PC and Monitor choice - a confused soul!

[raivo_vanags]

Hello all,<p>

Help a confused soul (that would be me) to choose a computer system.

I have read as much as I can and have come to be more and more

confused. My objective is to buy a PC and monitor to be able to do

<b>digital imaging editing and also video material (from digital

camcorder) editing</b>. I must say that I haven�t experienced it

before and currently one can say I don�t have a PC at home if not to

consider the current ancient system (32MB RAM; Pentium-MMX, 166MHz,

Cache 512K,15� monitor). I plan to buy everything from scratch of

course.<p>

I don�t want to spend a fortune on this but I tend <i>to tighten the

belt</i> and buy better things not to regret it in the future and pay

more on upgrades. Best bang for the buck principle most likely should

be applied. And of course, it�s just my hobby. I also want to perform

ordinary operations in MS Office and I Windows XP will be my

operating system.<p>

I have compiled different thoughts from photo.net participants on the

PC system that I thought are relevant to me. I must admit that I

don�t understand all the specifics. My current understanding is

this:<p>

<b>Processor speed</b>: Carl Smith and Darron Spohn suggest that

Pentium III 1.3GHz is faster than Pentium IV (any GHz?) and that�s

the way to go, right? And Pentium III 1.13GHz should go with 1Gb

PC133 SDRAM (not sure I get the differences between

DRAM/SRAM/SDRAM/RDRAM/DRR SDRAM and ECC DRAM).<p>

<b>RAM</b>: So I guess I should go for 1GB right? Or as Darron Spohn

says � <b>budget for RAM first, then decide how fast a computer you

can afford.</b> What�s the advice? Actually I haven�t heard about

Athlon either. I guess it�s much easier to go with Intel stuff in my

country. Not sure if I can get AMD, etc. here and if yes then the

lack of demand may hold the prices higher than Intel�s. It�s much

easier to build a system in US as you can order from variety of

products and suppliers. I don�t know what from all the systems I can

get here. <p>

And Roberto Totaro confuses me even more:<p>

<i>· Where you really save money is on the RAM: RAMBUS modules (the

ones used by the latest P4 motherboards) are about TWICE as expensive

per megabyte as DDR modules (the ones used by Athlon motherboards)!

If you want 1 GB of RAM that can be a nice amount of money, almost

the difference between a (good) CD burner and a (entry level) DVD

burner. Speedwise, in principle RAMBUS should be faster than DDR. In

practice you won't see the difference. Last but not least when

shopping for DDR memory, get the PC-2700 modules (333 MHz bus clock),

not the marginally cheaper PC-2100 (266 MHz). Don't buy PC-3200 (400

MHz) DDR: most motherboards support only 1 (one) PC-3200 module, that

is 512 MB of RAM. If one day you want/need more memory you'll have to

throw away your hugely expensive super-fast PC-3200 module and get

two PC-2700. </i><p>

<b>Video card</b>: not sure about speeds. I don�t play games but I

want to do video editing. www.normankoren.com states <i>It helps if

the video card software allows you to adjust gamma</i>.<p>

<b>Hard drive</b>: <a href="

http://www.normankoren.com">www.normankoren.com</a> and Darron Spohn

advices for capacity. Darron Spohn further goes with <i>Get a 7200

RPM drive with a 1MB or larger cache, and make sure the access time

is under 9 ms. · Whatever computer you choose, make sure it has

multiple drive bays and a power supply that can support the drives.

You will run out of drive space eventually. Adding a drive is easier

that replacing a drive, and less expensive than adding an external

drive.</i>I�m also on RAID/SCSI/ATAs.Somebody mentions scratch disk,

ahat about it?<p>

I�m lost on Carl B�s thoughts - <i>IDE RAID (promise fasttrack 100

with 4 x4 40GB WD ATA100, raid0) works for me, never seen anything

better, the only thing that beats it is SCSI160 raid, and a

controller for this is way too expensive. Works awesome on XP. FAT32

is still way to go (Pierre is right), no it is not limited to 32gb,

an fragmentation of MFT and such is not an issue then. Gary is wrong,

and NTFS really gets slower, and cannot be read from a plain boot

disk in case of crash. DiskKeeper is slowing you down and you have to

pay for it too.</i> I just know I don�t want to spend money for

nothing and fancy (in name of fancy).<p>

Roberto Totaro opinion - <i>I have a humble 120 GB ATA-133 7200 RPM

hard disk (not a SCSI) and I can still open a 100 MB Photoshop file

in a few seconds. Whether a SCSI hard disk is going to be faster than

an ATA-133 depends on many factors, but especially on the SCSI

controller you have. Unless you have a fancy controller with plenty

of on board cache, you won't see much of a difference between SCSI

and ATA disks. The ATA's, though, are cheaper and you don't need an

additional SCSI controller that, in my own experience, can be an

endless pain in the a** (because of compatibility and performance

issues).</i><p>

<b>Motherboards</b> - ???<p>

<b>CD/DVD drives</b> � I guess the question really is whether to go

for DVD writer or not. What are the minimal qualities needed? I have

seen some cheap DVD writers but don�t know how to evaluate them. Boy,

what can�t producers go with one standard from the very beginning� <p>

Roberto�s input again � <i>Concerning backup devices, IMHO a CD

burner doesn't make much sense: I scan my 35 mm film on a Canon

FS4000 and the resulting Photoshop files are around 100 MB each (at

14 bit/color, 4000 dpi). That means 6 or 7 images per CD. Ridiculous.

Get a DVD burner. Among DVD burners, possibly the best buy at the

moment is the Sony DRU500: it can burn basically any kind of DVD

media (DVD-R/RW, DVD+R/RW, DVD-RAM...) I have it and it's absolutely

great.</i><p>

There�s a bit clarifying article in PC Magazine � <a href="

http://www.pcmag.com/print_article/0,3048,a=40010,00.asp"> DVD Wars:

Cooling Down?</a>. It seems the three options currently are Panasonic

LFD521U(best price $220), Pioneer DVRA05(best price $238) and Sony

DRX500ULX(best price $389).<p>

The prices are coming down and standards more universal but when�s

the entry point? What�s the brake-even point for burning more CR-

R/RW�s and less writable DVD�s but with higher burner and matrices

costs? Isn�t the space on CD-R�s too small for you?<p>

<b>Monitor</b>: I guess I would go with 19 inches. I have heard also

about 0.24 or 0.25 dot pitches. What�s the way to go there? What

other indicators I should take into account? What about refresh

rates, BNC inputs?<p>

Darron Spohn argues - <i>Aperture grill monitors are sharper than

shadow mask monitors. · You also want a monitor with a flat

screen</i>. www.normankoren.com contradicts - <i>Get the best

monitor you can afford. 19 inch monitors are fine and not very

expensive. Make sure you have a modern monitor that allows you to set

the color temperature to 6500K. Darron Spohn prefers aperture grill

monitors over shadow mask monitors-- they're slightly sharper, but

not necessarily superior.</i><p>

Joze Volf goes - <i>I simply dissagree with the tip about choosing

monitor. I work in a computer business and I see and evaluate a lot

of equipment. Generaly an aperture grill display realy has a very

fine dot but this doesn't mean that the picture is sharp and pleasant

for viewing for long hours on a daily basis. Most AG CRTs I have used

(and they were all high priced models) were irritative for my eyes.

This was specialy noticable on high resolutions. And the colors; the

black is never near black when compared to shaddow mask display and

the structure of dots on quality shaddow mask monitor is much more

apropriate for viewing and editing photos on screen and picture also

looks more natural and ergonomic (less irritative)</i>.<p>

Remember, it�s just my hobby. What about dual monitors? Is it a nice

feature? As I currently own a 15� monitor I could make it dual with

my current 15�? Can the current PC be of any use for future? What?

Can I easily switch to the other PC on one of those monitors?<p>

<b>USB</b>: I guess USB 2.0 is the way to go, mhh?

FireWire: It�s IEEE1394 card, correct? I have heard it�s better to

have it with SCSI interface� Steve Bingham�s says - <i>The current

crop of 6 meg cameras use firewire. Thank God. Generic USB would take

forever. As for speed, USB 2 is slightly faster (450 verses 400). As

for digital camera image upload, firewire is much more popular. Also,

with video, firewire is also king. With a price of $49 for the

firewire card, including video editing software, why the debate????

</i> And I understand I need it for video editing, right?</i><p>

<b>Surge protection</b>: no clue how does it work.

www.normankoren.com says At minimum you need a protector with a UL

1440 let-through rating of 330V maximum. I don�t if it can be applied

to Europe as well. You have different power number system to our

220V, right? <p>

<b>Back-up</b>: how do you go with this issue? What do you think

about <a

href="http://www.pcmag.com/print_article/0,3048,a=33946,00.asp">

Maxtor Personal Storage 5000LE </a>? Is there a cheaper but safe

option?<p>

<b>Sound card</B> - I guess for video editing I should have something

decent, eh?<p>

<b>Expansion slots</b> - ???<p>

I also understand that the key is also to balance the system. <p>

I have read also that it�s a good idea to go with to PC � one for

editing other for Internet, etc.? Can I use my in such a manner? What

wire do I need? <p>

Hope to get some clarifying inputs. Thanks in advance! <p>

Best,

 

[mark_jacobs1]

Well I commend you on doing some research there! You'll most likely get different answers from everyone you talk to. Here's mine:

 

I went with AMD Ahtlon processors, so I can't help with the Petium delima. All I can say is that you can get an AMD Athlon 1700+ (1.4GHz) for $48. Pretty good deal if you ask me. I have never had any issues with choosing AMD for the last 4 CPUs I've used.

 

RAM - 1GB is great to start with. Type is dictated by your motherboard. If your mother board supports DDR. There are various speeds and again this is defined by your motherboard. Last I checked the price difference between DDR333 (PC2700) and DDR266 (PC2100) was miniscule so if those are you choices, it's a no brainer to go with the slightly faster type. Of course now there is faster RAM out there, but it's only of your concern if your MB supports it. I'm currently using DDR266, and have no complaints working in Photoshop (typically with 50mb TIFF files, multiple layers).

 

Video Cards - I am of the opinion that this is just not a crucial component for photo editing. You said you are not planning on playing the latest games, so go with whatever you can get the best price on. This is how I have done it and never had any woes.

 

Hard Drives - I have had great success with Maxtor 7200rpm drives. I'm no use to you for RAID advice. My motherboard has RAID support, but the only thing I use it for is two extra IDE ports. I do no mirroring. I store duplicates of images on a completely seperate computer and then again on CDr. I like doing things manually though.

 

Motherboards - I have had great success with ABIT, terrible luck with MSI (2 dead in a year) and FIC. Avoid relying on onboard features such as video adapters, USB, etc. I have no problems with an onboard audio device causing conflicts with anything else, but the less you use built into a motherboard the less chances of headaches you have later.

 

DVD writer - can't help you, hasn't come down in price enough for me to consider it yet.

 

Monitor - it's been so long since I've shopped for one, I've forgotten all the important things you are looking for. sorry.

 

Firewire vs. USB 2.0 - Firewire is the same as IEEE 1394 yes. Do you already have a scanner, printer, camera, camcorder or whatever all you are hooking up to the computer? What do they use? That's the easiest way to decide. You might end up wanting both. I have nothing that uses USB2.0, therefore I dont' have USB2.0. I have a digital camcorder that requires Firewire, so I've got that. I'm about 2 years behind in digital video equipment. At that time, everything was by firewire.

 

Sound card - already mentioned above in motherboard section. This all depends on your requirements too. What do you nead? You mention video editing. What are you outputting your video too? Back to the camcorder... sound card is meaningless. How are you getting your video input to the computer? If it's by DV then your covered, audio and video gets input through firewire. I spent many years doing digital multi-tracking with computers and that's where audio cards are really important. For video editing, I just don't see where it's going to be that crucial for anything special. Unless you happen to need a digital audio output or something or if you are recording additional audio sources into the computer. If that's the case this forum is probably not the best place to look. There are a ton of choices. I went with Echo Audio a few years back and have been happy.

 

Expansion slots - that's up to you. What do you plan on adding? Most motherboards come with plenty PCI slots for whatever you want to add.

 

Another thing to consider, especially if you are doing video editing is system cooling! If your CPU is running at 100% for a long perioid of time as often happens in video work you have to have a system to keep your CPU and case cool. So, some things to consider. Make sure your case has spaces for fans at least in the front and back. A tip that I learned... a lot of cases only give you little holes to allow air in and out where the fan is installed. This restricts airflow big time! So if cooling is an issue for you, cut a hole to allow more airflow, this made all the difference in the world for me and my previously overheating CPU during video work. Also keep an eye out for motherboard features that control fan speed based on CPU utilization. That way you don't have to have your fans blazing away at full speed all the time (noisey).

 

So there's plenty to work with. I'm sure the next person will probably disagree with everything I just wrote. That's they way this stuff is. Everyone has their opinions on what works best. You do the best you can when you start off and learn from mistakes as you go.

 

I didn't understand your very last question. Did you mean go with two PCs, one for internet, one for photo editing?? Not neccessary at all. I have two, one for audio work and one for photo/video work. The benefit for me is space issues! Trying to cram all the printers, scanners, keyboards, mixers into one room is insane!

 

Good luck!

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[mark_jacobs1]

One last thing on video and motherboards. If you are using a standalone video capture device (such as Dazzle or something), they do have conflicts with AMD processors combined with certain motherboard chipsets. I focus on AMD so I don't know if some may have conflicts with Intel CPUs or other chipsets as well. If you are just using a firewire card, then this is not doing to be a problem I believe. If you are going with an external device, make sure you go through their tech support to see if there are conflicts with any motherboard chipsets before you decide on one.

[scott_eaton]

<i>Processor speed: Carl Smith and Darron Spohn suggest that Pentium III 1.3GHz is faster than Pentium IV </i><P>

A P3 at 1.3ghz is faster than a newer P4 up to about 2ghz. That's because the older chip was more efficient and had less complicated stepping. However, most systems shipping today are at least 2.53ghz P4s which makes the P3 arguement irrelevant. The amount of money you'll save on the fastest P3 vs midline P4 is not worth worrying about. Go with the P4 at around the 2.53 speed range for best economics. <i><P>

I also want to perform ordinary operations in MS Office and I Windows XP will be my operating system. </i><P>

Windows XP, Windows 2000, and Mac OSX are <b>quantum leaps</b> ahead of their predecessors and are all superb for graphics/photo editing. <i><P>

So I guess I should go for 1GB right? </i><P>

Photoshop is so RAM intensive you can't have enough. Get at least a gig, and then start spending money on a faster processor. For Photoshop work you want lots of RAM first and processor speed second. <i><P>

Not sure if I can get AMD, etc. here and if yes then the lack of demand may hold the prices higher than Intel�s </i><P>

Are you willing to build your own machine? If the answer in 'no' then AMD is out of the question since I don't know of any vendor that builds commercial AMD based desktops that you can trust. <i><P>

Speedwise, in principle RAMBUS should be faster than DDR. In practice you won't see the difference. </i><P>

150% correct. RAM speed and BUS speed are specifications that keep unemployed computer nerds busy talking about meaningless hardware specs that have little real world performance. Within a 10 meter radius of where I'm typing I have about a quarter million USD in servers, none of which have RAM faster than lowly PC 133 SDR, and they will destroy any workstation running faster RAM in any application benchmark you want to run. The vast majority of the PC market is now running DDR, so don't worry about. Just don't be suckered into buying the fastest DDR for no reason. <P><i>

IDE RAID (promise fasttrack 100 with 4 x4 40GB WD ATA100, raid0) works for me, </i><P>

Four 40 gig IDE drives striped with RAID 0 should mop the floor with any SCSI drive or controller in read performance. I've used newer SCSI u320s at 15k, and they are only marginally faster that the far less expensive IDE solutions. Still, anything other than RAID 1 mirroring for non experienced personal is a big fat 'no-no'in my book. If you need peace of mind, get two 120gig drives, mirror them with RAID 1, and you'll never have to worry about them failing. Just be sure to get a PC that support RAID 1, although most of them now do. <P><I>

and NTFS really gets slower, and cannot be read from a plain boot disk in case of crash </i><P>

I have plenty of tools that allow me to explore NTFS partitions from a boot disk or CD-ROM, but I woulnd't make it through customs with them :-). Still, putting XP or Win2K on Fat32 is like putting cheap gas in your Porsche' and not recommended in my book unless you need to dual boot Win95/98. The easiest compromise, and my strongest recommendation for installing Win2K or XP on large HD's is to create a smaller, 5-10gig partition first with NTFS for the OS, and them use the rest of the space for another data partition with Fat32. Best of both worlds, is easy to set up, and allows you to put your XP swap file and Photoshop scratch disk in the first partition where they will run fast and clean. If you keep the first partition below 50% full, you'll never suffer from your PC slowing down over time due to your HD filling up and fragmenting. End of problem.<P><I>

Get the best monitor you can afford. 19 inch monitors are fine and not very expensive. </i><P>

What Darron said...again. <I><P>

With a price of $49 for the firewire card, including video editing software, why the debate</i><P>

Agree. If you buy a pre-built machine you'll have to contend with what it comes with - usually integrated onto the motherboard. This measn you'll usually need an addon card anyway, which is usually a good thing since most of them work better. There is no problem here. <I><P>

Back-up: how do you go with this issue? </i><P>

If you get a DVD burner you'll likely <B>have</b> you software back-up option, and if you use RAID 1 with two drives, you'll cover your hardware back-up. I'll take the DVD burner any day over some goofy back-up device that won't be able to restore your OS anyway.

 

[scott_eaton]

<I>Motherboards - I have had great success with ABIT</i><P>I'm currently running an Abit KR7A with Athlon XP 2000 at home, and it's a drastically faster system than any prebuilt P4 2.53 or slower I've deployed. Abit has fallen out of favor lately, but their older 133/266a AMD boards are screamers, and very, very stable.

[joseph_culbert]

Monitors -- Mind you, I'm no expert, but I've always preferred aperture-grille (aka Trinitron) type monitors. The flat screen has less distortion than the standard round CRT screen of a shadow-mask screen, and from my experience they have better contrast as well (I'm not sure what your friend means when he says shadow-masks have better black -- my experience has been the opposite).

 

That said, you probably want to do some comparison-shopping. I'd avoid LCD screens entirely if you want to do video -- they still have some issues with refresh lag.

[kelly_flanigan1]

Make sure your box actually can be upgraded in Ram. Here the alot of the charpies still have a max hardware limit on their board of 1 Gig; and start at 512Meg ram. With these "value systems" one cannot grow above 1 gig ram....................... I recently got a P4 2.5Ghz computer with 512 Meg ram; CDRw; DVD read only; reads 4 camera cards; 80G ram; ethernet 10/100; modem; 3.5 floppy; 5 usb; 2 firewire; speakers; keyboard; 17" monitor; optical oiuse; XP pro; for 800 bucks.....My mail order 1 Gig DDR chip was 198 bucks; so i'm at 1.5 G in Ram....Will get another chip soon; and be at 2 Gig ram.<BR><BR>In buying many machines for Photoshop; over the last 7 years; getting stuck with not enought ram due to HARDWARE limits has always been a major problem; when the system ages. I once paid 750 pucks for 16Megs of ram; and it was a good investment.

[adam_lang1]

What kind of problems are there with LCD monitors and video editing?

[raivo_vanags]

Thanks a lot for your answers. <p>

 

So your suggestion would be around this?:<p>

<I>Are you willing to build your own machine?</I> - no, so I guess I�m going with Intel.<p>

<b>Processor speed</b> - Pentium IV at around the 2.53 (or higher) speed range for best economics<p>

<b>RAM</b> � 1GB (if possible more). So I should get DDR RAM at some medium rate and don�t bother about the rest, right? Should I go with DDR333? May I should follow on Kelly's advice on RAM upgrades�<p>

<b>Hard drive</b> � I should go with 120GB drives and mirror them with RAID 1 <p>

(btw. I have used that the tendency is to make installations on C drive and files on D drive where C usually is small and all the big memo space is located on D. Any comments on this (am I out of line here with what I say?)?<p>

I don�t know what�s NTFS and Fat32 anyway� and I don�t completely follow what Scott said (sorry):<p>

<I>The easiest compromise, and my strongest recommendation for installing Win2K or XP on large HD's is to create a smaller, 5-10gig partition first with NTFS for the OS, and them use the rest of the space for another data partition with Fat32. Best of both worlds, is easy to set up, and allows you to put your XP swap file and Photoshop scratch disk in the first partition where they will run fast and clean. If you keep the first partition below 50% full, you'll never suffer from your PC slowing down over time due to your HD filling up and fragmenting. End of problem. </I><p>

<b>Monitor</b> - 19� � Trinitron? still waiting for some advise on dot pitches and refresh rates. <p>

<b>USB/FireWire</b> - The PC will not be pre-built, I will have it set up for me. So if I don�t have to contend with what it comes with then what�s the way to go � to have add-on cards or what? Is it then internally or externally placed? <p>

<b>Back-up</b> - So you advise to go with DVD-burner and with the setup described in Hardware section I wouldn�t have to worry? Does it mean I have to do a lot of DVD burning or not? <p>

<b>Motherboards</b> - I don�t know yet what�s available at my country but are you suggesting 133/266a AMD or AMD Athlon 1700+? What specs should I pay attention there? <p>

<b>Video card</b> - Is there a big difference if I use it for only Photoshop or also for video editing?

<b>Sound card</b> - what I mean is that I will make video editing with some sound editing as well. I�m using MiniDV format and Canon camcorder supporting Digital in and out. And if I get DVD burner then the film will go to disc (image and sound). May be I should clarify to myself � does sound card reflects only the output of the sound on speakers or it changes something also on sound mixing for CDs/DVDs etc.? Or is it <b>audio card</b> which is important? What�s advise then on audio cards (if there�s such a thing)?<p>

<b>System cooling</b> � is it a question only of holes in front and back or anything else?<p>

Yeah, what I meant with the second PC is � can I somehow utilize the extra monitor or system that I have currently (see introductory paragraph above)? What�s the best way to go there as is it helpful at all?<p>

Thanks one more time for your help � I just want to be sure that I know myself some stuff before going PC buiders/setuppers. I just don�t trust a lot of <I>experts</I> here as there have been plenty of times when the only thing a salesman or alike can tell you is that e.g. camera X is better than camera Y because it simply is better and that�s it! He doesn�t know a s@#$ about the product which he�s been selling for month� You guys are great!<p>

Cheers,

[mark_jacobs1]

Raivo, in response to your questions about my reply to your post...

 

Motherboard - in your last response, you said you were going with a pre-built Intel computer. If this is the case, none of what I said about AMD/motherboard combinations is relevant for you. Basically all the advice I gave was assuming you were building your own. You won't have much choice in the motherboard if buying a pre-built computer.

 

Video card - if you are just doing Photoshop and video editing, don't worry too much about the video card

 

Sound card - if all of your audio and video sources are coming in through your camcorder, then the audio card plays no key role. You only need to worry about audio card quality if you are recording audio into your computer (not from the camcorder) or outputting to some other recording device.

 

Cooling - if you are buying pre-built, this should hopefully be all taken care of by the manufacturer. My advice was geared towards if you buy your own case and do everything from scratch.

 

Second PC, monitor - you have lots of choices with what to do with your current PC and monitor. You can buy a video card for your new PC that will support two monitors. I have no experience with this so no recommendation on card type/brand, but it will allow you to extend your display onto a second screen basically.

[steven_dusk1]

Everyone has given you lots of answers - but you need to define the question better. All you have said is that photo and video is a hobby.

 

How much do you have to spend in total?

How serious a hobby is it?

How many hours a day will you be using it?

What size photo and video files will you be manipulating?

What is your final output device?

Will you be sending output to 3rd parties?

Is calibration and colour management important to you?

 

The system is vastly different depending on whether you do a few hours a week with digital camera files, or deal 8 hours a day with panoramic stitching of drum scanned large format...

[raivo_vanags]

Steven - thanks for your guiding-problem solving-directional questions. I hope my answers will help you to help me:) <p>

<I>How much do you have to spend in total?</I><p>

I haven't decided on budget as I will tighten my belt and buy a good thing at first and don't want to feel sorry I didn't buy the thing and then upgrading it later and paying more in total. We have a saying here <I>cheapskate pays twice</I>. But of course by no means money isn't an issue for me.<p>

 

<I>How serious a hobby is it? </I><p>

Photography � it's most serious hobby I have:) As I'm going digital it's become an issue.<p>

 

<I>How many hours a day will you be using it? </I><p>

Well I have a job so it's couple of hours after work and more on Sundays and Saturdays (especially during the winter time:) ) <p>

 

<I>What size photo and video files will you be manipulating? </I><p>

I guess RAW files on Canon 10d are ~5.5MB? I don't know yet how large those files are when converted to .tiffs. The same goes for video editing � I haven't done it. Video editing will be performed only from time to time (after returning from traveling and putting those multiple cassettes in some nonboring, nice film).<p.

 

<I>What is your final output device? </I><p>

For video it's DVD (I might by DVD recorder from the beginning or add it later) and MiniDV cassette. I want to add the music also to the video. Photography � some storage device (DVD or CD) and printer. For large print needs (some wall hungers) I will choose photo lab. (A good advise on printers wouldn't harm either.)<p>

 

<I>Will you be sending output to 3rd parties? </I><p>

Some compressed files to friends/relatives and sometimes a big file to photo lab for large size printout. Otherwise no. No intent for publishing or something. <p>

 

<I>Is calibration and color management important to you? </I><p>

Judging by statements on discussion forums � calibration spider and software is a way to go so will see. I don't tend to by it at first but the ability to add it would be great.<p>

 

I guess I will not buy a scanner. I can scan at some other place if the need arises. <p>

 

Best,

[steven_dusk1]

MEMORY: You are not going to be dealing with files in the 100's of MB in Photoshop, so a machine that has 1GB RAM will be enough to start with, and the capability to go to 1.5 or 2GB could be useful. PS recommends that memory available be at least four times the maximum size of the file you will be manipulating. Keep in mind that XP with no programs running uses up 140MB, and once Word, Excel, a couple of browser windows and your favourite email program are running you have used up 260MB.

 

DISKS: Photoshop is much happier with its own separate physical 'scratch' disk. This should not be a partition of your operating system disk. The suggestions about using IDE RAID mirroring of two 7200rpm 120GB (or larger)disks is a good one. There is no reason nowadays to have a single disk failure create havoc. If you were spending all day on the machine I would suggest SCSI disks, but the infrastructure is very expensive - but don't believe anyone who says that you wouldn't notice the difference, the disks are twice as quick in seek speed and offer continuous data transfer up to 50 percent faster. I have two similar machines, one SCSI and one IDE, and the SCSI machine feels about 3 times faster (but it costs about 3 times as much...).

 

Processor: As others have suggested, 2.5GHz or faster Pentium IV should be fine. Currently Intel seem to be winning the processor wars, but in a year's time it will probably be AMD... Photoshop makes very good use of multiprocessor machines and those with Hyperthreading technology, so if money were no object a twin XEON motherboard would put you in Photoshop heaven.

 

Monitor: A new Trinitron or high end LCD flat panel (The trinitron is better value for money but takes up more room). A monitor with .24 or .25 dot pitch and refresh of at least 100Hz will be a lot easier on your eyes. I find that bumping resolution up past 1280x1024 actually hinders Photoshop use. A second smaller monitor could be handy for putting all of your toolbars on. Monitors degrade after a few years use, so used is not always the economical choice. As photo and video is your main hobby, don't make my mistake and suffer for years before buying a colorimeter to calibrate your screen! I thought my good quality 19" trinitron monitor that I had painstakingly adjusted and continuously tweaked using Adobe Gamma and various other visual tools would be fine - WRONG! I did have the brightness, contrast and gamma very close as it happens, but the colour saturation difference after calibration with an EYE1 was significant and can not be emulated by any amount of fiddling with screen or screencard settings.

 

Power supply: Do not underestimate the difference a good quality power supply can make. In fact most crashes are caused by voltage irregularities. Regardless of whether you are buying a DELL machine or having a custom machine built, get them to put in a bigger power supply (100w over what is recommended) and the best brand available. I used to have Windows XP crash every day and thought it was normal windows behaviour. After upgrading to an Enermax power supply I have had no crashes with XP in almost a year. Life's too short to have a computer that isn't reliable.

 

Video Card: Matrox make good cards for dual monitors. The latest 3d gaming card is not necessary and may actually be worse for your purpose.

 

Sound card: Perhaps one of the higher end Soundblaster cards would be okay. For broadcast quality video editing you may need to go for a more expensive card with better S/N ratio. I am led to believe that the published S/N numbers for most sound cards are not to be trusted.

 

Backup: DVD would probably suit you best. The only downside is that there are still competing standards for DVD writing - I don't know who will win.

 

Enjoy