initial observations using riMac for graphic design

[c.s.]

My perspective may be a little different than the enthusiasts and gamers that seem to be the most active on this forum. I use my Macs almost exclusively for graphic design, and I couldn’t be happier with the retina iMac I received today.

I’ve been using a 2012 rMBP, usually docked to the 27” LED cinema display, with all of Adobe’s apps. After reading on here, I started second guessing that I didn’t max out the processor and graphic card. I merely upgraded to a 512GB SSD and ordered my own RAM. I ordered the base rMBP in 2012 and that has served me really well. In fact, I could keep using it, but I wanted the 27” retina screen. It’s glorious. And I haven’t taxed it yet. Navigating large documents in InDesign is buttery smooth and as sharp as the printed page. The detail and experience of using Photoshop is just amazing. Sometimes I have PS files over 1 GB and it doesn’t choke. I’m only a dabbler in 3D and After Effects, which I know would benefit from the upgraded components. Mostly I just use Photoshop all day. If that’s where you’re at, the base model is more than enough.

I remember when the rMBP came out and Adobe’s apps weren’t updated and it was a fuzzy mess and stuff didn’t work. Totally different story this time. Everything works perfect. Thanks to Adobe for really turning it around the past few years. (using CC by the way)

My ONLY minor complaint is that I can sort of hear the fan. I work in almost complete silence so it’s easy to notice. It’s not bad at all, I’m just used to the rMBP sitting off to the side in complete silence. I’m already getting used it. I did try some video compression just to see if I could get the fans to rev up and I could hardly notice.

Overall, really impressed to see Apple's leadership and innovation on this.

 

[Col Vandal]

Can I ask which specs you decided to go with? I'm trying to figure out a system and my needs seems similar to yours. I do a lot of photo editing and manipulation along with some Illustrator work.

 

[c.s.]

3.5 GHz i5
R9 M290X
16 GB RAM (have 16 more on the way)
512 GB Flash storage

So I really just upgraded to 512 GB Flash storage. Hated the thought of a spinning drive in there with all the file opening & saving that I do.

 

[AppleDroid]

3.5 GHz i5
R9 M290X
16 GB RAM (have 16 more on the way)
512 GB Flash storage

So I really just upgraded to 512 GB Flash storage. Hated the thought of a spinning drive in there with all the file opening & saving that I do.

Nice. I'm still waffling on this or a 6C nMP/D300 combo (only a few hundred difference in price full spec'd) how are apps like InDesign and Illustrator? My question is that an 8.5x11 doc even on my 1920x1200 screen is small, and I have to enlarge to 150% to view anything at a reasonable size, how it is it on this machine?

 

[thedeske]

Mostly I just use Photoshop all day. If that’s where you’re at, the base model is more than enough.

You and the Lightroom crowd are THE Target Audience for this machine. Glorious still photography at full or close rez. I think the Canon Mk3 raw is just a few tics above 5k. Close enough

 

[c.s.]

Nice. I'm still waffling on this or a 6C nMP/D300 combo (only a few hundred difference in price full spec'd) how are apps like InDesign and Illustrator? My question is that an 8.5x11 doc even on my 1920x1200 screen is small, and I have to enlarge to 150% to view anything at a reasonable size, how it is it on this machine?

You're going to see 2880 pixels vertically (1440 workspace), which for me is outstanding. It's like viewing a real 100% sheet of paper at 217 ppi. There's NOTHING else available on the market with that much detail. I'd much rather have this than a 30" monitor where I can discern the individual pixels. It's closer to seeing what an actual 8.5x11 doc will look like when printed, if that makes sense.

 

[dmccombs]

Congrats to the OP. It sounds like the perfect machine for his needs.

As a photographer, I am concerned more with color accuracy, and palate than scaling the resolution. I am used to working on a high gamut monitor, so I don't know how it would work, going back to a srgb monitor.

To the OP, or others that now have the new iMac, are your prints matching your monitor?

Thanks....

 

[c.s.]

My ONLY minor complaint is that I can sort of hear the fan. I work in almost complete silence so it’s easy to notice. It’s not bad at all, I’m just used to the rMBP sitting off to the side in complete silence. I’m already getting used it. I did try some video compression just to see if I could get the fans to rev up and I could hardly notice.

I wanted to clarify after looking up the technical specs on Apple's website. It looks like my rMBP is rated at only 7 decibels when idle and the riMac is 15 decibels. So that's why I'm hearing it, just barely. I've never noticed my rMBP except under heavy load.

----------

To the OP, or others that now have the new iMac, are your prints matching your monitor?

I've always found Apple displays to be incredibly accurate. That said, I try to go by the numbers rather than fully trust the screen. My line of work doesn't necessarily require a calibrated monitor, so it's hard for me to advise. For some folks it may be better to have a MP and a monitor with more control.

 

[dagamer34]

Congrats to the OP. It sounds like the perfect machine for his needs.

As a photographer, I am concerned more with color accuracy, and palate than scaling the resolution. I am used to working on a high gamut monitor, so I don't know how it would work, going back to a srgb monitor.

To the OP, or others that now have the new iMac, are your prints matching your monitor?

Thanks....

I'd go for Mac Pro + 2x Dell UP2414Qs then. 100% Adobe RGB, and pixel density is high enough to give that "Retina" look. It'll cost more though.

 

[odedia]

You and the Lightroom crowd are THE Target Audience for this machine. Glorious still photography at full or close rez. I think the Canon Mk3 raw is just a few tics above 5k. Close enough

Nikon D800E is A LOT of tics above 5k. It's 7k .