02-28-2012, 05:24 PM
[quote name='PuxaVida' timestamp='1330443264' post='16266']
Well I think I'm more or less ok with the Macs... Still to decide which MacBook or maybe the MacMini (it has an HDMI interface in addition to MacBooks)...
I think I have to study the color management concept in detail. Monitor & printer are understood, but I'm not sure if I need to go deep in details for the inks and the papers used... I do an amateur printing, not larger than A4... I hopt the soft proofing exists in Macs and they can give what I need.
Well Markus, if separate partitions with BootCamp only has an advantage in terms of gaming, I can choose the VM if it's more convenient. I have a PS3 for gaming, and I won't use the computer for this purpose...
I don't plan to do wireless backups actually... I'm still an old fashioned "wired" guy... FireWire or Thunderbolt, one of them could serve me well I guess.
Last but not least, the upcoming CPU... I wish too Intel would have competitors here... I hope the good old RISC architecture could be improved by ARM for instance and competitors comes into play.
It's hard to decide now; to wait until June or grab one now...
[/quote]
If you go for a current Mini, get one with a graphics card, that will help with video work, see the benchmark results I shared earlier. However Minis, despite being desktop machines, have laptop components. Again thermal design constraints. They do not reach the performance level of the iMacs and quadcore Macbooks Pro (15 inch and 17 inch). For movie rendering they are not the best system, but movie rendering is putting most systems under severe stress. I am a bit torn whether or not to write to you: "Get a 15 inch laptop or an iMac for your video work".
At least where I live, you can have a larger and faster spinning disk as well as an SSD inside (build-to-order configuration). This costs money, in particular the SSD - Markus and I discussed that above. Minis have extremely low noise levels - I like that. I have a soft spot for the Mini, though I find them a bit hard to justify from a rational perspective. Since you have an IPS monitor a Mini starts to make economic sense. I would need an external CD drive for a mini. A Mini with graphics card will outperform all the 11 and 13 inch macbooks, since none of them have a proper graphics card.
For both a laptop and a Mini you need to get a keyboard and a mouse/touchpad for use with you monitor. I have the Apple wireless ones and like them - no cables. With an iMac these are included.
The colour engine is the software to do the matching between the different devises. It still needs info, on how far a device is out from specification. It then uses that info to compensate. That info is provided with the profile. So someone needs to measure the colour response of the device. You can buy devices to do it yourself. It is now quite common to do that for a monitor. Even for my iMac it made a big difference. (I uses a spyder 3 if that is of interest). These devices start at the 100€ level. For measuring printers these devices are more expensive. The printer manufacturers provide profiles for their own inks and some of their papers. With printers the colour response changes when you change paper and/or ink-set. Some paper manufacturers also provide profiles for their papers used on a specific printer. If you do not stick to that, then all bets are off and in my experience useless. All colour management is lost - your prints will not match the monitor at a decent level. In particular for the occasional printer I think it is best to stick to the genuine papers and inks, since the cost of the printer profiling and the testing involved are not to justify.
I use soft proofing in Apple aperture. Softproofing is a software feature. It is not in Adobe Lightroom (also not in windows) which was one of the reasons I went for Aperture. Not having softprofing is one of the biggest complains against lightroom 3.
Hope that helps
Joachim
Well I think I'm more or less ok with the Macs... Still to decide which MacBook or maybe the MacMini (it has an HDMI interface in addition to MacBooks)...
I think I have to study the color management concept in detail. Monitor & printer are understood, but I'm not sure if I need to go deep in details for the inks and the papers used... I do an amateur printing, not larger than A4... I hopt the soft proofing exists in Macs and they can give what I need.
Well Markus, if separate partitions with BootCamp only has an advantage in terms of gaming, I can choose the VM if it's more convenient. I have a PS3 for gaming, and I won't use the computer for this purpose...
I don't plan to do wireless backups actually... I'm still an old fashioned "wired" guy... FireWire or Thunderbolt, one of them could serve me well I guess.
Last but not least, the upcoming CPU... I wish too Intel would have competitors here... I hope the good old RISC architecture could be improved by ARM for instance and competitors comes into play.
It's hard to decide now; to wait until June or grab one now...
[/quote]
If you go for a current Mini, get one with a graphics card, that will help with video work, see the benchmark results I shared earlier. However Minis, despite being desktop machines, have laptop components. Again thermal design constraints. They do not reach the performance level of the iMacs and quadcore Macbooks Pro (15 inch and 17 inch). For movie rendering they are not the best system, but movie rendering is putting most systems under severe stress. I am a bit torn whether or not to write to you: "Get a 15 inch laptop or an iMac for your video work".
At least where I live, you can have a larger and faster spinning disk as well as an SSD inside (build-to-order configuration). This costs money, in particular the SSD - Markus and I discussed that above. Minis have extremely low noise levels - I like that. I have a soft spot for the Mini, though I find them a bit hard to justify from a rational perspective. Since you have an IPS monitor a Mini starts to make economic sense. I would need an external CD drive for a mini. A Mini with graphics card will outperform all the 11 and 13 inch macbooks, since none of them have a proper graphics card.
For both a laptop and a Mini you need to get a keyboard and a mouse/touchpad for use with you monitor. I have the Apple wireless ones and like them - no cables. With an iMac these are included.
The colour engine is the software to do the matching between the different devises. It still needs info, on how far a device is out from specification. It then uses that info to compensate. That info is provided with the profile. So someone needs to measure the colour response of the device. You can buy devices to do it yourself. It is now quite common to do that for a monitor. Even for my iMac it made a big difference. (I uses a spyder 3 if that is of interest). These devices start at the 100€ level. For measuring printers these devices are more expensive. The printer manufacturers provide profiles for their own inks and some of their papers. With printers the colour response changes when you change paper and/or ink-set. Some paper manufacturers also provide profiles for their papers used on a specific printer. If you do not stick to that, then all bets are off and in my experience useless. All colour management is lost - your prints will not match the monitor at a decent level. In particular for the occasional printer I think it is best to stick to the genuine papers and inks, since the cost of the printer profiling and the testing involved are not to justify.
I use soft proofing in Apple aperture. Softproofing is a software feature. It is not in Adobe Lightroom (also not in windows) which was one of the reasons I went for Aperture. Not having softprofing is one of the biggest complains against lightroom 3.
Hope that helps
Joachim
enjoy