1. Welcome to NikonCafe.com—a friendly Nikon camera & photography discussion forum!

    If you are thinking of buying a camera or need help with your photos, you will find our forum members full of advice! Click here to join for free!

from PC to Mac

Discussion in 'Apple/Mac' started by Gerald Plowman, Jun 12, 2007.

  1. My brother want to go to a Mac Book from a PC. Apple folks are telling him the Mac Book which comes with 1 gig of memory is all he needs; doesn't need 2 gigs for photo processing. Assume he will be processing RAWs; would you agree?

    2nd question. Would you tell him to buy Aperture or use Nikon Capture and a PS program like Elements?

    Thanks for any advise I can pass along.
  2. Macs like RAM. He will be happier with 2 or 3GB if the photos are large file sizes IMHO. Not that 1GB won't work, just may not be as fast as he would like.

    Aperture does a fine job IMHO.
  3. DBrim


    May 30, 2007
    Boston, MA
    I'm able to process photos fine with 1GB of RAM using a combination of iPhoto (comes free) and Photoshop CS3. I do want an upgrade, though, and will be getting one eventually.
  4. peterparker


    Jun 2, 2006
    I'd go with 2 GB and Adobe Lightroom.
  5. Gale


    Jan 26, 2005
    Viera Fl
    CS3 comes with ACR 4 for really good processing

    Don't know about the other stufff
    Prob more ram is good
  6. SP77


    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    1 GB would give a bit of breathing room, but for serious work 2 GB or more is what he'd want. I just upgraded my Mac Mini from 512 MB to 2 GB and 2 GB is fine. With a bunch of apps open including iView and DxO parallel processing two images at once it was using a peak of about 1.5-1.6 GB and I could still switch between apps without a problem. With only 1 GB more would have had to get dumped to the swap file and it might have gotten a bit choppy. With only 512 MB, DxO took everything and the computer was useless for anything else while it was running.

    I use iView for sorting images, DxO for post processing, and GIMP (free) as a Photoshop program when I need to do specific things. I'd like to try Lightroom but haven't had the time.

    Edit: I'm also a recent PC convert. :biggrin: I had 512MB on an IBM Thinkpad T60 which was my last Windoze machine (ebayed to pay for the Mini) and 512MB seems to get you a lot further on Windoze than it does on Mac OS X. So I agree that Macs do seem to like RAM. Of course I wasn't doing all that I am now with photos so the same 512MB on Windows probably wouldn't have done any better.
  7. I would like to thank all the Pros in the Forum who took the time to reply. . . you provided a lot of great information. The Nikon Cafe comes through again!

    My next computer will be an Apple as well. I run 58 gigs on the HD and that is enough SW to cause any computer problems. . I just think there will be less with Apple.
  8. gadgetguy11


    Nov 16, 2005
    2GB Ram minimum, and I recommend LightRoom.
  9. I have to disagree with you here. I think that OS X seems to handle RAM much more efficiently than Windoze does. When I was using my WIN XP Pro machine with 2 GB RAM it seemed that I'd have to stop and reboot frequently while trying to edit images in CS2. When I got my G5 iMac and started editing images in CS2 in it, I was surprised at how I didn't have to stop and reboot, and unlike in my WIN XP machine I could do other things as well without the RAM choking up. Each machine had 2 GB RAM. I think part of the difference was that the WIN XP Pro machine was throttled by all the extra software I needed to have in it: virus scan, ad-aware, software firewall, etc.... Whatever, I did notice a significant improvement in the utilization of RAM in the G5 iMac as opposed to the WIN XP Pro machine.
  10. SP77


    Jun 4, 2007
    Rockville, MD
    Connie, I was talking more about just running basic apps like web, email, and very basic image management and editing (Jasc Paint Shop Pro 8). Immediately I noticed that the Mini with 512 would start choking for more RAM a lot sooner than my Windoze box did. I just looked up the specs for the video memory on the Mini and it's "80MB minimum", resulting in 432MB of available memory. I didn't realize it was that much, so that was probably the difference right there, so just ignore what I said above. My Windoze laptop had a fairly hot graphics chip in it with its own memory so it had the full 512MB available, so I'm comparing apples to oranges. :wink:
  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.