I use a Dual 2.0 G5 PM with 2.5 gigs of ram. I'm pleased with the performance in Photoshop CS2.
I want a better video card, so I can play around with Aperture.
I want a better video card, so I can play around with Aperture.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Computer Setup for Photography.
- Thread starter Dark
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
Mike Teezie said:
Does CS2 offer better performance than CS1? I'm thinking about getting CS2 student edition.
CrackedButter said:
In my opinion, although not heavily different in terms of "features", CS2 is one of the most significant improvements PS has seen in a long time. CS2 is a fantastic, robust app, and it fixed a lot of the buggy annoyances that plagued CS1 (uses dual processor setups more efficiently, uses RAM more efficiently, increased redraw times, better 16-but support, handles fonts MUCH better, etc).
In addition to the stability aspects, CS2 has added some LONG overdue changes to the layers palette that are wonderful. You can work with layers just as any file in the OS. Instead of "linking" layers, you can now merely Cmd+Click or Shift+Click on layers to select more than one at a time. When you have multiple layers selected, just hit Cmd+G and bam, they're grouped in a folder. And there's tons more where that came from. HUGE usability improvements in my opinion.
clintob said:
Okay thanks for your input on that. I should really check out a review online as well.
http://www.macupdate.com/reviews.php?id=13553 - this review is funny but also disheartening. I think I will try it out on the PPC macs at uni first. I know it already sucks on the intel iMacs under emulation.
I think I will wait for CS3.
Dark said:
Your G5 iMac is probably fairly comparable to my 1st Generation PowerMac (2003: 1.8GHz SP, with 1.5GB RAM).
I'm using Photoshop CS2 (I skipped CS1) and in general, I've been simply using iPhoto (with only JPEGs) instead of the more resource-intensive apps (Aperture, Adobe Bridge, Lightroom). Once I narrow down which particual composition/exposure I want, I then manually import the RAW version into CS2 to work on. For revision control, I've been loading everything in its own directory as per my structure, then directing iPhoto to import them into its. This does increase storage needs, but I only import JPEG's into iPhoto, so its not really bad.
In broadest terms, I don't really have any system performance problems, but I probably am unconciously working around some of them: I tend to shut down a lot of background stuff to make sure that my CPU is as free as possible. For example, shut down iTunes.
When I do hit a performance wall, it usually seems to be more related to disk access on an open/close more than needing the CPU to apply an effect. As such, I'd probably look to installing a Firewire-800 RAID to speed this part of the system up before adding more RAM.
FWIW, I don't think that my G5 meets minimum specs for Aperture (video card), so I've not bought it. I do have Bridge & Lightroom and have worked a little with Bridge, so as to do batch renaming work. I found it to be an incredibly slow "takes hours and hours" chore when working with long (thousands) file lists. My basic solution here was to avoid using Bridge except for when I must (file renames) and then breaking it down into smaller batches (just 100-200 files at a time). To a certain degree, this "too big to swallow" problem was an artifact of going on a long vacation and coming back with a huge amount of work.
For my next system, I'm inclined to go with a Mac Pro (tower) with an Aperature-recommended video card, but will probably wait until Adobe ships CS3.
-hh
peas said:
What is your experience with Eizo Displays and can you comment on the s2410w specifically? What are your thought about the stand/base for adjusting? What ever you can tell me would help.
Thanks
Rickay726 said:its a shame imac g5's only hold 2.5 gb ram.
as for the kid with the amazing macpro setup, i cant bring my self to figure out how you dont like it? i would die for a computer like that.
as for my iMac i only have 512 ram and run lightroom and CS2 on it sure it lags, buy my 2gb ram is on the way
Only rev. C iMacs G5 could hold 2.5 gigs of RAM (0.5 + 2 GB sticks). The original poster has rev. B iMac G5 (as do I). Revisions A and B only support 2 gigs (1 + 1 GB sticks)
Anyway, I also find Aperture extremely slow on my iMac (which is same as yours, except for smaller HD and monitor). But I find Photoshop to run fine on it for my needs (Web graphics and Lens Correction filter).
I think you should get a 2.66 GHz Mac Pro with at least 2 gigs of RAM. Dont bother with new 4-core Intel processors, it will use the same bus, so performance increase might not be as high as 2x, even if you find a way to unilize all four cores in the current Mac Pros
I have an intel imac with 1.5 GB ram and it runs CS2 ok. The extra gig made a huge difference. I can't wait until CS3 comes out.
Unless your TV is 1920 X 1080, I wouldnt bother, Most of them are 1366 X 768 which is fine for watching TV, but using as a monitor just is't good enough.
I have a 2.6Ghz with X1900, photography is a hobby, the computer runs great, sure photoshop isn't the best, but nothing that more RAM, and UB couldn't fix.
Lag with widgets, well maybe if I'm running dreamweaver, PS, Mail, Safari,etc,etc, again nothing that RAM and UB cant fix, and when tiger is released with true 64bit capability...
Expensive Machine, yes, but you get a fast computer now, which should outlast a new iMac, IMO