BetterPhoto Q&A
Category: New Answers

Photography Question 

Carl W. Warren
 

new computer for home photgraphy


my computer is about to die so, I need suggtion on what would be needed for home based computers? just would need to have some idea what would be in a moderate price range. still shoot film but i'm able to scan. carl warren


To love this question, log in above
December 08, 2006

 

W.
  http://www.apple.com/imac/


To love this comment, log in above
December 08, 2006

 

John P. Sandstedt
  Get a laptop [$500-800]with a replicator. You'll be able to use your current monitor, mouse and keyboard. You'll have full desktop capability.

The point is, you'll also have a laptop to take with you on trips, vacations, etc. You can download your digital pictures to the laptop and view them on a real screen, while you're enjoying a glass of wine.


To love this comment, log in above
December 09, 2006

 

Carl W. Warren
  thanks john, do you prefer a certain brand of laptop? thanks for the help .
onward to check out your gallery
carl warren


To love this comment, log in above
December 09, 2006

 

John P. Sandstedt
  I have a Dell [from work.] I've used Toshibas. MAC's are very expensive in comparison to what's available in Windows based hardware.

Elements 4.0 just came out in MAC; I'm not certain whether 5.0 is available yet for MAC. CS2, of course, is available for MAC.

If you're scanning, you're probably using Windows. I'd stay there.

Just make sure that, if you get some Windows based, that you have Windows XP or Windows Vista [the new operating system,] minimum 1 GIG RAM and minimum 40 GIG hard drive. Ethernet card, CD-DVD reader/writer. It doesn't matter whether it has an Intel or AMD chip, just get the fastest you can afford.


To love this comment, log in above
December 09, 2006

 

Carl W. Warren
 
 
 
thanks john have a great day
carl warren


To love this comment, log in above
December 09, 2006

 

Brendan Knell
  "It doesn't matter whether it has an Intel or AMD chip"

Just my two cents on this. Personally I don't like AMD. A few years ago, I bought an AMD Athlon XP 2500+ chip. It does not run stable at 2500+, so I have to underclock it to 1900+ for it to run stable. In English, this means that it will not run at the speed I bought it at, and I have to run it slower than what it should. I do not know if this is normal(I doubt it), but I will not buy another AMD because of this.

On the Macs, I've heard that they're really good. We are hoping to get a Mini or IMac for Christmas. From what I've heard, Macs aren't that much harder to use than Windows, it's just they're different. So if you are not computer savvy, sticking with what you know would probably be best.


To love this comment, log in above
December 09, 2006

 

John P. Sandstedt
  When I had my computer built for me, the Tech indicated he could install an AMD 2600 for much less than a Pentium.

I wanted fast - so I had him install the 3200 series, at the time the fastest 16-bit chip AMD had available. Never had a chip issue.

Check the prices in a Compusa flyer and I think oyu'll find, consistently, that AMD equpped computers are cheaper than Intel equipped units. And, you can check speed equivalency on the AMD web site, for sure.

Generally, the major problem with Windows based laptops is the fact that they include features that, routinely, have been available on desktops for some period of time. This may not be true today, especially as we're seeing specials chip especially for laptops [Intel's Centrino comes to mind.]

I've found that, when working with images files, one wants a lot of RAM. The same Tech told me that Windows XP maxed at 1.3 GIG of RAM, so that's why I got 1 GIG. Windows Media and, Windows Vista probaly can handle 2 GIG w/o problem.

Chip speed is next most important. The faster the better.


To love this comment, log in above
December 10, 2006

 

Brendan Knell
  "When I had my computer built for me, the Tech indicated he could install an AMD 2600 for much less than a Pentium."

That's what the guy told me when I bought mine, and that's why I bought it. Maybe mine is just a reject. Still I won't buy another one.


To love this comment, log in above
December 10, 2006

 

Eddie Lagos
  Carl Carl Carl, you are probably wondering what the heck is all this talk about chips and processors and blah, blah, blah blah. The best thing to do is to first figure out what base you want, either pc or mac. If you go mac the choice is very easy you cant really go wrong with any mac that you get. Many people stick with a pc because it's familiar to them, it's what they know and are perhaps afraid of change. The only thing I do stress is don't get a Celeron those processors are very slow and don't have much potential. The battle between AMD and intel is an ongoing one, don't worry much about it. Just stick with a reputable brand like Sony, Fujitsu, Toshiba, HP, etc. I personally like Fujitsu, but they can be pricey. The biggest problem with laptops is the warranty. Salespeople will try to convince you, for an hour if they must, to buy the warranty. If you feel like you need it just make sure the warranty covers the screen, which is the costliest part of the computer. Oh ya I don't like Dell, but that doesn't mean you have to feel the same way. They just don't look sturdy to me, kind of plastic like. Good luck.


To love this comment, log in above
December 12, 2006

 
- Susan Jane Allen

BetterPhoto Member
Contact Susan Jane Allen
Susan Jane Allen's Gallery
  Going back to John S.... A comment you made sent up alarm bells as I'm just about to order a custom built computer. I am deep in the Japanese countryside, and even finding someone who builds PCs has been a challenge. I'm currently using a three year old Dell Inspiron 1100 laptop, XP 2002, but in China a friend put it more RAM to a total of 768 and the biggest hard disk which would fit in it: 80GB. It is Celeron(R)CPU 2.40 GHz. But with this, I've still had problems when trying to do stuff like photo stitching more than 2 images--my computer just shuts down.

Not that I understand much myself, but I've been told that my processor simply wasn't built to handle so much RAM. So, that's why I decided to get a Pentium 4 (something) chip and 2GB of RAM, and also want a 300GB hard disk. However, do I understand from John S.' comment that there are also issues with Windows XP and that it can't process large amounts of RAM? Someone obtained Windows XP for me in English (Affordable software in English has also been an issue here), but I don't know what version, as he hasn't given it to me yet.

Also, does the size of the hard disk also come into play as to what processors can handle--I was thinking of a 300 GB for the hard disk, but was also going to inquire about 500GB.

Would really appreciate some guidance here, as someone has referred me to a friend who builds PCs and I may be able to order soon. My major goal is to be able to do anything I want in photo editing and have room for lots of photos--I'm shooting in RAW now and need lots of space (though I do also have a 300GB external hard drive).


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 

John P. Sandstedt
  When I had my computer built for me in December 2004, the technician went to great length to explain the the then current version of Windows XP [as upgraded] could not handle more than 1.3 GIG RAM. Accordingly, he advised me to get only a 1 GIG RAM module since, if I bought more, the extra couoldn't be used anyway.

I think Windows XP Media Edition probably addressed this issue, if it is/was correct. And, certainly, Windows Vista more than prbably solves it.

Upgrading a old laptop, also, probably isn't too great an idea. The Sysop, where I worked, always complained that laptop technologies lagged thos in desktops. One of the comments above talks about the slow Celeron chip, so staying with a Pentium seems right. Some laptops talk about Centrino chips - I don't know the differences/ comparisons.

Also, as noted above the arguments between Intel and AMD chips are like those between Canon and Nikon. There are proponents on both sides - no one will will the battle; however, in general, AMD chips are cheaper.


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 
- Susan Jane Allen

BetterPhoto Member
Contact Susan Jane Allen
Susan Jane Allen's Gallery
  Someone mentioned the AMD chip to me, but now I'm worried after what Brendon said. I wonder how much of a cost difference there is. Seems the Pentium is about $200. I'll have to check into it. But if I'm going to spend all this money, perhaps better I get something I know will work. Thanks!


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 

John P. Sandstedt
  Brendan's problem may be real or his may be the only such situation in captivity.

You might check with a computer magazine for reports of complaints such as his. If the problem were really wide spread, CompUsa and other stores wouldn't be selling AMD-chip equipped computers, nor would AMD continue to survive.


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 

Brendan Knell
  Susan, like I said above, mine was probably just the reject. I've also heard that that particular model(the Athlon) is not a very good model. The main reson that I mentioned this in the first place, is just in case other people are having this problem also, and it's more widespread than I thought.


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 
- Susan Jane Allen

BetterPhoto Member
Contact Susan Jane Allen
Susan Jane Allen's Gallery
  Okay, I'll check around online. One valuable piece of info I picked up was that with Windows' current version of XP, it wouldn't be worth my while to get 2GB of RAM. Very helpful right now!


To love this comment, log in above
December 16, 2006

 
Log in to respond or ask your own question.