with clarity and true color. I would welcome opinions, pros and cons, of P.C’s vs. Mac’s for this purpose. Thanks,

Alan

I’ve used both, and for all intents and purposes (with Photoshop) there isn’t a whole lot of difference, price differences aside. The more important question might relate to what else you may plan to do with the machine, apart from graphic work. If this machine may be used for a variety of applications, the choice should not be difficult.

Must-have mockup pack for every graphic designer 🔥🔥🔥

Easy-to-use drag-n-drop Photoshop scene creator with more than 2800 items.

Related Discussion Topics

Nice and short text about related topics in discussion sections