Approve the Cookies
This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and our Privacy Policy.
OK
Index  •   • New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Guest
New posts  •   • RTAT  •   • 'Best of'  •   • Gallery  •   • Gear  •   • Reviews
Register to forums    Log in

 
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
Thread started 08 Apr 2013 (Monday) 08:53
Search threadPrev/next
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

MAC vs PC Photos

 
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Apr 11, 2013 09:50 |  #31

Why on earth would I want to wear sunglasses while post processing images?


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)
XBAMBOBEE
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Dec 2012
Location: IN THE FAST LANE
     
Apr 11, 2013 10:04 as a reply to  @ post 15815651 |  #32

Numenorean wrote in post #15813174 (external link)
You understand wrong. Processing photos on a Mac isn't going to give "better results".

drvnbysound wrote in post #15813265 (external link)
True story ;-)a

This an assumption I derived from most people outside photography that I talked too. And I also further realized that most youtube tutorials about photography show Macs being used. Hence my generalized assumptions.


2 Legit 2 Quit

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
XBAMBOBEE
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Dec 2012
Location: IN THE FAST LANE
     
Apr 11, 2013 10:10 |  #33

Lowner wrote in post #15815655 (external link)
Why on earth would I want to wear sunglasses while post processing images?

I said "it is like" not that I wear sunglasses when post processing.
Another way to put the logic is looking through a tinted window at a scene outside and looking through a non tinted window of the same scene. That is how photos on a Mac with Retina display look against the same photo on a PC.


2 Legit 2 Quit

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Apr 11, 2013 13:22 |  #34

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15815733 (external link)
I said "it is like" not that I wear sunglasses when post processing.
Another way to put the logic is looking through a tinted window at a scene outside and looking through a non tinted window of the same scene. That is how photos on a Mac with Retina display look against the same photo on a PC.

You are not convincing me. Surely a properly calibrated monitor of either would produce results ,if not identical, then at least too close to call.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Simpleboy
Member
197 posts
Joined Aug 2007
     
Apr 11, 2013 14:55 |  #35

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15815733 (external link)
I said "it is like" not that I wear sunglasses when post processing.
Another way to put the logic is looking through a tinted window at a scene outside and looking through a non tinted window of the same scene. That is how photos on a Mac with Retina display look against the same photo on a PC.

To me it's sounding like you are doing all in your power to make the mac look good and all in your power to make the windows look bad, then concluding the mac is better.

Whatever floats your boat I guess!




  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Tom ­ Reichner
"That's what I do."
Avatar
16,052 posts
Gallery: 180 photos
Best ofs: 2
Likes: 6234
Joined Dec 2008
Location: from Pennsylvania, now in Washington state, road trip back and forth a lot, with extensive detouring
     
Apr 11, 2013 16:35 |  #36

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15803087 (external link)
Hey Folks,

I understand most people use Macs to process photos for better results.

Hmmm. I know many full time pros, and I can only think of one who uses a Mac.

There isn't another photographer in my town - pro or hobbyist - who uses a Mac. So, I have to travel 150 miles to get help with mine, when I have issues. If I used a PC, I could find a number of photographers right here in town who could help me.

Furthermore, I never heard of Macs giving "better results". The results obtained are a result of the gear used and the editing program used to process the image. The operating system does not result in photos that look any different than those processed on any other operating system.


"Your" and "you're" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"They're", "their", and "there" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one.
"Fare" and "fair" are different words with completely different meanings - please use the correct one. The proper expression is "moot point", NOT "mute point".

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
tonylong
...winded
Avatar
54,657 posts
Gallery: 60 photos
Likes: 547
Joined Sep 2007
Location: Vancouver, WA USA
     
Apr 11, 2013 17:38 |  #37

I think the misunderstanding here is the comparative "features" of the two Operating Systems.

Back before Windows actually came out, Steve Jobs and Bill Gates got a look at a "new" OS designed by Xerox. It had a graphical user interface, it caught their attention, and then they went back to their "homes", Jobs to Apple, and Gates to Microsoft.

Jobs pretty much hit the ground running, putting out the early versions of the Apple OS in 1984, causing quite a stir, and building up an early fan base. In the meantime, Microsoft, well, it was quite successful in its MS-DOS software "taking over" the OS world of the IBM empire of business machines. So, MS was pretty busy!

In the meantime, a big thing to say about the new Apple OS is that they began concentrating on graphical applications. Apple developed a reputation for, especially digital video, although in 2002 they came out with iPhoto, which was their "early" photo app.

Well, Microsoft began to catch up, although for the Apple/Mac fan base, it was "too little, too late", even though the first version of Windows came out in 1985.

I didn't start using Windows until, well, a few years later, so I'm not familiar with the various features although I do see that MS Paint, a very basic image editor, was included with all Windows releases.

Over the years, the Apple/Mac system does continue to draw fans. One of the reasons that is "touted" is that they see the system as more "stable", has a better "ease of use", so that to them at least things just "work better". I don't know, I'm not a Mac user (or for that matter a user of any Apple product, including an iPhone:)).

As a PC user (I migrated from Unix back in the early '90s), I've seen Windows grow and stabilize over the years, and add new features and capabilities, but I won't go into a Mac vs. Windows debate ...

But, as to which one gets better "results" in photo processing, well, what's important to realize is that in this day and age, we have major apps in common (Lightroom and Photoshop, for example), and although Apple released the Mac-only Aperture at about the same time as Adobe released Lightroom, understand that with a properly set up/color-managed system, the only differences that I'm aware of are minor "ease of use" issues and features. In fact many Mac users have gone to Lightroom, some have even gone over to Windows (although I don't expect that from the "fan base"). I've never heard people saying that they get better "results" with their photos between one OS and the other...it's just the OS that you choose (personal preference) to work with!


Tony
Two Canon cameras (5DC, 30D), three Canon lenses (24-105, 100-400, 100mm macro)
Tony Long Photos on PBase (external link)
Wildlife project pics here (external link), Biking Photog shoots here (external link), "Suburbia" project here (external link)! Mount St. Helens, Mount Hood pics here (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nekrosoft13
Goldmember
Avatar
4,087 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Likes: 683
Joined Jun 2010
     
Apr 11, 2013 18:49 |  #38
bannedPermanent ban

like every intellengent person in this thread said. it doesn't matter PC or MAC, you will get same results if you have color calibrated system.

Mac are NOT color calibrated from factory. if you use a cheap $90 acer monitor on PC or MAC neither will look good.

use color calibrated IPS screen and its a different story


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Mavgirl
Senior Member
647 posts
Joined Mar 2013
Location: Dallas area
     
Apr 12, 2013 19:21 |  #39

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15815709 (external link)
This an assumption I derived from most people outside photography that I talked too. And I also further realized that most youtube tutorials about photography show Macs being used. Hence my generalized assumptions.

I think a lot of people still think of Macs as better for graphics/photo work because at one time they actually were better. But that hasn't really been the case since the late 90's.


6D/50D/350D with too many lenses
Calumet 4x5, Pentax SV 35mm, Canon A-1, Rebel G and many more toys...

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
nekrosoft13
Goldmember
Avatar
4,087 posts
Gallery: 185 photos
Likes: 683
Joined Jun 2010
     
Apr 12, 2013 19:33 |  #40
bannedPermanent ban

if you ask apple fan If apple product is better, they will say of course, all apple stuff is better at everything.


Gear List

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
XBAMBOBEE
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Dec 2012
Location: IN THE FAST LANE
     
Apr 13, 2013 12:20 as a reply to  @ nekrosoft13's post |  #41

Update:

I calibrated the Mac with the spyder4 pro tool and also calibrated a Samsung PC. Then compared the same photo on both PCs and still got different results. The Mac shows a more darker/deep colored photo while the Samsung has a lighter/pale colored photo.


However, the sRGB readings for the Mac where 97% while the Samsung had 65%-55% after 2 calibrations.

Both laptops did not reach the target brightness of 180. The Mac was at 105 while the PC was at 55.

I was confused on which indicator the software refers to having the brightness adjusted to the middle. I therefore adjusted brightness for both laptops by counting how many brightness level bars each had the set it to the middle.

I would like to know if there is anything else I need to do as far calibration.

Thanks!


2 Legit 2 Quit

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Lowner
"I'm the original idiot"
Avatar
12,924 posts
Likes: 14
Joined Jul 2007
Location: Salisbury, UK.
     
Apr 13, 2013 12:56 |  #42

I'm surprised you struggled to reach the target luminance. By default these monitors are set to burn out ones eyeballs they are so bright. My PC is turned down at 76% and the contrast down at 82% to drop to the suggested luminance.

My Eye 1 display 2 calibrator displays the result as a bar while I'm tweaking the monitors own menu settings, it immediately shows the result so achieving the middle is very straightforward.


Richard

http://rcb4344.zenfoli​o.com (external link)

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,487 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 73
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
     
Apr 13, 2013 13:00 |  #43

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15815733 (external link)
I said "it is like" not that I wear sunglasses when post processing.
Another way to put the logic is looking through a tinted window at a scene outside and looking through a non tinted window of the same scene. That is how photos on a Mac with Retina display look against the same photo on a PC.

Seems like you've only looked at images on a cheap monitor attached to a PC. I'll take an Eizo or NEC PA series monitor over any Apple branded monitor currently available. If I had a Mac Pro I'd most likely choose a NEC PA monitor.


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
Bob_A
Cream of the Crop
Avatar
8,487 posts
Gallery: 48 photos
Likes: 73
Joined Jan 2005
Location: Alberta, Canada
     
Apr 13, 2013 13:08 |  #44

XBAMBOBEE wrote in post #15823641 (external link)
Update:

I calibrated the Mac with the spyder4 pro tool and also calibrated a Samsung PC. Then compared the same photo on both PCs and still got different results. The Mac shows a more darker/deep colored photo while the Samsung has a lighter/pale colored photo.


However, the sRGB readings for the Mac where 97% while the Samsung had 65%-55% after 2 calibrations.

Both laptops did not reach the target brightness of 180. The Mac was at 105 while the PC was at 55.

I was confused on which indicator the software refers to having the brightness adjusted to the middle. I therefore adjusted brightness for both laptops by counting how many brightness level bars each had the set it to the middle.

I would like to know if there is anything else I need to do as far calibration.

Thanks!

What units are you quoting for brightness? If it's cd/m^2 you should be in the range of 80-120 for photo editing. 180 cd/m^2 is way too bright. Also, contrast ratio should be in the range of 200:1 to 350:1.

I'm currently calibrated to 99.5 cd/m^2 and 302:1 with a Delta E of 0.27.


Bob
SmugMug (external link) | My Gear Ratings | My POTN Gallery

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
XBAMBOBEE
THREAD ­ STARTER
Goldmember
Avatar
1,283 posts
Gallery: 12 photos
Likes: 44
Joined Dec 2012
Location: IN THE FAST LANE
     
Apr 13, 2013 13:56 |  #45

Bob_A wrote in post #15823775 (external link)
What units are you quoting for brightness? If it's cd/m^2 you should be in the range of 80-120 for photo editing. 180 cd/m^2 is way too bright. Also, contrast ratio should be in the range of 200:1 to 350:1.

I'm currently calibrated to 99.5 cd/m^2 and 302:1 with a Delta E of 0.27.

Same units as yours. And I'm in the stated brightness range. Though I can't find what contrast readings I have.


2 Legit 2 Quit

  
  LOG IN TO REPLY
sponsored links
(this ad will go away when you log in as a registered member)

6,867 views & 0 likes for this thread
MAC vs PC Photos
FORUMS Post Processing, Marketing & Presenting Photos RAW, Post Processing & Printing 
AAA
x 1600
y 1600

Jump to forum...   •  Rules   •  Index   •  New posts   •  RTAT   •  'Best of'   •  Gallery   •  Gear   •  Reviews   •  Member list   •  Polls   •  Image rules   •  Search   •  Password reset

Not a member yet?
Register to forums
Registered members may log in to forums and access all the features: full search, image upload, follow forums, own gear list and ratings, likes, more forums, private messaging, thread follow, notifications, own gallery, all settings, view hosted photos, own reviews, see more and do more... and all is free. Don't be a stranger - register now and start posting!


COOKIES DISCLAIMER: This website uses cookies to improve your user experience. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies and to our privacy policy.
Privacy policy and cookie usage info.


POWERED BY AMASS forum software 2.1forum software
version 2.1 /
code and design
by Pekka Saarinen ©
for photography-on-the.net

Latest registered member is ibflyin
871 guests, 228 members online
Simultaneous users record so far is 15144, that happened on Nov 22, 2018

Photography-on-the.net Digital Photography Forums is the website for photographers and all who love great photos, camera and post processing techniques, gear talk, discussion and sharing. Professionals, hobbyists, newbies and those who don't even own a camera -- all are welcome regardless of skill, favourite brand, gear, gender or age. Registering and usage is free.