elliot_n Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Hi I'm about to buy one of the new 2.3Ghz G5 Powermacs. My intention is to use it solely for Photoshop work. I'll be correcting high resolution Imacon scans which will then be printed on an Epson 2400. I now need to choose a monitor. My budget is 600 British pounds (about 1,000 US dollars). That will buy me a 20" Apple Cinema Display (549 pounds). It looked tiny in the Apple store sat next to the 23" and a 30" displays, but I guess it'll feel bigger when I get it home. (I'm currently working on a 17" eMac, which is very slow, and the screen is way too small.) The 23" Apple Cinema Display, at 950 British pounds, is way out of my budget, but I've just come across the 24" Dell 2405FPW which can be had for little more than the 20" Cinema Display - 603 pounds from dell.co.uk. It seems to be a well-liked monitor, but is it suitable for the demands of a photographer? (I'll be calibrating the monitor with Basiccolor Display software and the Basiccolor Squid.) Of course, the 24" Dell doesn't look as cool as the 20" Apple, but I think I would be prepared to sacrifice looks for more screen real-estate. Also I'm intrigued by the option to rotate the screen 90 degrees (it seems that this feature is supported in Tiger). Most of my images are shot in 'portrait' format, so a vertical screen would seem logical. Does anyone have experience of working like this in Photoshop? Is it useful, or is it a gimmick? (I would have the screen in normal orientation when I wanted to balance two images, side-by-side, for my portfolio.) The only negative comments I've found so far about the Dell are that it is maybe too bright, that it sometimes emits a high-pitched whine, and that it isn't as pretty as the Apple. Which would you choose? Thanks Elliot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_m3 Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 Before buying the soon-to-be-obsolete Powermac G5 what with the Intels coming in a year, I'd get a 20" iMac G5. Big win in the bang for the buck department, and easy enough to resell and recoup much of your money when it's time to get the Powermac P4. And I bet the loss you'd take selling the iMac in a year would be easily offset by how much those 24" monitors will drop in price in the same time frame. - Robert Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I like Robert's proposal - makes a lot of sense for the short-term. I have both the Dell 2405 and ACD 23" - connected to a Dual 2GHz G5. I like the Dell for it's features and punch. I use it most of the time. But I still drag images over to the ACD for final levels. The Dell is too bright, even set to 0 and calibrating with a Gretag Eye-One. If you decide on the Dell, be sure and seek out the coupon that lets you get it for US$779. But really, at this point in time, I'd get the iMac G5 and follow Robert's plan. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
paul_sokal___dallas__tx Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I have the Dell and love it. I like the built in card reader as well. COlors are spot on with Monaco Optix XR and I love all the real estate. It is bright but that hasn't caused me any problems. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_m3 Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I should add that the other part of your question, I have a 20" Viewsonic 1600x1200 and it rotates nicely in Tiger when used with a Mini. Definitely a worthwhile feature. It doesn't work in portrait mode with my Powerbook though, perhaps understandable. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I wonder how soon the powermacs will really go over to intel as they now are releasing the dual core powermacs. Still, the iMac is a great deal right now especially the latest round, a bit more powerful cpu, slightly faster bus, faster memory, faster vid card with PCI X which will basically just help your 3D and I imagine games? Plus the monitor is fab. I'm bias to the iMac since that's what I'm using (revb). With the monitor calibrated with Spyder2 Pro, its spot on. And it runs PS really smoothly. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 Thanks for the comments. Re. the suggestion of buying an iMac - I should have mentioned that the scans I'm getting off the Imacon are 3200ppi 16bit scans of 6x9 negs. They start off as 400Mb tiffs but mushroom to about 800Mb when layers are added in Photoshop. If I max out the RAM on the 20" iMac to 2.5Gb it will cost me 2,000 British pounds. The 2.3Ghz G5 with 2.5Gb of RAM is cheaper at 1,960 pounds. (Of course, I then have to add a decent monitor.) I'm hoping the G5 will last me at least 3 years. My files won't get bigger - they'll get smaller as I start to shoot digital. But I do take the point, which I hadn't really considered before, that once the MacTels come out, my G5 will lose most of it's value. I like the sound of the Dell 2405FPW monitor, but I'm worried about it's brightness. I'm used to working in Photoshop in a room with the main lights switched off. Beside my Epson 2400 I have one of these daylight lamps to assess prints - http://uk.daylightcompany.com/product.plm/21/46 The lamp is quite bright - too bright really to match prints to my rather dim eMac monitor. But maybe not bright enough to illuminate the prints sufficiently to match the Dell monitor. There again, won't my calibration software (Basiccolor) be able to dim the Dell to whatever output levels (cd/m) I specify? Thanks for the tips Elliot Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robert_m3 Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 First, everyone needs to know one rule when buying from Apple: Don't Buy Their Memory! Go to crucial.com or somewhere else to get memory and you won't pay anything like the prices Apple charges, and you'll enjoy a lifetime warranty on good third party memory. Second, do you need to do all your processing at the 400 megabyte level? First step I'd do would be to get in the ballpark of my target resolution rather than try to juggle all those bits. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jamesnjohnson Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 I say buy the G5, the "Pro" Apple Intels won't be out till 2007. The G5 processor is no joke and will be around for awhile. Alot of Apple apps are built to use Altivec. Can't go wrong with Dual cpu or dual core G5. I am thinking about getting a used Dual CPU G5 early next year. G5 will be around for a while for a few reasons, New apps for the Intel based Macs will need to written in Xcode so G5 support will be there, current Apple apps run on G5 a lot of resources went into writing those apps, Dual Core PPC is powerful for what it does. I will avoid an iMac G5 a Powermac G5 is in the budget. As far as Monitor goes here is a good link Dell vs Apple http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 <I>There again, won't my calibration software (Basiccolor) be able to dim the Dell to whatever output levels (cd/m) I specify?</I><P> It probably will, but by reducing the dynamic range of your color map, as opposed to reducing the output of the backlight. A little is OK, a lot is not. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 Hi Brad. Thanks for your comments. But could you expand a bit more on this: ' I like the Dell for it's features and punch. I use it most of the time. But I still drag images over to the ACD for final levels.' I don't really understand why you wouldn''t do all your Photoshop work on the ACD. I mean, if the ACD calibrates better, why would you want to adjust your images on the Dell? Thanks Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brad_ Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 The ACD has some issues of its own. Pink around the edges - and not having a very good white. This is the first generation (plastic-rimmed) ACD, the newer aluminum wrapped versions might be better - don't know. The Dell, being really bright is a pleasure to use - on everything from photoshopping, to writing software, to surfing the web, to watching movies. So, I use it 90% of the time, even in ps. But before I save any image files I look at them on the ACD and usually do a levels tweak. Also, it's nice having all that space for running multiple apps. In spite of it being too bright I still like using it - especially at $779. Having a USB hub and CF reader is nice as well. www.citysnaps.net Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted October 25, 2005 Author Share Posted October 25, 2005 'Second, do you need to do all your processing at the 400 megabyte level? First step I'd do would be to get in the ballpark of my target resolution rather than try to juggle all those bits.' Hmmm, good point. Two of my friends have much more experience with working with Imacon scans than I do. One shares your opinion, and argues that it's crazy to be working with images at such a high resolution when they're primary destination is an 11"x14" portfolio (my current project). The other has just had an solo exhibition of very large Lambda prints, and says that whilst his images were originally scanned for magazine/ portfolio use, he's very glad that all his Photoshop work was done with scans done at the Imacon's maximum resolution - he does a LOT of Photoshop work on his images and recreating it, after the fact, on fresh scans would have been difficult. Anyway, the next scanning project I'll be working on is hopefully destined for a gallery, so I need a computer that can handle big files.... Re. my 11x14 portrait portfolio... I've just cut out a piece of mountboard to get an idea of the Dell's screen size. Something like 12.7" x 20.3", right? Wow, that's big! That means that if I flip the screen to portrait mode, I'll be able to view the images life- size (11x14). Amazing! (And there's room for the Photoshop palettes above or below the image.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brady_fontenot1 Posted October 25, 2005 Share Posted October 25, 2005 About editing large files. This is what I do, and it seems to work well. Scan at full resolution. save a master copy. then I resize that master copy to a smaller, more manageable file and save that as a seperate file. do all my edits in the form of adjustment layers on the smaller file. maybe make a a couple of masks. once i'm done editing, I resize the smaller edit file back to the original size of the scan and drag all my adjustment layers over to the master file. they line up perfectly on top of the master file, and it looks just like the smaller edit file, without the processing time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
EricM Posted October 26, 2005 Share Posted October 26, 2005 i want that 2405 soooo bad! Brad, you keep making me drool... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
doris_chan Posted October 26, 2005 Share Posted October 26, 2005 "The ACD has some issues of its own. Pink around the edges - and not having a very good white. This is the first generation (plastic-rimmed) ACD, the newer aluminum wrapped versions might be better - don't know." The aluminum version is worse, much worse. Startlingly magenta, and with the added bonus of a muddy yellow band down each side. Nice. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted October 26, 2005 Share Posted October 26, 2005 Brady..Thanx that's great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_bright1 Posted October 26, 2005 Share Posted October 26, 2005 I have been thinking long and hard about getting a Dell 2405FPW as well and we're going to have to make our minds up soon as the 30% discount offer ends today! <p> I found this small group review featuring the Dell 2405: <p> <a href="http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050706/index.html">http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050706/index.html</a> <p> and this one featuring the Apple 23" Cinema display: <p> <a href="http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050830/index.html">http://graphics.tomshardware.com/display/20050830/index.html</a> <p> Neither of them gets a particularly stellar review (which surprised me for the Apple as so many people here swear by them), but the price today (for the Dell) is *very* tempting... <p> Let us know what route you choose and how it works out. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
elliot_n Posted October 26, 2005 Author Share Posted October 26, 2005 Yes, the 30 percent discount offer ends today! I've decided to give the Dell a spin, and I've just ordered one for 600 British Pounds (that's with the discount - us Brits always have to pay more!) Dell have a 7 day returns policy, here in the UK, so I have a week to test out the display and see if is suitable for my needs. My main concern is the brightness of the display. I couldn't care less about ISO proofing standards - who want's to work in the dark!? - but it is important to me that I can place an Epson 2400 print in my viewing area, and get a good match with what I see on screen. My eMac, which calibrates at about 115 cd/m2, is too dim to get a good match. I fear that the Dell will be too bright. Let's see... Thanks for the advice. Ellliot (Brady, I had already figured out that workflow - it helps a bit, but adjustment layers and masks are not particularly taxing to my under-powered computer, even with a huge file. It's features like the healing brush, rotation, usm, resizing, saving etc that my computer struggles with (e.g. 10 seconds to spot a tiny speck with the healing brush), and all of these things need to be done on the master file.) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Uhooru Posted October 26, 2005 Share Posted October 26, 2005 Steve, I wouldn't put too much stock into Tom'shardware when it comes to evaluating photography related equipment. All the stuff they like has pretty much nothing to do with how a professional or serious user is going to use such a monitor. He sounds shocked that you have to use a 3rd party calibrator. Well, you basically are going to have a fair struggle if you don't fine tune calibration on your monitor and you really need a spyder type set up to do it. All they look at is speed and bells and whistles. They are great to tell you the fastest vid for gaming and the fastest processor for err gaming. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
steve_bright1 Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Well I take your point Barry, but at least the Tom's reviews do actually mention photographic use! Most reviews just seem to concentrate on videos or gaming - 'wow! look at the contrast on this thing' or 'how could you miss with a bezel as stylish as that' :) I decided I would wait as I don't have the budget for it right now. I found that Scan computers (in the UK) sell the Dell at about 25% off list on a regular basis, so missing the 30% isn't such a big deal. Although the Dell price has gone back up to GBP 942 today, I reckon they'll lower their list price before too long as right now it's head-to-head against the Apple (pricewise) which is perceived to be a better monitor. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
p.s. Posted October 27, 2005 Share Posted October 27, 2005 Have a look at this side-by-side review of the two: <a href="http://www.anandtech.com/displays/showdoc.aspx?i=2400">Anandtech Review</a> Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
peter_peter3 Posted October 28, 2005 Share Posted October 28, 2005 I just hooked up the 20" Dell 2005FPW, calibrated it with Coloreyes (updated Basiccolor) & it is very similar to my 20" Apple cinema screen. Without proper calibration, its MUCH to bright. For the discounted cost, its unbeatable, to the point that I just ordered the 24" too. I will admit to doing my photoshop work on a Lacie crt though, as I still find it to provide better shadow information and smoother gradations than any of my flat panels. Perhaps the Lacie 312 or Eizo is needed for critical colour work, IMHO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now