| Forum Home | ||||
| Press F1 | ||||
| Thread ID: 74886 | 2006-12-08 22:55:00 | Photography Question | Poppa John (284) | Press F1 |
| Post ID | Timestamp | Content | User | ||
| 505267 | 2006-12-08 22:55:00 | Metla did explain all this to me , but.... Being quite deaf & having short term memory problems I still don't understand. Perhaps some one could explain for me. Maryann is seriously into digital photograpgy. Her Computer is slow when working on pictures. We have :- XP Home SP2....CPU is AMDAthlon XP 1500MHz (4.5 x 333) 1700+. MB is ECS KM400-M Deluxe/KM40m2. MB chipset is VIA VT8378 (A) Unichrome KM400 (A). Video adaptor VIA/S3G Unichrome IGP (32MB) ( Everest says there are two of these ?). 3D Accelerator is VIA/S3 Unichrome. RAM is...512 (480) MB DDR SDRAM. I think Metla said that photography was memory intensive. I asked if we should increase the RAM to 1 GB. & after that I cannot remember, except there was something about a Video or graghics card. Can some one give me an explanation in simple English Please. PJ (In serious mode). Thankyyou. |
Poppa John (284) | ||
| 505268 | 2006-12-08 23:01:00 | lots of ram. not sure about the video card,I didn't think it was that important, but about to be proved wrong | plod (107) | ||
| 505269 | 2006-12-09 00:40:00 | RAM yes, vid card no. If she is dealing with big files namely RAW or TIF or higher resolutions a dual core will be handy, also if she is say batch loading a process for a set of photo's. If she is into it she may look into monitor calibrator as well. For ram 1GB should be enof, if not 2GB. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 505270 | 2006-12-09 01:02:00 | Based on what I see in your post you appear to have on board video hence the 512 Meg RAM less the 32 Meg for video equaling 480 Meg. When you say "working on pictures." could you tell us which application is being used? Photoshop, PaintShopPro, Irfanview or what? What is Maryann trying to do with the pictures? I would certainly up the ram to 1 Gig. Maybe even just buy a video card with dedicated memory (ram) so you can use your 512. Photoshop will take all the ram you can throw at it plus a dedicated partition for a swap file as well. |
Sweep (90) | ||
| 505271 | 2006-12-09 02:12:00 | My father uses photoshop - he used to be a pro photographer, now dabbles with digital. He has 512Mb recently increased from 256mb. He has an FX5200 graphics card and a 2000+ CPU. He has never complained to me about problems working with photos in photoshop. |
pctek (84) | ||
| 505272 | 2006-12-09 02:19:00 | RAM yes, vid card no. If she is dealing with big files namely RAW or TIF or higher resolutions a dual core will be handy, also if she is say batch loading a process for a set of photo's. If she is into it she may look into monitor calibrator as well. For ram 1GB should be enof, if not 2GB. Go away. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 505273 | 2006-12-09 02:27:00 | Alrighty, Yep, I suggested a video card so that the image on screen would be held in dedicated video-ram, and from memory the cpu is a 2200 Sempron, and the pic program is probably Adobe Elements. I haven't yet managed to call in and look at this PC recently but I do know that since it was first setup multiple items have been added into startup with scant regard for performance (and I have suggested these be edited but as I said I haven't yet sat down at the PC for a good look). The system should have plenty of grunt to run photo-manipulation applications, Though keep in mind that a rig such as mine can "feel the load" with some editing tasks. Anyhow, Imo, she needs a tune up, a dedicated video chipset is also a good idea (for all and every PC) and we may need to up the ram but only if its insisted that the system be run poorly configured, otherwise 512mb is plenty. |
Metla (12) | ||
| 505274 | 2006-12-09 02:28:00 | He has never complained to me about problems working with photos in photoshop. He's not as impatient as this generation... |
bob_doe_nz (92) | ||
| 505275 | 2006-12-09 03:50:00 | Depends on file and what the job is, a dSLR 10MP can be a 12MB file in RAW, convert to TIF on Photoshop it gets to 24MB and then if you use 16 bit file its a 50MB size before any manipulation or multiple layers. If its in JPG it would be a diff story. If one choose to use HDR it jumps up by another fold or more. |
Nomad (952) | ||
| 505276 | 2006-12-09 04:43:00 | Come on people, I did ask for simple English. This is Simple Poppa John you are talking to !!! PJ Maryann, now, is much more intelligent, & better looking. PJ |
Poppa John (284) | ||
| 1 2 3 4 | |||||