what would a "pro iphoto" have that iphoto doesnt? if it is just photo management, iphoto is great. the only thing i can see is giving it a pro interface.
CMYK support, capturing directly from a tethered camera, RAW processing support, advanced colour correction, better labelling, PDF export, watermarking - wouldn't mind some kind of .Mac pro service with this, but that is probably further down the road.
There is really no clear leader in this area - iview and capture one aren't bad - but they are kind of shitty in a lot of ways. This should be really good.
All that says is that you need a 2Ghz G5 processor to play full compressed HD video at 24fps.
Playing back HD quicktime does not have the same requirements as running an HD-resolution display.
Especially if you utilise the hardware accelleration for HD video decoding that's been present on more recent graphics hardware, via CoreVideo I imagine.
I expect a 1GHz G4 + decent graphics chip could do 1080p. The problem is that when everything is done on the CPU you need a damn lot of processing power there, hence the above type of specifications.
what would a "pro iphoto" have that iphoto doesnt? if it is just photo management, iphoto is great. the only thing i can see is giving it a pro interface.
The server side -- the ability to sync with resources on a private server.
maybe the ability to change the color space on the fly if the image is raw.
re-designed, core graphics based thumbnail engine that can handle more than a couple thousand shots.
The ability to add water marks to photos for web publication, resale and so on
Colaboration (think version cue in adobe CS2)
there are loads of things...
(I am a sys-admin in training -- ask a photographer for more)
Especially if you utilise the hardware accelleration for HD video decoding that's been present on more recent graphics hardware, via CoreVideo I imagine.
I expect a 1GHz G4 + decent graphics chip could do 1080p. The problem is that when everything is done on the CPU you need a damn lot of processing power there, hence the above type of specifications.
I think noirdesir was trying to tell me that the Powerbook couldnt handle having a 1920x1200 screen because it would require a more powerful processor just to display video, which is false.
a 1920x1200 video frame is completely different from one 'frame' that you see on your monitor and the processor does not touch the video signal.
(hence why your computer doesnt speed up or slow down when you change resolutions)
General feeling: Apple has recently had two "announcements" that got very good press and were a nice surprise for us. Steve J will not want this one to be a downer with small enhancements.
Best Bet: Dual cores in the PM range and some other tech goodies, but dual cores will get the press.
Worst Bet: Freescale finally delivering on the G4 dual cores like they said they would. If they do then screen resolution will take a back seat. If Freescale follows in the Moto tradition then it's a small bump - no bit deal and they better have some other goodies, like an improved screen and built in iSight.
Safest Bet: 10.4.3 released as it will be needed for the dual core PMs.
Software Bet: iPhoto Pro would be nice, but then Apple would need to include most features in iLife 06. I don't have a clue (other than a Photo Management app of some type) that Steve will pull out of the hat, but it will be something that will be demoed on all the new Macs in their display.
Farout Bet: EOL 12" PB, replaced with a 3 pound version (external SuperDrive) with a wide screen.
Sure Bet: I can afford anything announced if it's over $129 - and I'll need the Edu Store discount . . .
I think noirdesir was trying to tell me that the Powerbook couldnt handle having a 1920x1200 screen because it would require a more powerful processor just to display video, which is false.
No, no, not at all. I just hate it that on my current 1 GHz Powerbook I cannot even play 720p at more than 10 fps, dropping to 1 or 2 fps during fast movements.
I just find it slightly ironic for Apple to present an HD Powerbook with the fine print saying: This computer will not play HD-movies.
Following that line of thinking, it might not make sense to release a computer with a blue-ray drive if the computer could not decode HD-DVDs in real-time.
(Of course if Apple gets their act together and enables h.264 decoding in the graphics chip, all this becomes a mood point).
(Of course if Apple gets their act together and enables h.264 decoding in the graphics chip, all this becomes a mood point).
I hope so! and I hope 10.3 makes it retro-active to mac mini...if it can play Wolfenstien ET at 30FPS + w/o a hiccup, then I dont understand how it can choke on a lil' old 30 second 720p clip
EDIT
QT 7.0.3 made a mark improvment, but hardware would be GREAT
Nearly everyone is assuming that the photo-related product will be software. I don't see any mention of it being specifically software. I think photo-related hardware is just about as likely, such as a camera or some other product. I certainly wouldn't rule something like this out.
Nearly everyone is assuming that the photo-related product will be software. I don't see any mention of it being specifically software. I think photo-related hardware is just about as likely, such as a camera or some other product. I certainly wouldn't rule something like this out.
Maybe a "tablet" done different: Think of a WACOM pad with your PS document showing up on the LCD behind the clear sensor mat...think of the potential -- see what you draw while you draw!
Maybe a "tablet" done different: Think of a WACOM pad with your PS document showing up on the LCD behind the clear sensor mat...think of the potential -- see what you draw while you draw!
Mac+windows (we will take anybodys money)
WACOM has it, and it is expensive...add in a computer to the LCD and you are looking at $3000 minimum. How many of these do you think Apple could realistically sell?
WACOM has it, and it is expensive...add in a computer to the LCD and you are looking at $3000 minimum. How many of these do you think Apple could realistically sell?
Well, I was saying a tablet, not a tablet computer...I was thinking of something that would work just like a wacom, I didnt know wacom had them already--I am a geek -- not a graphics guy
WACOM has a 17" (aprox $1800) and a 21" (aprox $3000) tablet with a LCD screen built into it. Apple could possibly enter the market close to or slightly lower than WACOM, but I doubt it if they are going to offer the quality and response that WACOM does with "new" technolog to Apple.
Nearly everyone is assuming that the photo-related product will be software. I don't see any mention of it being specifically software. I think photo-related hardware is just about as likely, such as a camera or some other product. I certainly wouldn't rule something like this out.
Aside from software & iSight's in new displays what could Apple have up their sleeve? Apple wouldn't just make a camera for the hell of it. They would only do one if they had some angle no one else has. That's why they don't sell Apple printers anymore.
The iPhoto store so designers can DL stock photo's? :-)
Also, if we are just getting a minor speed bump then I think new displays are unlikely. Besides, that would hardly be worthy of an event, especially after the last two shockers.
I'm still hoping for new PB's & PM's. For professional software reasons (photoshop, etc) the pro machines will need to be last to go Intel. The consumer grade software is largely Apple's and easier to convert.
I wouldn't hold my breath on the stock library. Most of photographers I expect would be at this type of show don't hold much love for most stock photography houses right now; especially the royalty free style houses. Easy-entry mass market stock houses tend to prey on new-to-market stock photographers or photographers that are already making money in other areas of the market.
have a quick (perhaps stupid) question, When I watch DVD on my Powerbook 15" does it automaticaly produce video in 480p or is it 480i or another format?
The source is 480i deinterlaced to technically 480p for playback; similar to how progressive scan DVD players deinterlace for HDTVs. You don't get the added resolution of 480p over 480i; but you don't get much in the way of scan lines either.
if the dvd you are watching is a movie, it is usually full 480p frames that you get... for example matrix revolutions dvd (NTSC) is stored as 720x480 pixels 24 frames per seconds, compressed with mpeg2. when played back on your powerbook, it takes this 720x480 pixels and "de-anamorphoses" it to around 800-something by 354-something for the 2.2+ cinematic widescreen thingy. special features on the matrix revolutions dvd, eg, making of this and that, that would be around 480i
powerbook with iSight they already have it appleinsider had something about a couple mnths ago, and after last week it is the logical step. Plus maybe a more pro photobooth and iphoto they don't have a big booth at a photo show to tell you about itunes 7 or new cinema displays and there is a camera lens on the invitation.
Comments
Originally posted by Ferali
what would a "pro iphoto" have that iphoto doesnt? if it is just photo management, iphoto is great. the only thing i can see is giving it a pro interface.
CMYK support, capturing directly from a tethered camera, RAW processing support, advanced colour correction, better labelling, PDF export, watermarking - wouldn't mind some kind of .Mac pro service with this, but that is probably further down the road.
There is really no clear leader in this area - iview and capture one aren't bad - but they are kind of shitty in a lot of ways. This should be really good.
Originally posted by noirdesir
For 1920x1080 (1080p) video at 24 frames per second:
QuickTime 7 for Mac OS X:
* Dual 2.0 GHz PowerMac G5 or faster Macintosh computer
All that says is that you need a 2Ghz G5 processor to play full compressed HD video at 24fps.
Playing back HD quicktime does not have the same requirements as running an HD-resolution display.
Most of you would say the 30" cinema is too much screen real estate for you (it's even too much for me)
But you're not the target market. It's a professional video display.
1920x1200 or 1920x1080 isn't too much for a designer, like me.
Yes, it's small, but it's also much needed screen real estate for a portable design workstation, which I'm specifically after.
Most of the high end PC laptops have the same or similar resolutions in screens that are even smaller than the Powerbook's.
Originally posted by cinder
All that says is that you need a 2Ghz G5 processor to play full compressed HD video at 24fps.
Playing back HD quicktime does not have the same requirements as running an HD-resolution display.
Especially if you utilise the hardware accelleration for HD video decoding that's been present on more recent graphics hardware, via CoreVideo I imagine.
I expect a 1GHz G4 + decent graphics chip could do 1080p. The problem is that when everything is done on the CPU you need a damn lot of processing power there, hence the above type of specifications.
Originally posted by Ferali
what would a "pro iphoto" have that iphoto doesnt? if it is just photo management, iphoto is great. the only thing i can see is giving it a pro interface.
The server side -- the ability to sync with resources on a private server.
maybe the ability to change the color space on the fly if the image is raw.
re-designed, core graphics based thumbnail engine that can handle more than a couple thousand shots.
The ability to add water marks to photos for web publication, resale and so on
Colaboration (think version cue in adobe CS2)
there are loads of things...
(I am a sys-admin in training -- ask a photographer for more)
Originally posted by Hattig
Especially if you utilise the hardware accelleration for HD video decoding that's been present on more recent graphics hardware, via CoreVideo I imagine.
I expect a 1GHz G4 + decent graphics chip could do 1080p. The problem is that when everything is done on the CPU you need a damn lot of processing power there, hence the above type of specifications.
I think noirdesir was trying to tell me that the Powerbook couldnt handle having a 1920x1200 screen because it would require a more powerful processor just to display video, which is false.
a 1920x1200 video frame is completely different from one 'frame' that you see on your monitor and the processor does not touch the video signal.
(hence why your computer doesnt speed up or slow down when you change resolutions)
Best Bet: Dual cores in the PM range and some other tech goodies, but dual cores will get the press.
Worst Bet: Freescale finally delivering on the G4 dual cores like they said they would. If they do then screen resolution will take a back seat. If Freescale follows in the Moto tradition then it's a small bump - no bit deal and they better have some other goodies, like an improved screen and built in iSight.
Safest Bet: 10.4.3 released as it will be needed for the dual core PMs.
Software Bet: iPhoto Pro would be nice, but then Apple would need to include most features in iLife 06. I don't have a clue (other than a Photo Management app of some type) that Steve will pull out of the hat, but it will be something that will be demoed on all the new Macs in their display.
Farout Bet: EOL 12" PB, replaced with a 3 pound version (external SuperDrive) with a wide screen.
Sure Bet: I can afford anything announced if it's over $129 - and I'll need the Edu Store discount . . .
Originally posted by cinder
I think noirdesir was trying to tell me that the Powerbook couldnt handle having a 1920x1200 screen because it would require a more powerful processor just to display video, which is false.
No, no, not at all. I just hate it that on my current 1 GHz Powerbook I cannot even play 720p at more than 10 fps, dropping to 1 or 2 fps during fast movements.
I just find it slightly ironic for Apple to present an HD Powerbook with the fine print saying: This computer will not play HD-movies.
Following that line of thinking, it might not make sense to release a computer with a blue-ray drive if the computer could not decode HD-DVDs in real-time.
(Of course if Apple gets their act together and enables h.264 decoding in the graphics chip, all this becomes a mood point).
Originally posted by noirdesir
(Of course if Apple gets their act together and enables h.264 decoding in the graphics chip, all this becomes a mood point).
I hope so! and I hope 10.3 makes it retro-active to mac mini...if it can play Wolfenstien ET at 30FPS + w/o a hiccup, then I dont understand how it can choke on a lil' old 30 second 720p clip
EDIT
QT 7.0.3 made a mark improvment, but hardware would be GREAT
Originally posted by eekles77
Nearly everyone is assuming that the photo-related product will be software. I don't see any mention of it being specifically software. I think photo-related hardware is just about as likely, such as a camera or some other product. I certainly wouldn't rule something like this out.
Maybe a "tablet" done different: Think of a WACOM pad with your PS document showing up on the LCD behind the clear sensor mat...think of the potential -- see what you draw while you draw!
Mac+windows (we will take anybodys money)
Originally posted by a_greer
Maybe a "tablet" done different: Think of a WACOM pad with your PS document showing up on the LCD behind the clear sensor mat...think of the potential -- see what you draw while you draw!
Mac+windows (we will take anybodys money)
WACOM has it, and it is expensive...add in a computer to the LCD and you are looking at $3000 minimum. How many of these do you think Apple could realistically sell?
Originally posted by @homenow
WACOM has it, and it is expensive...add in a computer to the LCD and you are looking at $3000 minimum. How many of these do you think Apple could realistically sell?
Well, I was saying a tablet, not a tablet computer...I was thinking of something that would work just like a wacom, I didnt know wacom had them already--I am a geek -- not a graphics guy
Originally posted by eekles77
Nearly everyone is assuming that the photo-related product will be software. I don't see any mention of it being specifically software. I think photo-related hardware is just about as likely, such as a camera or some other product. I certainly wouldn't rule something like this out.
Aside from software & iSight's in new displays what could Apple have up their sleeve? Apple wouldn't just make a camera for the hell of it. They would only do one if they had some angle no one else has. That's why they don't sell Apple printers anymore.
The iPhoto store so designers can DL stock photo's? :-)
Also, if we are just getting a minor speed bump then I think new displays are unlikely. Besides, that would hardly be worthy of an event, especially after the last two shockers.
I'm still hoping for new PB's & PM's. For professional software reasons (photoshop, etc) the pro machines will need to be last to go Intel. The consumer grade software is largely Apple's and easier to convert.
Corey
have a quick (perhaps stupid) question, When I watch DVD on my Powerbook 15" does it automaticaly produce video in 480p or is it 480i or another format?
thanks for feedback