[Macadvo]

Hi all,

Being a long time Mac user and current owner of a 20 inch Rev A Core Duo iMac I have been wondering about the new Aluminium 24 inchers.

Just over a year ago I set up a photography business and now find myself using Aperture with a library of nearly 12,000 images. Needless to say it's a bit slow.

I had been waiting until I can afford a Mac Pro with a 30 inch display but the new 24 inch 2.8 C2D Extreme looks compelling.

How well will this run Aperture if I upgrade the memory to 4Gb? Is the graphics card in the new iMacs that much faster than the X1600 in my current iMac?

Help me spend my money guys!

Alistair

[rubaiyat]

Yes, buy the 24" but wait for Leopard.

[Macadvo]

Thanks for the reply rubaiyat

I'm itching to get a nice speed bump in Aperture, to me that is more exciting than waiting for Leopard.

I may well try and get to an Apple store (though the nearest is over 200 miles away) to check the performance.

Though I AM itching to get one

[Rumor]

Wait until Leopard is released and if you can, buy a Mac Pro.

[AC Rempt]

Don't listen to these guys, Alistair. If you want the 24, go for it. I also have a Rev A 20" and am seriously thinking about moving to the 24". They are great looking machines, and the increased power is always a plus. Besides, sounds like a nice road trip

[mavherzog]

Are you at 2GB of RAM on your current iMac?

[Macadvo]

I am indeed maxed out at 2Gb on both my current CD iMac and my 2.16 Ghz CD Macbook Pro and I have to say both machines leave me decidedly wanting when using Aperture.

I had started using Lightroom but as soon as the number of pictures imported got above 1000 even that started slowing down (mainly when browsing thumbs) making Aperture seem snappier

I know that OSX starts to feel great at 4Gb and if I go for the 24 inch iMac I'll be maxing the RAM out as soon as I get it, my only hesitation is around the graphics chip/card in it as after doing some reading it turns out the 2600 HD Pro isn't THAT fast despite being a DX10 class card.

Almost pulled the trigger on the 24 whilst at work last night (it's now 0935 here in the UK) but bottled out at the last minute as am really quite nervous about spending over £1000 AGAIN and possibly still feeling disappointed when using Aperture.

Positive points :
The massive 24 inch screen is excellent for photo editing
Firewire 800, both for importing photos and using my external drive(s)

Negative points:
AIO design means upgrading in the future costs more
IF I am still disappointed then I'll have to fork out another £3000+ for a Mac Pro/30 inch screen

Now I would normally ebay my current iMac to help offset the cost of the new one but I've already been made oh so acutely aware that my girlfriend needs a new computer and "oh isn't that mac thingy just gorgeous!" so I guess I'll be absorbing the whole cost of this on my own

Having just completed some wedding photos (my first wedding, what stress!) and expecting a nice cheque from the taxman I want to put this money to good use (Yes darling, I KNOW the holiday is classed as "good use") and really don't want to be let down.

So the big question is.........Am I going to be "wowed" when using Aperture with the new 24 inch iMac as compared to my current 20 inch iMac?

Thanks for your input guys, I do appreciate it.

Alistair

[Rumor]

My point from the previous post is that if you can, wait until Leopard comes out. At that time, if you can afford it, get a MacPro. It will suit you better for professional photo editing. The iMac is nice and very sleek looking, but it not a "pro" machine. It also has much more expandability.

However, this is based of the premise that you can afford it in two months.

[AC Rempt]

Ignore my earlier post. If you really want to be in a better position to upgrade in the future, then the folks telling you to go Mac Pro are right. iMacs are somewhat cheaper in the short run, but if you're running your business on these machines, then I think it's better to look at them as a long-term investment. A friend who makes his living as a graphic designer milked an old G3 tower for years via upgrades, and now he has a G5 tower he's praying he can continue to improve (the CPU upgrade picture is grim on the G5 front).

You don't have to buy an Apple display, so that's some money saved, and you won't be regretting the lack of upgrade path in a year or two.

[MindFad]

I'd go with Rumor's suggestion. Sounds like a better long term solution for ya, and Leopard isn't far off now.

[pk1]

Dear Alistair,

first of all I wish you the best for your business! Your sincere writing in your posts shows that you are now beggining to expand your business, and since I'm in the same spot I feel the same as you. I've been waiting for about a year for the new iMacs to come, but I felt rather disappointed by them.

I am also considering an 24-inch new iMac, but my domain is the web (design, development etc) where things are a bit easier, regarding my demands from a computer. In your case (photography), I think you should go for the Pro. The huge amount of Ram you can install will probably boost Aperture's performance. Plus you can easily install a second (or third, or even fourth) hard drive when the dozens thousands of photographs start filling your disks.

I know that the Mac Pro paired with an 23-inch Apple Cinema Display is way much more expensive than the 24-inch iMac, but it's a professional machine, powerful enough for your needs and will almost certainly make you feel that you got the proper computer for your business - i.e., you won't feel disappointed.

Now, if I was considering to buy a Mac Pro, I'd still had to wait more, since there are some rumors of updates to come in the Pro line incorporating the new "Penryn" chips - or so I've read in Apple rumor sites. Also, the current Cinema Displays are really quite old and there has to be some upgrade in the display line as well, in the near future.

Examining Apple's moves in the past one-two years, we first saw the move to the Intel chips. The whole line of Macs were updated to the new architecture and then got a bit improved (Core 2 Duo processors and a bit better specs). Then the company left the Mac (with minor updates) alone and focused on entering in the consumer electronics domain: the AppleTv and then the hyped iPhone. Even Leopard was put-off in order to use resources from the Mac OS department for iPhone development.

Now that they're through with this, it was time to get back on the Macs. The much anticipated new iMacs are here, and they're back on track struggling to release Leopard on time this October. So since the iMacs are new, what's left to update? The Mac Pro. And since new "power" CPUs are soon coming, it's almost sure that the updated Mac Pro will feature some of these.

One last point, is that since you're a photographer, you probably need a good display that accurately displays colors and blacks. The new iMac glossy screen is considered by many (including myself) not suitable for a professional, but rather for home use (even though the aluminum gives it a more "pro" look).

To sum up, I think that if you're serious about your business, you should considere getting a Mac Pro and a Cinema Display (or some other professional display). And since there seems to be an update on the horizon, wait some more (while saving the money!) to get the new Mac Pro (and hopefully new displays!). You'll have a professional configuration that will rock and will boost your productivity (which will in turn increase your revenue).

That's just my opinion. I wish you well in your decision and in your business as well!

P.S.: Let us know which option you chose!

[gg1234]

As mentioned, the MacPro may be your best bet but I can tell you that the difference in speed between the original 2GHz Core Duo and the 2.8 GHz Extreme is very noticeable. Launching PS CS3 "takes ages" on the older iMac (with 2 Gig of RAM) but launches in a just a couple of seconds on the 2.8 GHz machine (with 4 Gig of RAM). I tend to agree with the comments on the display but glossy hasn't bothered me in the least. I still need to calibrate the display but I have a pretty decent (and calibrated) CRT monitor for critical color work. All in all the speed of the 2.8 GHz machine is a bit more than I expected but YMMV....

[MichiganRich]

Mac Pro has no equal for professional level speed when it comes to work.

That being said, I have calibrated my new 24" iMac with a Gretag-Macbeth i1 spectrophotometer, and it is sooooo much nicer than I had anticipated. The glossiness (which I was unsure of at release) is actually a benefit... the extra boost to the contrast and saturation makes everything look SO nice. I have a calibrated 23" Cinema next to it, and the iMac is absolutely stunning. I have the 2.4 model, and it's tons faster than the G5 it replaced. The Mac Pro at work is faster (duh) but not by leaps and bounds. I think the Geekbench scores for the Mac Pros like my work machine is around 5400, my iMac gets around 3200, and the G5 was right around 1000. I have a Raptor 10k drive in the Mac Pro as a dedicated scratch disk, so that helps a lot in Pshop too.

I work in Photoshop all day as a retoucher, and I know that beauty does not equal accuracy, but this iMac is not my work machine so the beauty is much preferred.

[rubaiyat]

Do have a close critical look at the new 24" iMac especially as you are using Apperture which uses a lot of black background.

I found myself beautifully reflected in the screen.

Depending on what you see when you look in the screen will help you decide

[WhozeJohnGalt]

If you are doing graphic design and photo stuff, I'd say no. The new screen is not only annoying because of it's reflections, but it is not as accurate as the previous iMac's screen.

[Veltliner]

As a professional photographer, research the glossy screen regarding calibration, exactness of color and contrast. Google it, and also check out the older discussion to the theme. With a MacPro and a Cinema display you can't go wrong (only more expensive).

I'm in a similar situation (get a 24" iMac now - the one with the matte screen and the 7300GT GPU, or get a MacPro later with a cinema display).

[Veltliner]

PS: As you are using Aperture: get a MacPro.

But not now. The upgrade for the MacPro is long, long overdue. So you might want to wait for both Leopard and the upgraded MacPro.

Aperture is elitist in hardware demands, and only wants the best. If you get a MacPro with enough RAM/good video card, you'll just zip through your library.

I myself use Lightroom, which is much less hardware demanding.

Just check out what GPU is best. Aperture is very demanding for the GPU.

[Chongo]

unless you are getting the 2.8 Ghz 24" iMac, the 20" 2.4Ghz has all the same power and hard drive, graphics card, etc for less money

[analogika]

Originally Posted by Macadvo 

The massive 24 inch screen is excellent for photo editing

That is, unfortunately, incorrect.

The glossy screens tend to have deeper contrast and richer colours - the problem being that they're actually oversaturating. The effect is similar to using Ektachrome or Velvia film.

This is great for consumers, whom the machine is geared at. Watching a DVD or your personal photo slideshow will be more vivid and engaging due to the enhanced nuances of the imaging.

If, however, your business is based upon being able to manipulate precisely those very nuances - as it inevitably is if you're a photographer -, then you MUST have a properly calibrated "control" monitor available in addition to the iMac's glossy screen.

[Veltliner]

The problem with the glossy screen is, that it fools the calibration tool with reflections.

When colors and contrast are enhanced, you will, on Aperture, use less saturation and less contrast settings, and your photos will come out with too low a contrast and less saturation than you wanted.

I have not used a glossy Mac screen yet (and this is why I recommended in my earlier post: research it), but other people have tested it and you can find the results on the web. Result: not suitable for photo and video editing.

[bearcatrp]

I would recommend a refurished mac pro. I got a 2ghz one for 1999.00. Not the fastest of the bunch but do plan on replacing the processors when the price drops after the newer pro's come out. I have done video editing (personal) on my 24 inch iMac and my mac pro and can tell you there is a big difference in speed. Good luck on your choice.
Randy

[experimental]

I am a designer/producer who's been using G5 iMacs form the very first release, I use both Illustrator and photoshop regularily and similarily to yourself, I am very interested in a speed tweek and a real estate upgrade. I wanted the new 24 inch with Leopard. Thats what I was waiting for, an updated dream machine, because of my love for the all in one concept.
Alas ....
The reality is that the glass is too reflective to be serious, worse than my big old CRT, if I pointed it towards a window and did a dark edit, the light got in the way. To my bemusement, the apple logo continuously jumps out at me, its way too heavy a contrast. I consider myself lucky that I have been pushed to consider the Mac Pro, the files open and write so fast, so very much faster, especially detailed Ai files. This is after using my 2 year old 2.1Ghz 20 inch model iMac. There is no competition, save up a bit more and the upgrade will be properly complete with a blazing G5 Tower. Or wait a year and see if they go back to a more professional looking iMac.

[CheesePuff]

Does anyone know of a site that benchmarks the 2.8 GHz processor with the standard 2.4 GHz? MacConnection actually sells the brand new 24" 2.8 GHz model for $1999, with free shipping and no tax for U.S. customers (so $50 less, and sans tax compared to through Apple) and am wondering if it's really worth the extra $200.

[mduell]

3 Aluminum iMacs versus Other Macs

iMac Aluminum versus Others -After Effects and Photoshop

iMac Aluminum versus Others - Cinebench 10 and Motion 3

[Chongo]

Originally Posted by mduell 

3 Aluminum iMacs versus Other Macs

iMac Aluminum versus Others -After Effects and Photoshop

iMac Aluminum versus Others - Cinebench 10 and Motion 3

looks like it there is not too much difference between the 2.4 20" and the 2.8 24"

[mduell]

For non-gaming benchmarks, the difference in performance is approximately proportional to the CPU speed difference (17%).

[analogika]

Originally Posted by mduell 

For non-gaming benchmarks, the difference in performance is approximately proportional to the CPU speed difference (17%).

Unless you're heavily number-crunching for hours on end in an environment where time is money, that difference is pretty much irrelevant at this point.

A 1.83 GHz Core Duo is well fast enough for the casual user.

[Gee4orce]

Don't forget you can always run a cinema (or other) display off the iMac, thus giving you a screen that you can use for your absolutely colour critical work.

[alangreenwell]

I have to admit that I had the same kind of issue. I was about to buy a Mac Pro, and upgrade it to 4G when the iMac 2.8G came out. I spent a couple of days going through the pros and cons and ended up with the iMac.

I have like you well over 10,000 photos. I have been using Lightroom for my workflow (as it is a little less resource hungry than Aperture).

I have to say that I also already had a 23" ACD that I was using with a PC part of the time and the rest of the time plugged into my Macbook Pro.

So now I have the iMac 2.8 with the ACD and I have to say I could not be happier. The machine is very snappy, the graphics card does what it should and I cannot believe that the Mac Pro would be any better. A major bonus to me was that I got rid of two Windows machines and I now have a very tidy desk.

Hope some of this help.

PS. I also use an external FW800 Lacie drive for archiving DNG to on import and an iomega network drive for backup.

[mduell]

Does it bother you looking back and forth between the glossy and matte screens?

[pk1]

Well, if you already have an external display then it's ok, I wouldn't mind for the built-in glossy screen. But the whole point of getting an iMac instead of a Mac Pro is that 1) it's cheaper, and 2) it takes up less space in your office, since it's an all-in-one solution.

If I was to buy an ACD anyways, then I wouldn't mind giving a couple of hundred euros more for a Mac Pro. I wish the iMac display was good enough, so I could save the money for the external monitor, and a get a not so pricey all-in-one desktop solution.

To be honest, even though there have been complains about the new iMac regarding other issues (i.e. same specs, worst graphics card etc), the only reason I'm still thinking about it is the screen...

[Macadvo]

Firstly, thank you to you all for your informative and helpful replies.

I have to say I've bitten the bullet and bought a Mac Pro. It was about £1500 more than I wanted to spend but I had a little help from Mr Visa :s

Went to the Apple store in the Trafford Centre and checked out the 24 inch iMac and a Mac Pro and it really was a no contest decision. As much as I've always admired the glossy displays I just couldn't have lived with it.

Here's what I ended up buying.

Mac Pro Quad 2.66Ghz
1Gb memory (to be upped to 5 soon)
ATi Radeon X1900XT AND
nVidia 7300GT
250Gb HDD
Airport Extreme with Bluetooth
23 inch Apple Cinema Display (with a second to be added next year, it's gorgeous!)
Applecare
JBL Spot speakers

When I told the store I wanted the X1900XT they were happy to fir both it and the wireless/bluetooth for me at no extra charge. They did however leave the 7300GT in slot one and put the X1900XT in another slot. I may swap them around later. Will the Mac Pro be ok running these two different vendors cards together? I'm powering the ACD from the X1900XT and a HDTV through VGA (1360x768) from the 7300GT, that ok?

Thanks again everyone

Alistair

[Macadvo]

OK so I've just done some googling on graphics card setups in OSX with the Mac Pro and discovered that the Apple Store had the 7300GT in slot one and the Radeon in slot 3.

I've just changed them around and now have the Radeon in slot 1 at 16x and the 7300 GT in slot 4 at 8x and just can't believe the difference in Aperture. Changing from windowed to full screen happens almost instantly, as does zooming/unzooming. Can't believe the Apple Store didn't know how to best take advantage of these cards lol

[pk1]

Alistair,

congratulations on your new gorgeous machine! I wish you the best in your business, and may your new Mac Pro increase your revenue by orders of magnitude of what you invested in it

[AC Rempt]

I'm glad you ended up with a machine you'll be totally happy with owning. That's what matters.

[Macadvo]

Thanks guys,

What a friendly place the nn forums are, makes me proud to be a Mac owner!

Alistair

[Chinasaur]

Wow (Envy)

You have a behemoth there

Enjoy!