I am starting up my own freelance photography/research business in a few weeks and would like your opinions on what type of computer to buy.
I currently have a Mac G4 at home and 2 monitors. I purchased the G4 approx. 5 years ago and it's starting to get pretty slow.
So, I'm planning on getting some new toys! Anyway, I'm thinking of going with the new Intel MacBook. (2Ghz, 2GB Ram and 120GB hard drive) or a new iMac (2Ghz, 2GB Ram and 500GB hard drive)
Most of what I'll be doing is commercial photography, weddings and photo research for numerous publishers.
So, hard disk space is an issue since I will be storing lots of hi-res images on my computer........ Then again, external hard disks aren't very expensive.
I like the mobility of a laptop, but wonder if it's worth it since they are more expensive.
Any thoughts??
I would not rely on built-in storage for important data, and certianly not on laptop drives (they have a much higher failure rate than desktop drives). I would suggest investing in a machine of your choice AND an external RAID storage array. It will help you sleep better at night. Obviously you will want some kind of backup you can store off site too (DVDs are usually sufficient for that).
The external drive is definitely a thought, and I will probably go that route. I've also been storing a lot of images on DVD.
I guess I'm just torn between the old question of laptop vs desktop.
We're on Mac and have been doing the kind of work you contemplate for over 15 years, so I can make some pretty specific recommendations.
You'll need both the laptop and a desktop unit with a large monitor:
For onsite commercial shooting with the client present, it will be important to have the means to view larger versions of each shot simply to fine-tune shots. Your laptop will be your best friend for that. We currently have Mac laptops, but are likely to replace those with the cheapest PCs we can find, since about all they are used for is onsite file reviews.
For final file selection for producing large prints (where the real money is in weddings and portraits), the bigger your monitor, the bigger your sales. Period. Bigger is also better for image processing. You don't want to sit a client down at a laptop screen at this stage of the process. It also pays to get a swivel base so you can rotate the monitor to display veritcal shots as large as possible. We saw a huge jump in the sizes of prints we sold when we went to the 24 inch Mac monitor and sincerely regret not buying the 30. Doing so is a high priority. We have three G5's, all 1.8 twins with max RAM and the biggest available internal HDs. They are plenty fast for our needs. Buying today, we would still go for the smallest twin processors and max RAM and HD. It's a question of "good enough" versus spending money that would be better used elsewhere.
In selecting your storage medium, think LONG term with huge masses of photos. We keep images 10 years before disposing of them. Consider also the delivery medium for presenting files to clients. We have portable drives for interim storage, but eventually burn everything to disc for filing along with client paperwork in good old fashioned file cabinets. Since clients want CDs rather than DVDs, we burn select images to those for storage and dump the rest. Our portable drives are for backup of images on the built in drives while working with clients, but both are cleared as soon as we are through with the client.
Something you didn't ask about: CF card size. 4mb, 2mb, even 1mb are very attractive and popular for nature shooters. For the kind of work you contemplate FUGETABOUTIT! Sorting images to folders small enough for burning to CDs is time consuming and a real drag. We're moving more and more to 512mb chips simply to avoid all the sorting. Yeah, you leave almost 200mb of capacity every time you burn a disc, but that's cheaper than the time needed to sort. Purely a logistic issue, but think about how much time you will spend each year simply sorting images into folders for burning!
Another issue you didn't mention: Paperwork! We got "carbon copy" invoices from Quill, printed with our letterhead etc for not much money. On them we also have a model release statement and blanks for clients to sign. We also have a statement of delivery terms and use limits on the photos. In signing and paying the invoice, the clients are also agreeing to our terms. Having them all in one form really cuts down the paper management and record keeping!
I banged my head against the wall about this for a while. I've got a nice Dell laptop with the 17" wide screen display, and it is pitiful at photo editing. Laptop displays just don't cut it. I was kicking around a new desktop system just for photoshop, and priced out dual and quad core pentium systems, and G5 systems, but finally decided on the iMac you described with a second 20" monitor. Hank's advice that "size matters" is likely accurate for your situation, so you might want to get the larger second monitor (iMac will not support a 30"). I'm not selling anything so I don't need as much monitor as you do. My system will be here on June 5.
Oddly enough, the person that finally sold me on the iMac is a graphic artist that moonlights working for Dell at a mall keosk. He was helping me spec. out a powerful dual processor, dual core pentium workstation for Photoshop when he asked what I was going to use it for. I told him raw camera files and post processing work; 8 meg files now, maybe 22 meg later in life, with no more than half a dozen layers. That's when he told me I was looking at way more workstation than I needed and suggested the iMac. He uses dual processor G5 machines stuffed up with RAM to process graphics files that are hundreds of meg each in several layers. As a photographer I'm not doing anything near that. So I thanked him and went to the Mac Store the next day.
Something interesting to consider if you use PS. Native Mac PS does not run well on the iMac. When PS CS3 is released there will be a version compiled for the Intel Mac systems, but until then it will be slower than it is on a G5. If you use Bootcamp to create a Windows XP partition on your iMac, then supposedly the Windows version of PS screams on the iMac. I'll let you know next week.
Thanks for the responses. I think in order to narrow things down, I should probably be a little more specific as to what I'll be doing.
I'll be shooting approx. 20+ weddings per year, (this will possibly be higher since I am advertising in a local bridal magazine this year), The photo research will vary as well, but I will be probably be researching 2000-3000 images per year. I will also need to acquire hi-res images and immediately send the approved images to the film house. These images will be sent via ftp or CD and the the images can then be deleted from my machine. That was my main concern with built-in storage rather than long term storage.
I also shoot quite a bit of nature images and sell to eductional publishers, that is where the long term storage would come in handy.
Right now, my CF cards are all 512mb and 1GB. I'll probably never go higher than that.
and yes, I do do quite a bit of photoshop work. Right now I am using CS2 and have heard about the Intel issue.
Hopefully that helps!
Thanks for the responses. I think in order to narrow things down, I should probably be a little more specific as to what I'll be doing.
I'll be shooting approx. 20+ weddings per year, (this will possibly be higher since I am advertising in a local bridal magazine this year), The photo research will vary as well, but I will be probably be researching 2000-3000 images per year. I will also need to acquire hi-res images and immediately send the approved images to the film house. These images will be sent via ftp or CD and the the images can then be deleted from my machine. That was my main concern with built-in storage rather than long term storage.
I also shoot quite a bit of nature images and sell to eductional publishers, that is where the long term storage would come in handy.
Right now, my CF cards are all 512mb and 1GB. I'll probably never go higher than that.
and yes, I do do quite a bit of photoshop work. Right now I am using CS2 and have heard about the Intel issue.
Hopefully that helps!
Discussion
6 repliesI currently have a Mac G4 at home and 2 monitors. I purchased the G4 approx. 5 years ago and it's starting to get pretty slow.
So, I'm planning on getting some new toys! Anyway, I'm thinking of going with the new Intel MacBook. (2Ghz, 2GB Ram and 120GB hard drive) or a new iMac (2Ghz, 2GB Ram and 500GB hard drive)
Most of what I'll be doing is commercial photography, weddings and photo research for numerous publishers.
So, hard disk space is an issue since I will be storing lots of hi-res images on my computer........ Then again, external hard disks aren't very expensive.
I like the mobility of a laptop, but wonder if it's worth it since they are more expensive.
Any thoughts??
Mark
Guy
I guess I'm just torn between the old question of laptop vs desktop.
You'll need both the laptop and a desktop unit with a large monitor:
For onsite commercial shooting with the client present, it will be important to have the means to view larger versions of each shot simply to fine-tune shots. Your laptop will be your best friend for that. We currently have Mac laptops, but are likely to replace those with the cheapest PCs we can find, since about all they are used for is onsite file reviews.
For final file selection for producing large prints (where the real money is in weddings and portraits), the bigger your monitor, the bigger your sales. Period. Bigger is also better for image processing. You don't want to sit a client down at a laptop screen at this stage of the process. It also pays to get a swivel base so you can rotate the monitor to display veritcal shots as large as possible. We saw a huge jump in the sizes of prints we sold when we went to the 24 inch Mac monitor and sincerely regret not buying the 30. Doing so is a high priority. We have three G5's, all 1.8 twins with max RAM and the biggest available internal HDs. They are plenty fast for our needs. Buying today, we would still go for the smallest twin processors and max RAM and HD. It's a question of "good enough" versus spending money that would be better used elsewhere.
In selecting your storage medium, think LONG term with huge masses of photos. We keep images 10 years before disposing of them. Consider also the delivery medium for presenting files to clients. We have portable drives for interim storage, but eventually burn everything to disc for filing along with client paperwork in good old fashioned file cabinets. Since clients want CDs rather than DVDs, we burn select images to those for storage and dump the rest. Our portable drives are for backup of images on the built in drives while working with clients, but both are cleared as soon as we are through with the client.
Something you didn't ask about: CF card size. 4mb, 2mb, even 1mb are very attractive and popular for nature shooters. For the kind of work you contemplate FUGETABOUTIT! Sorting images to folders small enough for burning to CDs is time consuming and a real drag. We're moving more and more to 512mb chips simply to avoid all the sorting. Yeah, you leave almost 200mb of capacity every time you burn a disc, but that's cheaper than the time needed to sort. Purely a logistic issue, but think about how much time you will spend each year simply sorting images into folders for burning!
Another issue you didn't mention: Paperwork! We got "carbon copy" invoices from Quill, printed with our letterhead etc for not much money. On them we also have a model release statement and blanks for clients to sign. We also have a statement of delivery terms and use limits on the photos. In signing and paying the invoice, the clients are also agreeing to our terms. Having them all in one form really cuts down the paper management and record keeping!
I banged my head against the wall about this for a while. I've got a nice Dell laptop with the 17" wide screen display, and it is pitiful at photo editing. Laptop displays just don't cut it. I was kicking around a new desktop system just for photoshop, and priced out dual and quad core pentium systems, and G5 systems, but finally decided on the iMac you described with a second 20" monitor. Hank's advice that "size matters" is likely accurate for your situation, so you might want to get the larger second monitor (iMac will not support a 30"). I'm not selling anything so I don't need as much monitor as you do. My system will be here on June 5.
Oddly enough, the person that finally sold me on the iMac is a graphic artist that moonlights working for Dell at a mall keosk. He was helping me spec. out a powerful dual processor, dual core pentium workstation for Photoshop when he asked what I was going to use it for. I told him raw camera files and post processing work; 8 meg files now, maybe 22 meg later in life, with no more than half a dozen layers. That's when he told me I was looking at way more workstation than I needed and suggested the iMac. He uses dual processor G5 machines stuffed up with RAM to process graphics files that are hundreds of meg each in several layers. As a photographer I'm not doing anything near that. So I thanked him and went to the Mac Store the next day.
Something interesting to consider if you use PS. Native Mac PS does not run well on the iMac. When PS CS3 is released there will be a version compiled for the Intel Mac systems, but until then it will be slower than it is on a G5. If you use Bootcamp to create a Windows XP partition on your iMac, then supposedly the Windows version of PS screams on the iMac. I'll let you know next week.
I'll be shooting approx. 20+ weddings per year, (this will possibly be higher since I am advertising in a local bridal magazine this year), The photo research will vary as well, but I will be probably be researching 2000-3000 images per year. I will also need to acquire hi-res images and immediately send the approved images to the film house. These images will be sent via ftp or CD and the the images can then be deleted from my machine. That was my main concern with built-in storage rather than long term storage.
I also shoot quite a bit of nature images and sell to eductional publishers, that is where the long term storage would come in handy.
Right now, my CF cards are all 512mb and 1GB. I'll probably never go higher than that.
and yes, I do do quite a bit of photoshop work. Right now I am using CS2 and have heard about the Intel issue.
Hopefully that helps!
I'll be shooting approx. 20+ weddings per year, (this will possibly be higher since I am advertising in a local bridal magazine this year), The photo research will vary as well, but I will be probably be researching 2000-3000 images per year. I will also need to acquire hi-res images and immediately send the approved images to the film house. These images will be sent via ftp or CD and the the images can then be deleted from my machine. That was my main concern with built-in storage rather than long term storage.
I also shoot quite a bit of nature images and sell to eductional publishers, that is where the long term storage would come in handy.
Right now, my CF cards are all 512mb and 1GB. I'll probably never go higher than that.
and yes, I do do quite a bit of photoshop work. Right now I am using CS2 and have heard about the Intel issue.
Hopefully that helps!