Do pro Photographers really have to use a Mac?!

Will, the PC version for Windows came out in 1993, about version 2.5 + Some of us folks started with the Non-Mac version then, and shelled out 600 bucks for a copy. Version 3.0 added layers. Many of us used old Photostyler on PC's before Photoshop, until it was bought and killed off by Adobe. In printing I still use older versions of Photoshop, to open real oddball file variants customers unearth that have been abandoned with Photoshop "upgrades", and resave them in a more common format.

I must admit I haven't worked in the photographic field for as long as many of the other contributers but I can say that I was born and raised on the Mac and PC and I really don't understand what all the trouble is.

 

In the past, yes, you may have HAD to use a Mac to get PS but now a days pretty much everything you need is available for PC. As far as compatability goes, the only time you should ever have a problem is when someone sends you Mac files. For quite some time now Macs have had no problem what so ever dealing with PC files (obviously they can't run PC specific files like .exe).

 

Really now most people probably won't see anything but finished prints and .jpg's and .psd's from you, so how you go about making them is entirely up to you.

 

Oh, and I wouldn't count on Vista being of any help any time soon. Not only will Adobe have to create a brand new PS to run on Vista, I'm sure they'll charge full price plus. My roommates have been playing around with beta versions (they're electrical engineering majors) and it's resulted in nothing but unhappiness, crashes, and reformated HD's.

Color mangagement is good on the mac when moving graphics between different software, but then not all software is "colorsync" aware anyway.

 

Photoshop handles all the color management in photoshop so the operating system is not important when you use photoshop. So enjoy your new 30 mega pixel Canon and your old PC!

 

If you do video though, Final Cut Studio is a really nice suite of video applications and runs only on the mac. And that virus stuff...

One advantage of macs is that they don't come with a crapload of useless trial software

that you have to uninstall. If you've ever ordered a dell, you know what I mean. I guess you

can always wipe the disk, and reinstall from scratch...

 

Windows XP has a 2gb memory limit for a process which just sucks if you want to work

with large files. I'm not sure what the limit is for Macs, but I imagine it must be a lot

bigger.

 

Macs also run Aperture, which is significantly better imo for editing than lightroom.

 

In terms of scripting, I think there's a lot more support on the mac which has applescript.

Personally, I use perl and various unix tools, which is also much nicer to use on a mac

rather then using cygwin on PC. This is useful if you want to say take a text file of captions

and keywords and automatically embed them into thousands of jpeg/tiff files.

Oops, forgot to mention, it should also be noted that the new Intel iMacs can run both Windows XP and OSX. We just got one for tethered shooting with our D1X and it's awesome.

 

In a single editing sit down I can run a hundred .RAW's through Lightroom then reboot in XP to play a little bit of Counter-Strike. :D

No, you don't HAVE to move to MAC but you will eventually wish you did and wish you hadn't waited.

"...roommates have been playing around with beta versions...nothing but unhappiness, crashes, and reformated HD's..."

 

Wel, that's what happens when you install Vista - a new generation of software on uncertified hardware. Remember the problems people had installing Win-95 on AT-486 machines designed for DOS 3.1? Doesn't work like this - wait for MS-certified hardware and get Vista with a brand new PC.

 

On running Windows on a Mac - why bother? Most files are cross platform, you can open Mac files on a PC using the CanOpener software - so if you really want to run Windows - buy a cheap PC!

If you are providing digital files to your clients on DVD or CD, then the platform you use to

create them is not an issue. I would imagine your clients are more concerned about your

file size and sensor resolution, relative to their needs. Why would they even need to know

what computer your PP your images on? I am a Mac user myself, but some of my clients

are forced to use Windows PC's because of the corporate structure they operate in. There

is no compability problem with DVD's and CD's.

 

McCluney Photo

I've been sending files to press for about 8 years and photographing semi-professionally for the past 3. Both pursuits are accomplished without benefit of a Mac.

 

When I was in graphic design school, of course we used Macs. From that experience I can tell you that anyone who says that Macs never crash is being disingenuous. I almost failed a class because I couldn't get my output done by the deadline due to... repeated crashes.

<I>No, you don't HAVE to move to MAC but you will eventually wish you did and wish you hadn't waited.</i><P>

 

I don't. Photoshop works identically. (Well, Macs have a "CMD" key instead of a "CTRL" key)<P>

 

There are lots of folks here who've been at this longer than I have, but I've been Photoshopping now for over 4 years. Not once have I ever thought "Damn... I wish I'd bought a Mac!" I've shared plenty of files with Mac users who never had a single problem opening them and/or using them.<P>

 

Sit down with a Mac and use it. Sit down with a PC and use it. Buy whichever one floats your boat. I think I can confidently say this: A fully-loaded PC will likely cost less and run Photoshop just fine.

I've heard that some art directors throw a fit if they walk into the studio and see a PC sitting there to recieve the images and not a mac.

<...A fully-loaded PC will likely cost less..>

 

Dont want to add oil into the fire, but according to the November Macworld magazine, if

you compare high end Dell vs High end MacPro, same video card, memory hardrive

etc...the Mac is 800$US cheaper. 1 big reason; now Mac is Intel. So i think that not even

the price is even a factor afterall for you to choose. I am on a Mac for the past 14years by

choice, i have nothing against PC (still dont understand why some of you have problem

with video card not compatible with that DVD burner, or with that MP3 players not working

because of the USB card..? ) but seriously people dont realy care what you use IF you can

deliver on time and on budget your image. Ask your friends what they have, ask around

the business what they have, and buy the one that have more people around you that

could give you a hand if you are in trouble one day. dont fight : ) PC or MAC in the end its

all the same....except for Scott Eaton who seem always in a mad mood when he give is

oppinion : )

"I've heard that some art directors throw a fit if they walk into the studio and see a PC sitting there to recieve the images and not a mac."

 

I've met that AD. His name is Richard Head.

 

I suffered through some of same snobbery from Macintosh-titutes some years ago. One of my favorite episodes came from a new admirer of my work (a fellow arteest) who, upon learning that I used *Freehand!?* on a *PEECEE??* turned away in disgust.

 

One of the reasons I went with Intel boxes instead of Macs after getting out of school was that Macs were approaching the nadir of their existance and PCs, with the advent of Adobe apps circa Photoshop 6 (I skipped 5.X) became color profile aware. That and the fact that 95% of the world was Windows based made the move a no brainer. I also like building my own boxes.

 

Having said all that, I would not hesitate to buy one of the new Intel based Macs if I were starting over, but I'm not so I won't.

"Dont want to add oil into the fire, but according to the November Macworld magazine, if you compare high end Dell vs High end MacPro, same video card, memory hardrive etc...the Mac is 800$US cheaper." High end Dell's are notoriously overpriced, not a good comparison.

Maybe they compare it because of there High end componant? The fact is PC people are use

to custom build there machine whit *sometime* lowend composante, and compare a Dell

system or a Mac to it...if you like to compare, at least compare to system similar, with similar

high end composant and i think this is what Macworld have done. But then again, this was

not the original questions : )

"Macs hold no advantage anymore."

<P>

...except they work.

Didn't you already know that you need a Mac and that you MUST shoot with a Canon to be a pro? Where have you been?

Adobe has written Photoshop for Windows since at least version 7, and only ported it to Mac later in the cycle. I have no issues with using Windows XP and Photoshop, nor with Windows 2000 - XP is faster and essentially bullet-proof. With Windows, I have the advantage of at least 10 times the number of software titles, and complete freedom to upgrade my system from a variety of sources. Windows is also documented a lot better than Mac. While there are user groups for Windows, that is your only choice for Mac.

 

People tend to use what they used in school, including my son (a graphics designer), and love the Mac. You recall that Apple went to court to block Microsoft from donating computers to schools. Apple regards public schools as their fiefdom.

 

There weren't any computers when I was in graduate school (actually there were - water-cooled IBM 360's), so I was free to choose what I felt was the best when I needed a personal computer. I have no regrets.

-->Did Steve Job have done anything to Scott when he was a kid?

 

Yup, he dropped an ICC profile on his head, that's why he is the way he is. Consistent, no

question. Biased? Yup. Without his posts, this place would far less interesting and useful for a

good laugh now and then. I actually think he's a closet Mac user :-)

"I have the advantage of at least 10 times the number of software titles"

 

Yeah, most of them are anti-virus software for the 65,000+ known PC viruses. <G>

<i>"Do pro Photographers really have to use a Mac?!"</i>

<P>

...no, but they want to!

<P>

Seriously, you can NEVER ask this kind of question and expect a straight answer on this

forum.

<P>

<I>"If I have to go mac to be taken seriously in this profession then i will."</i>

<P>

Don't list your OS on your letterhead or copyright stamp. Paul

Quote: "I have the advantage of at least 10 times the number of software titles"

>Yeah, most of them are anti-virus software for the 65,000+ known PC >viruses. <G>

 

No, actually games. Macs don't have all the game choices, which rules them out for serious work ; )

 

Also, any system that's a monoculture becomes an attractive target for viruses. If everyone's running the latest Mac OS with the same browser and if people are really stupid enough not to use a virus scan (see above), then it's simply an untapped market for virus writers. There's no such think as a hack or virus-proof OS, but so long as Mac remains just a few percentage of the market, virus-writers may continue to target PCs.

 

Virus and Mac links:

http://antivirus.about.com/od/macintoshresource/

Both the Mac and PC are useable in roofing work to hold tarps in place, to protect pallets of shingles.<BR><BR><img src="http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y148/ektar/KATRINA/P1010025shingleMACPC.jpg">

WOW! what a great response... though I thought as much! I've read every single post here and can see there are some very experienced contributors. I now have a better idea of peoples views and have helped me reach some kind of decision.

 

I wasnt after a "clear cut answer" as one user has put it.. I'd rather be confused having had peoples perspectives rather than be confused without them!

 

I value everyones opinion on this matter; I can see the professionals amongst you and whilst I have taken into consideration everyones comments I will very likely purchase a mac in the very near future. (Looking at the new Mac Pro (with fries and a diet coke! .. sorry, couldn?t help that one!))

 

My final decision has been mainly based on these factors (brought up in this thread):

 

1. Ad-agencies and other graphics organisations use macs "because they do!" not just because they are better. So it would make sense to know that when dealing with these people "we are speaking the same language"

2. File compatibility may be an issue as with virus attacks and security of my hard work on the Hard disc!

3. Color management.

4. Mac now uses the Intel architecture (best of both worlds?!)

5. Though this sucks.. people do make an issue over ?what car you drive?! I will be dealing with other photographers/organizations.

 

Thinking more from a business point of view I feel more comfortable taking this route.

 

Thanks..

-->Mac now uses the Intel architecture (best of both worlds?!)

 

This is a biggie IMHO. You can run BOTH operating systems. You have the best of both

worlds. With a product like Parallels you can run at the same time, OS X and Windows

(even Vista!). Why would you even consider a garage built PC? Have you seen the new

MacPro's? Absolutely beautiful design. Look at what it takes to pop in a hard drive. This is

a no brainer in my mind even though I rarely need to run Windows software. I do

occasionally using Virtual PC which sucks (but works).