Post Processing...PC vs. Apple, Photoshop vs. Aperture...???

[canon23]

I know this is probably not the most appropriate place to post it, but since "EOS Bodies" have the most posts/visits, I figured I would get the most feed backs here.

I'm considering to upgrade my computer but have come to a standstill.

I'm still debating on whether to stay with PC and upgrading it to a newer and more power one or switching to Apple, iMac. I have no experience or working knowledge of post processing, Photoshop, Lightroom, or Aperture.

Also, should I go with Adobe Photoshop, Lightroom, or Aperture?

All these equipment is mainly for post processing my photos.

Please help. Thanks.

 

[smithy]

If you want to do basic post processing of your digital photos, Aperture (Mac only) or Lightroom (both platforms) will suffice.

For significantly more advanced editing and drawing, Photoshop is the way to go.

The PC/Mac decision is up to you. I use both (I've been bi-platform since 2005). I'm typing this on a Macbook Pro, which I use primarily for web browsing and email, but for post processing I use a Windows 7 desktop PC. I like my PC for advanced work because it's upgradable. I can upgrade the graphics card if I need more power in this area (which I recently did). I can replace the CPU or hard drive or motherboard if I need to improve the performance from any of these components, which I also have done. All for the fraction of the price of a new computer.

With a Mac, you get a complete (and usually refined) all-in-one package. But if you need more performance from it you'll have to get your credit card out and buy a new one.

The other big difference between Mac and PCs is the operating system. A Mac comes with OS X (10.7 currently). PCs usually come with Windows 7. There are a number of differences between the two systems, but to be honest I don't even notice when I switch between them anymore. Nor does my wife (who is not interested in computers in the slightest). They have different strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately achieve the same thing. One thing to note though, is that there are significantly more programs available for Windows than there are for OS X, and when Apple release new versions of OS X, you often need to purchase new versions of your software to make them compatible. Microsoft provide far better backward-compatibility with older software (something which almost holds them back). On the other hand, Aperture is only available for OS X...

 

[briansquibb]

Have you considered using DPP (free) and Photoshop Elements (cheap).

The two together make a very good team and are very fast.

 

[VirtualRain]

If you haven't tried a Mac, I highly encourage you to at least check it out at your local Apple store or wherever you can get your hands on one. After using Windows for nearly 20 years, i found the Mac to be a breath of fresh air... the platform is just much more refined than Windows. Simple things like the touch pad and gesture capabilities on a Mac laptop are just night and day better compared to the limited postage stamp touch pad on most Windows laptops. Same goes for displays... I could go on and on.

Then for photo library management and RAW processing, I suggest you trial both Lightroom and Aperture to see which one you like better. I use Aperture and it doesn't leave me wanting much except better noise reduction adjustments which I've picked up in a plugin (Nik Dfine).

 

[3kramd5]

I use an OSX machine (mac book pro) and a Windows machine (home brew).

They do the same thing.

Some things about OSX bug me. Some things about Windows bug me.

If you run multi platform, Lightroom > Aperture since you can go between machines. If you don't, Aperture offers managed libraries, but Lightroom has arguably better development tools.

I'm 99% LR. Only dip into photoshop on rare occasions.

 

[revup67]

I am sure I'll get some hate mail for this but here goes: PC/Mac is personal preference but since you are sequestering opinions they both have their pluses and minus. A few things I despise about Apple is that they charge retail list on everything as there's no competition such as with PC's (Windows), you can choose Dell, HP, ASUS, Sony and list goes on or even build your own like I did. More competition means better prices means more savings and more diversity. I also don't care for Macs as you have to do everything Apple's way - they remind me of AOL where you are led like cattle through a corral. I hear all the time my Mac's never break. Not true - they all use the same manufacturer's for hard drives, motherboards, power supplies, etc - It's the outer shell you are paying for with Apple.

More frightening is this link on a recent virus outbreak (april 2012) of the Mac: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/widespread-computer-virus-indicates-mac-users-no-longer-safe/

Pay careful attention to the paragraph that begins with: "This is hardly the first time Mac users have been hit by a Windows-style computer virus. Last year, security researchers discovered that a piece of malware, called Mac Defender, had targeted Apple machines. Intego, a security firm, discovered Mac Defender on May 2, 2011. It took Apple until May 31, 2011, to issue a fix."

That's almost 30 days to respond to a virus outbreak while they sat there with their fingers up their you know what's. Pathetic and a somewhat of a laissez-faire attitude. Shame on Apple. That would not happen on a PC.

Sure PC's have more than there share of infections but a resolution may take a few hours not 30 days. F-secure anti virus guarantees to have a patch within 4 hours or less as one example.

Lastly, the old adage about Macs having better graphics is nonsense. That was true back in 1991 with Windows 3.1 vs. what the Mac had to offer. Take a look at any high end graphics/gaming card for a PC - they have come a long way and both sides are equally as good.

PC's have dropped a few bombs along the way but have cleaned up since. Win ME and Windows Vista - both were rubbish though I don't think you'll be looking at any of these. If you choose a PC get a Win 7 64 bit which can make use of up to 192 gig of RAM or you may want to wait for Windows 8 due out in the fall. Anyway hope this helps in your decision making.

 

[briansquibb]

I am sure I'll get some hate mail for this but here goes: PC/Mac is personal preference but since you are sequestering opinions they both have their pluses and minus. A few things I despise about Apple is that they charge retail list on everything as there's no competition such as with PC's (Windows), you can choose Dell, HP, ASUS, Sony and list goes on or even build your own like I did. More competition means better prices means more savings and more diversity. I also don't care for Macs as you have to do everything Apple's way - they remind me of AOL where you are led like cattle through a corral. I hear all the time my Mac's never break. Not true - they all use the same manufacturer's for hard drives, motherboards, power supplies, etc - It's the outer shell you are paying for with Apple.

More frightening is this link on a recent virus outbreak (april 2012) of the Mac: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/widespread-computer-virus-indicates-mac-users-no-longer-safe/

Pay careful attention to the paragraph that begins with: "This is hardly the first time Mac users have been hit by a Windows-style computer virus. Last year, security researchers discovered that a piece of malware, called Mac Defender, had targeted Apple machines. Intego, a security firm, discovered Mac Defender on May 2, 2011. It took Apple until May 31, 2011, to issue a fix."

That's almost 30 days to respond to a virus outbreak while they sat there with their fingers up their you know what's. Pathetic and a somewhat of a laissez-faire attitude. Shame on Apple. That would not happen on a PC.

Sure PC's have more than there share of infections but a resolution may take a few hours not 30 days. F-secure anti virus guarantees to have a patch within 4 hours or less as one example.

Lastly, the old adage about Macs having better graphics is nonsense. That was true back in 1991 with Windows 3.1 vs. what the Mac had to offer. Take a look at any high end graphics/gaming card for a PC - they have come a long way and both sides are equally as good.

PC's have dropped a few bombs along the way but have cleaned up since. Win ME and Windows Vista - both were rubbish though I don't think you'll be looking at any of these. If you choose a PC get a Win 7 64 bit which can make use of up to 192 gig of RAM or you may want to wait for Windows 8 due out in the fall. Anyway hope this helps in your decision making.

I am on a NDA for windows 8 - I am not unhappy with it

 

[Tcapp]

PC. Better performance for the $, more efficient user interface for a power user. Apple does make a beautiful display though, which is totally worth checking out. But they are glossy, which i personally like in some situations, but I have the dell ultrasharp 30" monitor. Its a matte screen to reduce reflections, and has double the resolution as a 1080p display. It also comes factory calibrated to sRGB. Not perfectly calibrated, but a great ballpark starting place. Try building your own PC on a site like magicmicro.com I built mine for just under $1000 and i have 16gb of ram, and overclocked sandybridge i7 processor, and enough fans to keep everything super cool. I have an awesome graphics card in there too. You can't beat the bang for the buck!

Lightroom for many images, photoshop for few.

Have fun!

 

[ianmacd]

I can replace the CPU or hard drive or motherboard if I need to improve the performance from any of these components, which I also have done. All for the fraction of the price of a new computer.

With a Mac, you get a complete (and usually refined) all-in-one package. But if you need more performance from it you'll have to get your credit card out and buy a new one.
The other big difference between Mac and PCs is the operating system. A Mac comes with OS X (10.7 currently). PCs usually come with Windows 7. There are a number of differences between the two systems, but to be honest I don't even notice when I switch between them anymore. Nor does my wife (who is not interested in computers in the slightest). They have different strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately achieve the same thing. One thing to note though, is that there are significantly more programs available for Windows than there are for OS X, and when Apple release new versions of OS X, you often need to purchase new versions of your software to make them compatible. Microsoft provide far better backward-compatibility with older software (something which almost holds them back). On the other hand, Aperture is only available for OS X...

My Mac is upgradable and I have. Its a Mac Pro. Its had new GFX card and an SSD boot disk to complement the existing 4 drives internally. How is that not exandable? CPU's can be swapped out for newer compatable ones too.

All intel macs can have memory and hard disks swapped out both which will improve performance.

As for the comment about backward compatability, where did that come from? Apple have only just stopped supplying rosetta to run powerpc only apps and they stopped selling powerpc based macs in 2006. You don't have to buy them (unlike with windows and office which did require a specific version of office for vista) but you won't get all the latest features with the old versions. Worth keeping in mind too that the cost of apps on the mac tends to be less (including OS X itself) and they are easly installed and maintained if available though the app store.

 

[ianmacd]

I am sure I'll get some hate mail for this but here goes: PC/Mac is personal preference but since you are sequestering opinions they both have their pluses and minus. A few things I despise about Apple is that they charge retail list on everything as there's no competition such as with PC's (Windows), you can choose Dell, HP, ASUS, Sony and list goes on or even build your own like I did. More competition means better prices means more savings and more diversity. I also don't care for Macs as you have to do everything Apple's way - they remind me of AOL where you are led like cattle through a corral. I hear all the time my Mac's never break. Not true - they all use the same manufacturer's for hard drives, motherboards, power supplies, etc - It's the outer shell you are paying for with Apple.

More frightening is this link on a recent virus outbreak (april 2012) of the Mac: http://bits.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/04/06/widespread-computer-virus-indicates-mac-users-no-longer-safe/

Pay careful attention to the paragraph that begins with: "This is hardly the first time Mac users have been hit by a Windows-style computer virus. Last year, security researchers discovered that a piece of malware, called Mac Defender, had targeted Apple machines. Intego, a security firm, discovered Mac Defender on May 2, 2011. It took Apple until May 31, 2011, to issue a fix."

That's almost 30 days to respond to a virus outbreak while they sat there with their fingers up their you know what's. Pathetic and a somewhat of a laissez-faire attitude. Shame on Apple. That would not happen on a PC.

Sure PC's have more than there share of infections but a resolution may take a few hours not 30 days. F-secure anti virus guarantees to have a patch within 4 hours or less as one example.

Lastly, the old adage about Macs having better graphics is nonsense. That was true back in 1991 with Windows 3.1 vs. what the Mac had to offer. Take a look at any high end graphics/gaming card for a PC - they have come a long way and both sides are equally as good.

PC's have dropped a few bombs along the way but have cleaned up since. Win ME and Windows Vista - both were rubbish though I don't think you'll be looking at any of these. If you choose a PC get a Win 7 64 bit which can make use of up to 192 gig of RAM or you may want to wait for Windows 8 due out in the fall. Anyway hope this helps in your decision making.

You are mixing OS level patching with virus defenition updates. Apples responsivness to patching is far superior to microsoft. You also need to appreciate the development and testing cycles needed for updates like these. Microsoft know only too well how lack of testing can backfire as when they released sp6 for nt4 it broke TCP for non admin apps.

Im sure Intego's own VirusBarrier along with Norton, McAfee, F-Secure and sophos had these covered off quickly but people don't seem to use virus scanners on mac's. This is probably because there are relativly few around compared to the 1000's on the windows platform. You tend to even get virus scanners included with new pc's these days such is the issue in the pc world.

 

[smithy]

I can replace the CPU or hard drive or motherboard if I need to improve the performance from any of these components, which I also have done. All for the fraction of the price of a new computer.

With a Mac, you get a complete (and usually refined) all-in-one package. But if you need more performance from it you'll have to get your credit card out and buy a new one.
The other big difference between Mac and PCs is the operating system. A Mac comes with OS X (10.7 currently). PCs usually come with Windows 7. There are a number of differences between the two systems, but to be honest I don't even notice when I switch between them anymore. Nor does my wife (who is not interested in computers in the slightest). They have different strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately achieve the same thing. One thing to note though, is that there are significantly more programs available for Windows than there are for OS X, and when Apple release new versions of OS X, you often need to purchase new versions of your software to make them compatible. Microsoft provide far better backward-compatibility with older software (something which almost holds them back). On the other hand, Aperture is only available for OS X...

My Mac is upgradable and I have. Its a Mac Pro. Its had new GFX card and an SSD boot disk to complement the existing 4 drives internally. How is that not exandable? CPU's can be swapped out for newer compatable ones too.

All intel macs can have memory and hard disks swapped out both which will improve performance.

As for the comment about backward compatability, where did that come from? Apple have only just stopped supplying rosetta to run powerpc only apps and they stopped selling powerpc based macs in 2006. You don't have to buy them (unlike with windows and office which did require a specific version of office for vista) but you won't get all the latest features with the old versions. Worth keeping in mind too that the cost of apps on the mac tends to be less (including OS X itself) and they are easly installed and maintained if available though the app store.

The OP is contemplating an iMac. If you're telling me he can easily upgrade his motherboard, CPU and graphics card in that computer, I will happily acknowledge an error on my part.

 

[ianmacd]

I can replace the CPU or hard drive or motherboard if I need to improve the performance from any of these components, which I also have done. All for the fraction of the price of a new computer.

With a Mac, you get a complete (and usually refined) all-in-one package. But if you need more performance from it you'll have to get your credit card out and buy a new one.
The other big difference between Mac and PCs is the operating system. A Mac comes with OS X (10.7 currently). PCs usually come with Windows 7. There are a number of differences between the two systems, but to be honest I don't even notice when I switch between them anymore. Nor does my wife (who is not interested in computers in the slightest). They have different strengths and weaknesses, but ultimately achieve the same thing. One thing to note though, is that there are significantly more programs available for Windows than there are for OS X, and when Apple release new versions of OS X, you often need to purchase new versions of your software to make them compatible. Microsoft provide far better backward-compatibility with older software (something which almost holds them back). On the other hand, Aperture is only available for OS X...

My Mac is upgradable and I have. Its a Mac Pro. Its had new GFX card and an SSD boot disk to complement the existing 4 drives internally. How is that not exandable? CPU's can be swapped out for newer compatable ones too.

All intel macs can have memory and hard disks swapped out both which will improve performance.

As for the comment about backward compatability, where did that come from? Apple have only just stopped supplying rosetta to run powerpc only apps and they stopped selling powerpc based macs in 2006. You don't have to buy them (unlike with windows and office which did require a specific version of office for vista) but you won't get all the latest features with the old versions. Worth keeping in mind too that the cost of apps on the mac tends to be less (including OS X itself) and they are easly installed and maintained if available though the app store.

The OP is contemplating an iMac. If you're telling me he can easily upgrade his motherboard, CPU and graphics card in that computer, I will happily acknowledge an error on my part.

Not sure how I could tell you that when I am unaware of the OP's level of compitence at upgrading iMacs or skills with Electrical, electronic or mechanical engineering in general but you generalised on Macs so what you said is not true. Any Mac could have its logic board replaced, if its in the skillset of the majority of people is a different question.

Also, its a mistake is believing the only way to increase performance in any computer is to replace the main board. Memory and disk will often make the most difference to a system speed as modern computers do not tend to suffer slowdown from CPU bound processess. Maxing memory and using SSD's can make a slow machine perform the majority of tasks quicker. Granted you may have issues renering prores to h.264 video files on a 'lower spec' cpu but most things in a workflow are moving data so the bigger memory (so less swapping) and faster IO to storage often yealds the most noticable increase in performance from the users perspective.

 

[smithy]

The OP is contemplating an iMac. If you're telling me he can easily upgrade his motherboard, CPU and graphics card in that computer, I will happily acknowledge an error on my part.

Not sure how I could tell you that when I am unaware of the OP's level of compitence at upgrading iMacs or skills with Electrical, electronic or mechanical engineering in general but you generalised on Macs so what you said is not true. Any Mac could have its logic board replaced, if its in the skillset of the majority of people is a different question.

After more than twenty years of working in the IT industry with eager PC and Mac fanboys, I know how to tell when a conversation is not going to go anywhere.

I'm here for the photography, so I'll leave you to it. Good luck with your next upgrade.

 

[RLPhoto]

Mac or PC, Doesnt Matter To Me.

I still process 18MP Raw files and huge PSD's with my modest E6600 2.4ghz First Gen, Core 2 Duo System I built in 2009! I Still use Windows XP Pro 32-bit, only 4GB of ram, and a Nvidia 8800 GTS. Never had a BSOD and my system has never bogged down from its original install.

The key is not bogging your system down with crap that you'll never use! I only have a few programs installed that I use and not one more that I dont.

Im sure if I had a D800, My system could still handle any 36mp RAW files with ease. I just don't get all the hype for Macintosh's with the insane prices they demand for them, and if id like, i could install windows 7 and 4gb or more RAM for Little $$$.

 

[keithfullermusic]

Mac or PC, Doesnt Matter To Me.

I still process 18MP Raw files and huge PSD's with my modest E6600 2.4ghz First Gen, Core 2 Duo System I built in 2009! I Still use Windows XP Pro 32-bit, only 4GB of ram, and a Nvidia 8800 GTS. Never had a BSOD and my system has never bogged down from its original install.

The key is not bogging your system down with crap that you'll never use! I only have a few programs installed that I use and not one more that I dont.

Im sure if I had a D800, My system could still handle any 36mp RAW files with ease. I just don't get all the hype for Macintosh's with the insane prices they demand for them, and if id like, i could install windows 7 and 4gb or more RAM for Little $$$.

You get what you pay for. It's true with pretty much everything, and that includes cameras and computers.