How good is the eMac for Photoshop?

Discussion in 'Macintosh Computers' started by Willy S, Jun 13, 2005.

  1. Willy S macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #1
    I would like to know if anybody has experience with eMac in graphics work? I´m considering it vs Mini+ CRT/LCD and at this moment I don´t have a clue what I should buy for photoshoping.
     
  2. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #2
    Well, the eMac has the better graphics card, bigger hard drive, and more expandability, and most graphic designers prefer CRTs over LCDs. So I'd say the eMac.
     
  3. zach macrumors 65816

    zach

    Joined:
    Feb 14, 2003
    Location:
    Medford
    #3
    That's definitely not true anymore. A LOT of graphic designers like LCDs now.

    Regardless, wordmunger is right, the eMac is the better choice. Of course, anything will run photoshop to a degree: I used photoshop on my 700 MHz G3 iBook with 384 megs of ram for 2 1/2 years.
     
  4. dops7107 macrumors 6502a

    dops7107

    Joined:
    Mar 19, 2005
    Location:
    Perth, Oztrailya
    #4
    I have a Mac Mini (1.25 Ghz) at home and a new eMac (1.42 Ghz) at work. Both run Photoshop adequately for my needs - 1 gig RAM makes it smooth. The eMac is marginally faster I reckon. Then again, Mac Mini = sexier and more choice with monitors and resolutions.
     
  5. Willy S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #5
    I think I´ll go for the eMac since Mini wasn´t updated. I´m not entirely happy with the eMac´s resolution. 1024x768@100Hz...
     
  6. wordmunger macrumors 603

    wordmunger

    Joined:
    Sep 3, 2003
    Location:
    North Carolina
    #6
    I'd suggest using the screen spanning hack to hook up a small monitor. You can use the small monitor for palettes and the eMac's native monitor for your images.
     
  7. Willy S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #7
    Not a bad idea! Thanks. :D
     
  8. Maxiseller macrumors 6502a

    Maxiseller

    Joined:
    Jan 11, 2005
    Location:
    Little grey, chilly island.
    #8
    Plus, new emacs work at a resolution of 1280*960

    I use Photoshop quite a bit, and I have to say it's very, very responsive, no problems at all.
     
  9. Willy S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #9
    Do you feel any flicker at that refresh rate or is it very usable?
     
  10. thedude110 macrumors 68020

    thedude110

    Joined:
    Jun 13, 2005
    #10
    I work at a small college -- we have a lab full of (theft-proof!) emacs that students use for Photoshop on a consistent basis. Students concerned with speed have been content, art students haven't complained about resolution (which is not to say everyone is satisfied -- just that no one is dissatisfied enough to complain). Emacs are obviously not optimized Photoshop systems, but porbably better than the underwhelming hard drive on the Mini ...
     
  11. neoelectronaut macrumors 68020

    neoelectronaut

    Joined:
    Dec 3, 2003
    Location:
    Southeastern Louisiana
    #11
    I use my late-'03 (Specs in sig) Mac for Photoshop all the time.

    You really gotta think of it like this:

    Current eMacs are more or less all-in-one versions of Powermac G4s from a few years back, except for 1 less processor and possibly less cache, I'm not sure on the technical stuff.

    If you feel that you could easily do Photoshop work on a 1.25Ghz G4 PM...then you can do it on an eMac.
     
  12. Willy S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #12
    I think the eMac is powerful enough for Photoshop, especially for me because I only work with max 10MB photos. It´s just the monitor that I´m not sure of.
     
  13. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #13
    I think you'd be better off with a Mac mini so you can choose your own screen (Get one with more than 1024x768 resolution. A Dell 20'' LCD screen would be a good choice for you if you can afford it. It is $599 usually, but if you look around you can find sometimes find specials on it. If you can't afford that much, a Dell 17'' isn't a bad display and it is $263. Stay away from 19'' screens). Also, make sure you get at least 512mb of RAM.
     
  14. Willy S thread starter macrumors 6502

    Joined:
    May 8, 2005
    #14
    Thanks!

    Just if Apple would just update the Mini. :rolleyes:

    BTW, why do you suggest to avoid the 19" and rather pick a 17" LCD? My knowledge on LCDs is very limited.
     
  15. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #15
    19'' screens almost always use the same resolution as 17'' screens, which means everything will appear bigger, but you won't be able to fit any more stuff on the screen.
     
  16. zakatov macrumors 6502a

    zakatov

    Joined:
    Mar 8, 2005
    Location:
    South Florida
    #16
    true, I got a 19in Dell LCD with 1280x1024 res, which is standard on 17in models as well. Quality, however, will probably be higher on the (more expensive) 19in model (it is for the Dell lineup).
     
  17. Chaszmyr macrumors 601

    Chaszmyr

    Joined:
    Aug 9, 2002
    #17
    Depends on what you consider higher quality. Color and contrast may be better, but pixel density is lower and therefore images aren't as sharp.
     

Share This Page