Hi John - The comes equipped with the NEC SpectraViewII color calibration tool and features enhanced color accuracy covering 99.3% of the Adobe RGB color space, 94.8% of the NTSC color space, and 146.4% of the sRGB color space. With a variety of input connectors including DisplayPort, Mini DisplayPort, HDMI, and DVI-D Dual-Link, you can plug this monitor into a variety of computers. You can also connect USB-compatible peripheral devices to either of the two upstream or three downstream USB ports.

The Mac mini is the entry level machine from Apple really designed for people switching from a PC. It is a tiny little desktop computer that packs quite a lot of punch into a small space, and will run Photoshop and Lightroom very well. Oct 19, 2014  Re: Mac mini any good for video editing and photo processing? In reply to photosen • Oct 19, 2014 My mac mini is a couple of years old, and I've done tons of videos with it, using iMovie, and never had a problem.

The Bottom Line I’m sure if we just ran processor and benchmark test that The NEW Mac Pro is the fastest Mac that Apple has ever created. The question you have to ask yourself is, “Do I run benchmark tests or do I use applications on a day to day basis that I’m waiting for tasks to complete?” For me the answer is no. Sure if I spent my days rendering video all day every day, I’d already have the Mac Pro. There would be no question. However, as a photographer I can’t justify the difference in price.

Another test, transcoding a CineForm file to MP4, worked even better: The Mini was just slightly slower than my MacBook Pro, and about half as fast as the iMac Pro. The lack of a dedicated graphics processor really seems to be the weak point here, and unfortunately, there's no easy way to rectify that. There are only three processors available for the Mini, and no option to add a discrete GPU. An extra $300 on the base model we've been testing will get you a 3.2 GHz six-core processor with hyperthreading and Turbo Boost up to 4.6 GHz. That's probably enough speed to leave the MacBook Pro in the dust, and should give the Mini some serious CPU processing power, but it won't improve the graphics performance at all. Apple is clearly expecting some people will use the Mac Mini with an external GPU, but that's at least an additional $500, and hooking up a bulky box with its own fans and power supply seems to defeat the purpose of a compact machine. For a sense of how poor the graphics performance is, I tried one more test, Unigine's Valley benchmark.

My point about a smaller initial investment applies to the majority of photographers out there who are not trained enough to act as technical support for their computer. PC desktops can last as long as a Mac, but my experience with PC laptops has been dreadful.

Having last upgraded my computer in the summer of 2009, I noticed I was no longer able to competently keep up with the files with which I was now working. For the majority of my work I still shoot film, and scan it, and when I shoot digitally, I have 36MP files that weigh around 70MB each. My previous—now backup—writing and surfing-the-net computer was a 15' MacBook Pro, featuring a 2.66 GHz Intel® Core™ i7 processor, 4GB of RAM, and a matte screen; the top-of-the-line MacBook Pro at the time. This computer has served me well for the past six years, especially since I was still in school when I first purchased it and had access to the school’s computer lab for doing any heavy-duty editing. Fast forward to now, and the computer is struggling to make the most basic image adjustments to my 40 x 50', 300MB scans, or even just importing and organizing a couple of hundred 36MP raw files. I knew it was time to upgrade to something that could handle my seemingly modest and fairly normal imaging needs comfortably. When I began my search for the new computer, I had it in my mind that a Mac mini was the way to go.

In the end I don't think the cost is all that different, at least not 50% less. Desktop or Laptop? Another trend I heard constantly from photographers was the use of laptops for photo editing. Maybe this has to do a lot with the Mac line of computers having a sweet spot with the laptop form factor with their MacBook models. Maybe there are just a lot more photographers who are constantly on the go and need a more mobile solution.

Photoshop CC definitely takes advantage of multiple cores and now has Open CL support. So filters will run faster on the new Mac Pro.

IMacs have all of the performance power I need for my workflow, and the option to have a 5K Retina display was certainly enticing. I felt that I could overcome the glossiness just due to the resolution and working room I would be afforded by a screen of this size.

Download camino 1.0 beta 1 for machine 2. The earliest known appearance of 'Microsoft Windows' was in a, and it was heavily promoted at the. Installation instructions Windows May 1985 Beta setup: First, there is no PS/2 mouse support. It was marketed as a response to GUI environments such as,, and, although the first completed release was not until late 1985. Windows 1.0x features co-operative multitasking, tiled windows, ability to launch and integrate with DOS programs, runs on top of existing DOS, supports 8088 based PCs with IBM CGA, Hercules Monochrome, and IBM EGA video. It was followed up.

Whatever the reason, I think this is one you really need to consider carefully. Desktops are quite simply better for editing photos. Yes, that is a blanket across the board statement. Mac or PC, a desktop will run your editing software better than a laptop for less money. MacBooks are very capable of running editing software if you make sure they have some essential upgrades (see the Mac Recommendations section below). In fact, I think MacBooks are better suited than nearly anything from the PC world in the way of laptops.

That is changing a bit, the “ultrabook” line of PC laptops are finally competing fairly well with MacBooks and some of the stuff shown by PC makers at CES 2015 looks really interesting. But going back to the cutthroat market of PCs I will bring up again how the vendors cut every corner they possibly can. I have owned numerous PC laptops over the years and haven't been truly happy with any of them – especially for photo editing. As good as a MacBook can be, I still recommend a desktop. Laptop screens are mostly terrible.

Mark Hewitson wrote: I also use Safari, Word, Excel and Spotify & iTunes. The Mini you describe should easily be able to handle all of these. (If your iTunes Library is very large, you might need to store it on an external disk. Thoughts please? You might want to give some thought to storage options.

My previous MacBook Pro from 2006 ran for 7 years without a single re-install, and was upgraded to a new version of Mac OS X whenever it came out. I never experienced performance degradation in the OS – and if anything, some versions (e.g. Snow Leopard) actually made it feel snappier. However, with careful usage and by using your head before clicking on everything presented to you, a Windows PC is very capable and does give you some more freedom with respect to upgrades and customization than a Mac, that is for sure. Jordan I LOVE IT!!! This post is great, and I’m sure it is perfect for those wanting an upgrade to Mac. However, this doesn’t reeeeaaaalllly define the differences between Mac and PC.

Thanks a bunch! I totally agree with most of this, but I’ve put years of study into this, and written some books on optimizing Windows performance, and I might be able to save you a few bucks * RAM. If you’re spending most of your time in Lightroom, you’re fine with just 4GB of RAM.

If so, what was the last year of the mini where you could update it yourself? Click to expand.The 2014 models do not have quad core i7 processors.

For comparison, a 1 Gb Ethernet connection can transfer data up to 128 MB/second. A 10 Gb Ethernet connection can transfer data up to 1.25 GB/second; ten times faster.

Takes some knowledge. Takes some time. But if budget is one of your key concerns you can minimize the up front investment. If you are a beginner on a tight budget and are willing to be your own tech support then you can potentially save quite a bit of money on a PC and use the rest on photography gear! But be aware, even though the number may be smaller than the up front cost of a Mac, it still takes a good sized amount of money to build a PC good enough for editing photos.

Like so many other things in life, you get what you pay for in a computer. There is a reason those cheap $200 PCs don’t really work that well for nearly anything.

Personal Setup We'll show you how to get the most out of your new Mac, online or in store. • Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD, and shipping 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 16GB of RAM and 1TB SSD. Autodesk Maya 2018 tested using a 144.8MB scene. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini. • Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 64GB of RAM and Intel UHD Graphics 630, and shipping 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 16GB of RAM and Intel Iris graphics. Tested with Rise of the Tomb Raider v1.0.5 using the built-in benchmark, at 1024x768 resolution, with lowest settings and Vsync disabled.

What Monitors are Compatible with the Apple Mac mini? Keeping in mind that Apple got out of the monitor scene years ago, most modern monitors built for your PC also work with the mini. The Thunderbolt 2 and USB 3 ports make connecting most monitors possible, and the MacOS has built-in support for third-party external monitors. If you want to stream movies to your TV and have the connectivity to use two computer monitors, the mini can transition between those tasks with ease. Whether you want to host your own home server or just plug your old PC components into a new Mac, a Mac mini will fill both of these roles admirably. Check out B&H Photo and Video's selection of Apple mini devices to find everything you need to get started.

A friend has a quad core i5 iMac and it runs everything in FCPX a lot more quickly. Quad cores definitely makes a difference! I plan to up the ram to the maximum of 16gb at some point., especially for the integrated graphics. I also want to install a 1Tb SSD and keep the 500Gb in the machine to store my music collection. The SSD will allow the machine to boot and load programs more quickly, I'm not sure if it will significantly improve performance once using any particular program. It would seem we live quite close to each other, I'm in Ealing W.

Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini. • Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 64GB of RAM and 2TB SSD, and shipping 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 16GB of RAM and 1TB SSD. Adobe Photoshop 19.1.6 tested using a 10GB file and rotate, unsharp mask, auto color, and scale functions. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini. • Testing conducted by Apple in October 2018 using preproduction 3.2GHz 6-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 64GB of RAM and 1TB SSD, and shipping 3.0GHz dual-core Intel Core i7-based Mac mini systems with 16GB of RAM and 1TB SSD. Tested with FIO 3.8, 1024KB request size, 150GB test file and IO depth=8. Performance tests are conducted using specific computer systems and reflect the approximate performance of Mac mini.

Despite this, the 2018 Mini has a few flaws that will probably keep it from being the best choice for most people. Summary The 2018 Mac Mini is the first new compact computer we’ve seen from Apple in four years. With an eighth-generation Intel processor and abundant connectivity, including four Thunderbolt 3 and two USB Type-A ports, the Mini is designed to be fast and flexible. Apple is positioning the new Mini as a “pro” machine, but we found that the lack of a dedicated GPU holds this system back. Still, if you don’t need particularly powerful graphics and are looking for a speedy desktop, the Mini has a lot to offer for both the size and the price. Hardware The most impressive thing about the new Mini is its selection of ports.

The most inexpensive Mac Pro starts at about $3,000, which may seem not too bad when you compare it with the iMac because that is only $800 more. Wait, did I just say ONLY $800?

It was the computer I had been eyeing even before I began my serious search. Often known around the art and design world as the go-to option for those not ready or able to step up to the Mac Pro, it seemed to be an ideal balance between performance, price, and space. However, curiosity got the best of me and I began comparing all of the current Mac models to see which one was truly best suited to me. Speed, versatility, and monitors became the three criteria I used to judge each of the models, as well as how long a computer could stand to support me. Going six years with my previous computer felt like a stretch, and I knew I could have updated sooner, or at least made some upgrades to the RAM. However, now I knew that nearly anything new I chose would be an improvement.

In multicore, the Mac Mini was also only about 5 percent slower than the MacBook Pro, though it still fell more than 50 percent behind the iMac. In fairness, the Mini costs less than a third of either of these systems, and its i3 processor is more powerful than I would have expected, but while the CPU might have given a strong performance, with graphics the Mini struggled. In Cinebench's GPU test, the Mini was only able to manage half of the MacBook Pro's performance and one-third of the iMac Pro. Cinebench Single-Core 151 149 176 Cinebench Multi-Core 585 716 1671 Cinebench GPU 40.61 78.13 123.69 fps Geekbench 4 Single-Core 4726 4601 5255 Geekbench 4 Multi-Core 9 33093 Geekbench 4 OpenCL Compute 6 160901 Adobe Media Encoder Cineform to MP4 11:12 11:02 5:55 Geekbench painted a similarly disappointing picture. Against its OpenCL computer test, the integrated Intel graphics in the Mini were 40 percent slower than the MacBook Pro and scored only about one eighth the speed of the iMac Pro.

Seiyuu Danshi is a Japanese-style Visual Novel / Dating sim (whichever you prefer) with voice acting as its main theme. In this game, you'll play as a newbie voice actor who strives for the Seiyuu Award. A brand new Sim Date game is here! Lots of hot Hentai action! Anime dating sim for girls. Browse the newest, top selling and discounted Dating Sim products on Steam. Your anime dating sim for mac are there free dating sites that are any good matches for windows and only know a thread in anyways. Become a pretty anime help. Become a pretty anime help. Collection features anime board on them i would love anime expo 2011.

On the iMac Retina 5K this export took 35 minutes. It gets better in Adobe Premiere Pro CC and the Adobe Media Encoder CC.

I use it for editing Nikon NEF files from a D600 (24mp) using Lightroom and Photoshop. I also use it to edit HD video from the D600 using Final Cut Pro X. Photoshop performance - I have no issues with this at all, and the times I've created large composites (like you, not really above 500mb) it has handled them without issue. Lightroom performance - from what I've read Lightroom likes a powerful processor, and doesn't utilise multi cored processors above 4 cores particularly well (i.e. There is little performance gain going from 4 cores to 6 or 8 etc. Especially when weighed against the extra cost). The gain to be had from the faster processor is in the creation of previews, rendering the file when viewing the raw in the develop module (it takes my machine about 2s to display the image sharp, which can be frustrating with a lot of images to edit), and in exporting the files.

Quad core benefit's performance most when exporting the images. For all other tasks, CPU speed is more significant. An SSD gives the feeling of an overall responsive system so is definitely a good thing to have. GPU speed provides no benefit to Lightroom performance. Going up to a quad core machine with a 512Gb SSD (all other specs similar too) requires you to get a 27' iMac which would have been an increased spend of £400 (using Apple prices for memory). The quad core 27' iMac is an amazing machine and would make for an amazing Lightroom performance experience, but if you already have a screen you like then a saving of £400 goes a long way towards a new camera lens. Based on the conclusion from this person's recent tests I reckon you made a good purchasing choice: From the conclusion it would seem quad core gives the most optimal performance.

Reducing the playback resolution helped a bit, but at a certain point, the footage just became challenging to work with. On one test of 4K footage using color, correction, a blur and a title, the Mini managed to display only 10 percent of the frames during a 10-second playback. And forget about working at double speed (which many editors do to save time); once effects were added, the audio wouldn't even play if I tried to preview faster than real-time. Even using proxies (low-res temporary files in a format that should be easier for the program to read) barely helped the situation. When exporting the footage, a task that generally doesn't rely heavily on the GPU, the Mini performed better. Despite the effects and color correction, Engadget Today came out with no glitches, though it took nearly three times as long as it does on the iMac Pro.