Computers for photographers - recommended specifications

[DD_nVidia]

Thanks Gordon

I'm still cleaning up the final thing before I submit it on Sunday, so once I'm done and have it proof read etc. I'll format it for the forums, tags and such, then edit my origonal post.

And sure keeping it up - to - date shouldn't be a problem.

[R0Y.1]

for mid range under 10MP... Mid-range GPU: NVIDIA GeForce 8800GT 512MB/9800GT 512MB

Those are basically the same. I'd recommend the GTS 250 (preferably the 1GB one from MSI) which is much better, uses less power, has better cooling and is roughly the same price. I'm planning to get one.

And 1 thing to keep in mind is that even if one has a ~10MP cam, pp is usually done with a much up-sampled copy (particularly if large print-outs are required) which can take up a lot of space/memory/processing. Even a simple scanned image can be as big as 1-2GB originally. Working on these is no easier than on a medium format's output. And the h.264 HD videos from, say, sx1 do demand a LOT from a PC, when opened up for cooking in an already monstrous app with tons of plugins. So I guess ~>10-12MP shouldn't be the sole factor determining the requirement of horsepower. Just my 2 cents

On a side note, DX11-based cards are available right now, but I think by the time DX11-games/apps are being released frequently, there will be MUCH better cards for much less. So IMHO it's not wise to assume you're (;) ) doing a time-proof investment if you buy a DX11-based card right now. Waiting (if you already have a card right now) is OK I guess, but my card is on RMA for months and the issue is on court now, and I can't remain handicapped any longer so I'm getting a new one... sorry for being "impatient"...

[Tomis]

Or you could just buy a mac!

p.s.
I'm just giving you a hard time Daniel. This is an excellent guide!

[Tomis]

HIGH END!: 20-30MP DSLR's

CPU: Intel Core i7 920 2.6GHz Hyperthreaded (8 Threads) 8MB Cachce 45nm [overclock to 3.2GHz]
RAM: 3x2GB DD3-1333Mhz/3x4GB DDR3-1066Mhz
GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX260/280 (1GB)
PSU: 800W-900W
HDD: FAST OS Drive, FAST Scratch Disk Drive, Larger Data Drives. (2 data drives, one main, one backup)

my little macbook pro 2.2 which is far from this spec handles image of this size and larger even massive tiffs with no problem

HAHAHAHA!!!

[R0Y.1]

Or you could just buy a mac!

I respect your choice. MAK definitely looks a lot cooler than hacked xp/vista/ubuntu. BUT, it's a lot more about usability than just looks... or EVEN security or stability. XP, though limited to 4GB RAM and (normally) DX9, happens to run almost everything one can stumble upon and like. I hate Microsoft and I love the s*xy ubuntu and UNIX/Linux stability/security thing which MAC uses anyway, but I just can't picture myself "shifting" away from this horrible windows in which folks play and develop games and MOST desirable applications. I'm talking stuff one can hardly live without. I like the adventurous journeys where there's risk, but rewards to compensate 'em all nevertheless.

[DD_nVidia]

There isnt any DX11 cards out just now...

GTS250 is based on the G92b core isnt it...It certainly isnt the GT200...

[R0Y.1]

Yeah, I heard they're gonna be available this month... apparently not until Oct.. (ATI Radeon HD 5850/5870)

Would you not prefer the superb GTS250 over the 8800/9800GT at almost the same price tag for a LOT better performance/stability?

[Tomis]

Or you could just buy a mac!

I respect your choice. MAK definitely looks a lot cooler than hacked xp/vista/ubuntu. BUT, it's a lot more about usability than just looks... or EVEN security or stability. XP, though limited to 4GB RAM and (normally) DX9, happens to run almost everything one can stumble upon and like. I hate Microsoft and I love the s*xy ubuntu and UNIX/Linux stability/security thing which MAC uses anyway, but I just can't picture myself "shifting" away from this horrible windows in which folks play and develop games and MOST desirable applications. I'm talking stuff one can hardly live without. I like the adventurous journeys where there's risk, but rewards to compensate 'em all nevertheless.

I agree usability has a lot to do with my choice of Apple over Microsoft. I chose a mac because I find that in creative professional situations such as photography, graphic design and video editing the osx platform feels much more stable to me. Not to mention iLife which is great for throwing together a quick website on iWeb, or using iMovie/iDVD to put a home video on dvd that actually works and plays in any dvd player without purchasing any separate software. The good looks of Apples computers are only a secondary benefit.

I will agree with you though. Gaming is not Apples strong point (unless your talking mobile, but thats a different story). But I'm not a gamer, and if i was I'd buy a xbox.

[R0Y.1]

Other than the cool looks of mac, I think all the features you have mentioned have much more availability of usable software which cost from nothing to everything on windows - particularly xp. I can see you are a total "i"-fan. I won't blame you - we all have our "things". If you think you are happy to be using only a handful of apps on only a handful arenas, I don't see why that is bad at all. But I am more of a traveler who tries everything and goes everywhere. I would definitely have tried mac if that was usable in my hw conf. But it appears to me as if mac is just a cocktail of windows and linux, with nothing revolutionary to offer. And you can of course create websites, music and DVDs for free both in windows and Linux. There are free DNS providers, domain name registrars, web hosts and free software to create EVERYTHING on windows. And those are better than that on mac, because Mac's formats are proprietary and are usually usable on "i"-platforms. I can hardly think of anybody who likes quicktime. mkv is the container preferred by enthusiasts of h.264, aka HD content. And the encodings are also doable with x.264 - no need for any costly software. Anything multimedia is doable excellently without costing money on windows. Most people like open standards. Microsoft doesn't itself believe that, but things do run fine on windows. And I have never had any stability issues with any multimedia application on xp. I'm not a console lover. I love kb and mouse since it's where I do almost everything from chatting to working to composing/playing music to editing/watching videos/DVDs to surfing/creating websites to creating/editing/playing games etc etc. Besides there's hardly any room for any other "box"es in my room

[theorigamist]

Is there a reason all of the recommended parts are Intel and Nvidia? What about Phenom II X4 940s for the first two computer levels? What about the HD 4850, HD4890, HD 5850, and HD 5870 for the four levels, respectively? These seem to give more performance at roughly the same price points. (Caveat: I'm not entirely up-to-date on my hardware, especially graphics cards. If I'm missing something, please let me know.)

[DD_nVidia]

As far as I know nothing takes advantage of the latest version of Open GL and Direct X as of yet.

I'm gonna hazzard a guess that the next versions of Adobes products will no doubt be using Open GL and CL extensively in all their products (including Version 3.0 of Lightroom)

As for why Intel and Nvidia. To put it bluntly, I know their product lines a lot better. AMD have just made their processor line more confusing than it has to be.

I am infact about to update my post with i5 processors.

AMD have nothing to compete against the i5's and they are more powerful per GHz, plus the ones that have hyperthreading are faster in supported applications again!

[DD_nVidia]

Also, not to bash but, people who do things for a living, dont use iWeb or iDVD just like I don't use Paint to edit my photos. (ok not the BEST example but you get the idea) For normal people though sure, but these arn't computers for normal people, they are for people who are serious about sitting down and doing some workloads. iPhoto however is nice! It seems to do a good job of rendering sharp thumbnails pretty fast and provide an almost seemless scaling experience, something I desperately want from Lightroom and Windows Explorer! This is no doubt down to the use of Open GL and CL used in the OS core. Hopefully MS gets its game up an allows futher GPU acceleration of things within the OS including rending of previews, thumbnails, full images etc.

Personally Windows doesnt crash on me, I don't get viruses or spyware because I do have antivirus (which mac users should do too) along with the fact I'm not a complete tool when it comes to using the internet and installing programs (those check boxes, read them, it helps!)

I'm a bit busy with college stuff just now but once I get a good gap (most likely over Christmas) i'll certainly have a good sit down with a dozen bottles of lucozade and a multipack of crisps and go through all the AMD/nVidia/Intel options.

[Bramsey89]

700w is a bit excessive.

I have a core i7 processor, 8gb RAM, and gts 240 1gb and it works great with just 350w

[Citruspers]

@Bramsey: Add 1 mid to high end graphics card, and you will suddenyl need 600 Watts

[agun]

AMD processors are also pretty good for the price. I think you should of included their processors in at least the 10MP range.

PS: Stable PSUs are critical for system stability. Don't skimp on them.