Well, it would seem that you also want the largest screen possible, perhaps multiple monitors. For this reason, as well as RAM and hard drive storage options, I would suggest a Mac Pro. However, I think the lowest model quad core Mac Pro should suit your power needs.
Well, it would seem that you also want the largest screen possible, perhaps multiple monitors. For this reason, as well as RAM and hard drive storage options, I would suggest a Mac Pro. However, I think the lowest model quad core Mac Pro should suit your power needs.
No idea what that is ahaha..sorry, I am a long time Windows user, and I do prefer Windows, but I need a mac for my art.
yes, a large screen would be useful, multiple? no, I don't have ANY room on my desk.
Yeah, if you don't want to shell out $2500 plus on the Mac Pro, plus a monitor, plus added RAM, you can't do wrong with the 27" iMac, which is upgradable to 16GB of RAM. I still don't think you'll need the added power of the highest performance model. The dual core i3 should suit your needs.
I am a current Comic Colourist, and I read that most comic companies only accept mac files.
So what MAC is right for me?
the only requirement is that it needs a lot of RAM.
I'm not sure why they would only accept Mac files as there aren't really many Mac-exclusive file formats - they perhaps just exclude Windows-exclusive formats. They may also just recommend using a Mac due to the colour workflow:
This can be done on a Windows PC too but Apple's setup is easier for it. I wouldn't recommend an iMac for this type of work because the display is glossy and not very easy to adjust the position. The people in the above link have some iMacs but the matte kind or Mac Pros with the 20" matte cinema screen. The Mac Mini or Macbook will be fast enough performance-wise and you could get a matte IPS display that can be rotated into portrait mode.
Portrait mode on a matte IPS with the page zoomed up to full size is like holding a printed comic page in your hand. It has the appearance of paper.
The iMac has 4 RAM slots so would allow an upgrade to 16GB in future but 16GB is expensive and 8GB should be enough. The Mini and laptops are also easier to upgrade the storage - you can't get into the iMac hard drive at all so you can't upgrade to a 3rd party SSD.
SSD will help when you are opening/saving large image files. Standard hard drives read/write around 50-80MB/s. Good SSDs exceed 200MB/s. So multi-GB image files open/save in a fraction of the time and these should become affordable in the next year.
The Mac Mini also supports dual matching displays so you can buy two cheaper IPS displays and have one in portrait, the other in landscape.
You can get one from eBay for around £550 and save on the £100+ Apple tax in the UK:
2 x 22" displays = 2 x £238 (if you shop around, you will get cheaper)
Late 2010/2011, 160GB SSD = £160.
Total cost with a single display + 8GB RAM = £998
Base iMac with 4GB would be £999. The iMac CPU and GPU are faster but you lose out on not having a matte screen and being able to upgrade your hard drive. The Mini drive upgrade isn't easy but it's easier than the iMac.
The only reason you would want to upgrade the internal HD would be for an SSD's speed. For capacity you just plunk down the external HD du jour (best price/performance), now with superfast eSATA protocols, because storage memory in HD format has never been cheaper than today. No need to skimp on capacity.
So you must ask yourself if you really need that SSD's speed. I'd say it depends on the complexity level of the imagery you work with. If you try to render a feature film on it you'll find your iMac runs out of steam fast. For a number of limiting reasons, HD i/o speed being (only) one. You would need a bank of high-end MacPros for that kind of work. But TBH cartoon coloring doesn't sound half as stressful on any machine. I could be wrong.
Comments
Well, it would seem that you also want the largest screen possible, perhaps multiple monitors. For this reason, as well as RAM and hard drive storage options, I would suggest a Mac Pro. However, I think the lowest model quad core Mac Pro should suit your power needs.
No idea what that is ahaha..sorry, I am a long time Windows user, and I do prefer Windows, but I need a mac for my art.
yes, a large screen would be useful, multiple? no, I don't have ANY room on my desk.
... I don't have ANY room on my desk.
Get a new desk
Get a new desk
Thanks for the help.
I don'[t have any ROOM for a bigger desk.
Thanks for the help.
I don'[t have any ROOM for a bigger desk.
Get a bigger room
Originally Posted by Masked Rider OOO
Thanks for the help.
I don'[t have any ROOM for a bigger desk.
Get a bigger room
Masked Rider, if you get yourself a 27" i7 Quadcore iMac, you won't need a big desk, and you'll be set for years.
What MAC is for me?
I am a current Comic Colourist, and I read that most comic companies only accept mac files.
So what MAC is right for me?
the only requirement is that it needs a lot of RAM.
I'm not sure why they would only accept Mac files as there aren't really many Mac-exclusive file formats - they perhaps just exclude Windows-exclusive formats. They may also just recommend using a Mac due to the colour workflow:
http://www.apple.com/pro/profiles/darkhorse/
This can be done on a Windows PC too but Apple's setup is easier for it. I wouldn't recommend an iMac for this type of work because the display is glossy and not very easy to adjust the position. The people in the above link have some iMacs but the matte kind or Mac Pros with the 20" matte cinema screen. The Mac Mini or Macbook will be fast enough performance-wise and you could get a matte IPS display that can be rotated into portrait mode.
Portrait mode on a matte IPS with the page zoomed up to full size is like holding a printed comic page in your hand. It has the appearance of paper.
The iMac has 4 RAM slots so would allow an upgrade to 16GB in future but 16GB is expensive and 8GB should be enough. The Mini and laptops are also easier to upgrade the storage - you can't get into the iMac hard drive at all so you can't upgrade to a 3rd party SSD.
SSD will help when you are opening/saving large image files. Standard hard drives read/write around 50-80MB/s. Good SSDs exceed 200MB/s. So multi-GB image files open/save in a fraction of the time and these should become affordable in the next year.
The Mac Mini also supports dual matching displays so you can buy two cheaper IPS displays and have one in portrait, the other in landscape.
You can get one from eBay for around £550 and save on the £100+ Apple tax in the UK:
http://cgi.ebay.co.uk/apple-new-mac-...#ht_500wt_1136
8GB RAM = £195, 4GB RAM = £70-£100
2 x 22" displays = 2 x £238 (if you shop around, you will get cheaper)
Late 2010/2011, 160GB SSD = £160.
Total cost with a single display + 8GB RAM = £998
Base iMac with 4GB would be £999. The iMac CPU and GPU are faster but you lose out on not having a matte screen and being able to upgrade your hard drive. The Mini drive upgrade isn't easy but it's easier than the iMac.
So you must ask yourself if you really need that SSD's speed. I'd say it depends on the complexity level of the imagery you work with. If you try to render a feature film on it you'll find your iMac runs out of steam fast. For a number of limiting reasons, HD i/o speed being (only) one. You would need a bank of high-end MacPros for that kind of work. But TBH cartoon coloring doesn't sound half as stressful on any machine. I could be wrong.