what video card for editing?

Discussion in 'Digital Photography' started by Jim Waggener, Jan 22, 2004.

  1. Jim Waggener

    Jim Waggener Guest

    I don't play computer games. What is a good card for editing digital
    pictures?

    Thanks,

    Jim




    -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
    Jim Waggener, Jan 22, 2004
    #1
    1. Advertising

  2. One of the very best video cards for photo editing is Matrox.
    The Model 450 is the least expensive Matrox card that supports Dual
    monitors, a really nice feature for use with Photoshop or other photo
    editors.
    You can use the full screen of your main monitor to display your image
    and use a smaller, less expensive monitor to display the toolbars and
    palettes......Very Nice!
    Matrox makes several fancier and more expensive video cards, but unless
    you NEED the extra features, I'd go with the 450.
    Bob Williams

    Jim Waggener wrote:

    > I don't play computer games. What is a good card for editing digital
    > pictures?
    >
    > Thanks,
    >
    > Jim
    >
    > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----
    Robert E. Williams, Jan 22, 2004
    #2
    1. Advertising

  3. Jim Waggener

    Rick Guest

    Just FYI the G400/G400 Max also support dual monitors. The 2D
    image quality is a tad better on them (compared to the G450 &
    G550) as well... the G400 series used slightly better output filters.

    Rick

    "Robert E. Williams" <> wrote in message news:...
    > One of the very best video cards for photo editing is Matrox.
    > The Model 450 is the least expensive Matrox card that supports Dual
    > monitors, a really nice feature for use with Photoshop or other photo
    > editors.
    > You can use the full screen of your main monitor to display your image
    > and use a smaller, less expensive monitor to display the toolbars and
    > palettes......Very Nice!
    > Matrox makes several fancier and more expensive video cards, but unless
    > you NEED the extra features, I'd go with the 450.
    > Bob Williams
    >
    > Jim Waggener wrote:
    >
    > > I don't play computer games. What is a good card for editing digital
    > > pictures?
    > >
    > > Thanks,
    > >
    > > Jim
    > >
    > > -----= Posted via Newsfeeds.Com, Uncensored Usenet News =-----
    > > http://www.newsfeeds.com - The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
    > > -----== Over 100,000 Newsgroups - 19 Different Servers! =-----

    >
    Rick, Jan 22, 2004
    #3
  4. Michael Quack, Jan 23, 2004
    #4
  5. Jim Waggener

    Z Man Guest

    "Michael Quack" <> wrote in message
    news:...
    > In article <>,
    > Jim Waggener says...
    >
    > > I don't play computer games. What is a good card
    > > for editing digital pictures?

    >
    > Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.


    Don't these cards hold only 32MB ram? That's pretty low be today's
    standards, isn't it?
    Z Man, Jan 23, 2004
    #5
  6. Jim Waggener

    Rick Guest

    "Z Man" <> wrote in message news:7z_Pb.5696$...
    >
    > "Michael Quack" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <>,
    > > Jim Waggener says...
    > >
    > > > I don't play computer games. What is a good card
    > > > for editing digital pictures?

    > >
    > > Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.

    >
    > Don't these cards hold only 32MB ram? That's pretty low be today's
    > standards, isn't it?


    It's more than enough for 2D work.

    Rick
    Rick, Jan 23, 2004
    #6
  7. Jim Waggener

    Rick Guest

    I ran the Matrox G400 Max 32 MB for several years and must say it's a great
    card although I recently switched over to the MSI FX 5600 128 MB and to sum
    it up I found a new love, to my suprise the 5600 does 2d a tad better and
    does a tremendous job with 3d.

    Rick


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.564 / Virus Database: 356 - Release Date: 1/19/04
    Rick, Jan 23, 2004
    #7
  8. "Jim Waggener" <> wrote in news:40105286_2
    @corp.newsgroups.com:

    > I don't play computer games. What is a good card for editing digital
    > pictures?
    >

    Put a Matrox G450 in my new computer and it looks great.
    Mike Latondresse, Jan 23, 2004
    #8
  9. Jim Waggener

    Rick Guest

    "Z Man" <> wrote in message
    news:7z_Pb.5696$...
    >
    > "Michael Quack" <> wrote in message
    > news:...
    > > In article <>,
    > > Jim Waggener says...
    > >
    > > > I don't play computer games. What is a good card
    > > > for editing digital pictures?

    > >
    > > Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.




    I read the Matrox NG for 2+ years and although I had the G400 Max and never
    a G450 the regulars in the group preferred the G400 Max hands down.

    Rick


    ---
    Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free.
    Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com).
    Version: 6.0.566 / Virus Database: 357 - Release Date: 1/22/04
    Rick, Jan 23, 2004
    #9
  10. Jim Waggener

    Rick Guest

    "Rick" <> wrote in message news:...
    > I read the Matrox NG for 2+ years and although I had the G400 Max and never
    > a G450 the regulars in the group preferred the G400 Max hands down.


    That's because it's a better card than the G450 in most respects.
    Not all though -- a G450 can run a secondary monitor at a higher
    refresh rate than a G400 Max. But for a single display setup a
    G400 Max is a better choice, because of the slightly better 2D
    image quality.

    Rick (another Rick :)
    Rick, Jan 23, 2004
    #10
  11. In article <7z_Pb.5696$>,
    Z Man says...

    > > Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.

    >
    > Don't these cards hold only 32MB ram?


    Yes.

    > That's pretty low be today's
    > standards, isn't it?


    For gaming. But still enough to overdrive *any* monitor
    on the market in 2D. Photoshop doesn't have any 3D at all.

    --
    Michael Quack <>

    http://www.photoquack.de/glamour/1.htm
    http://www.photoquack.de/fashion/1.htm
    Michael Quack, Jan 23, 2004
    #11
  12. "Z Man" <> writes:

    >> Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.


    >Don't these cards hold only 32MB ram? That's pretty low be today's
    >standards, isn't it?


    Doesn't matter for 2D. For 2D, you only need enough memory for the
    frame buffer plus a bit extra for fonts and such. Even at 1600x1200
    with 32 bit colour, the frame buffer takes less than 8 MB.

    Doing 3D graphics fast needs lots more memory on the card. You want two
    complete screens worth of image memory so you can do double-buffering
    (displaying one frame artifact-free while the next is being generated
    invisibly). You need space for texture maps that will be applied to all
    of the objects that are being drawn. You need a Z-buffer to determine
    what's visible accurately, and maybe a stencil buffer for shadows. And
    recent cards have programmable hardware (shaders) that take more
    resources. That's why high-end cards have lots of RAM - for 3D.

    Dave
    Dave Martindale, Jan 24, 2004
    #12
  13. Dave Martindale wrote:
    > "Z Man" <> writes:
    >
    >>> Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.

    >
    >> Don't these cards hold only 32MB ram? That's pretty low be today's
    >> standards, isn't it?

    >
    > Doesn't matter for 2D. For 2D, you only need enough memory for the
    > frame buffer plus a bit extra for fonts and such. Even at 1600x1200
    > with 32 bit colour, the frame buffer takes less than 8 MB.
    >
    > Doing 3D graphics fast needs lots more memory on the card. You want
    > two complete screens worth of image memory so you can do
    > double-buffering (displaying one frame artifact-free while the next
    > is being generated invisibly). You need space for texture maps that
    > will be applied to all of the objects that are being drawn. You need
    > a Z-buffer to determine what's visible accurately, and maybe a
    > stencil buffer for shadows. And recent cards have programmable
    > hardware (shaders) that take more resources. That's why high-end
    > cards have lots of RAM - for 3D.


    But in DirectX 9 you've now got 128-bit color support: 4 32-bit floating
    point RGBA fields. This allows for much higher dynamic range and would be
    of great use to digital photographiers - if all the other input equipment
    like cameras and scanners actually supported it. I'm not aware of the
    current trends in that regard. But anyways, if 128-bit color happens then
    you will have a 32MB framebuffer, not an 8MB framebuffer, for 1 of those
    1600x1200 images.

    Sorry I'm not really up on what video cards do 128-bit color in a manner
    that matters to digital photographiers. Just it might be worth asking
    around about that.

    --
    Cheers, www.indiegamedesign.com
    Brandon Van Every Seattle, WA

    20% of the world is real.
    80% is gobbledygook we make up inside our own heads.
    Brandon J. Van Every, Jan 25, 2004
    #13
  14. Jim Waggener

    Ray White Guest

    Besides Matrox Video cards .......Does anyone have any experience or
    opinions
    about ATI Radeaon cards.

    ......The reason I ask is, my new in the box ATI 9500Pro does not have any
    PVR features
    So.....Do I keep it and purchase a PCI TV video Card or return it and get a
    ALL in One
    card.......I don't play any games on the Win 2000 computer that will recieve
    this new video card.....

    TIA
    Ray
    Ray White, Jan 25, 2004
    #14
  15. In article <bv0lhh$8g$>,
    Ray White says...

    > Besides Matrox Video cards .......Does anyone have
    > any experience or opinions about ATI Radeaon cards.


    The quality of their drivers suckes.

    > .....The reason I ask is, my new in the box
    > ATI 9500Pro does not have any PVR features


    Ah, that! Now I understand. It didn't occur to me that
    you could mean digitizing also, when you said editing.

    Frankly, digitizing with regular video cards is not
    the way to go for top quality results.

    Why not simply get firewire and a digital camcorder?

    If you don't play games, you could as well sell
    the Radeon and get a Matrox.

    --
    Michael Quack <>

    http://www.photoquack.de/glamour/1.htm
    http://www.photoquack.de/fashion/1.htm
    Michael Quack, Jan 25, 2004
    #15
  16. In article <buvb8n$mgglv$-berlin.de>,
    Brandon J. Van Every says...

    > >>> Any Matrox model G450 DH and above. No other.


    > But in DirectX 9 you've now got 128-bit color support: 4 32-bit floating
    > point RGBA fields. This allows for much higher dynamic range and would be
    > of great use to digital photographiers - if all the other input equipment
    > like cameras and scanners actually supported it. I'm not aware of the
    > current trends in that regard. But anyways, if 128-bit color happens then
    > you will have a 32MB framebuffer, not an 8MB framebuffer, for 1 of those
    > 1600x1200 images.
    >
    > Sorry I'm not really up on what video cards do 128-bit color in a manner
    > that matters to digital photographiers. Just it might be worth asking
    > around about that.


    As I said: Matrox G450 DH *and above*.

    "And above" would be the Matrox Parhelia, 10 bit per channel.
    Plus the usual supreme Matrox signal quality.


    --
    Michael Quack <>

    http://www.photoquack.de/glamour/1.htm
    http://www.photoquack.de/fashion/1.htm
    Michael Quack, Jan 25, 2004
    #16
    1. Advertising

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

It takes just 2 minutes to sign up (and it's free!). Just click the sign up button to choose a username and then you can ask your own questions on the forum.
Similar Threads
  1. ripper

    Video editing software?

    ripper, Sep 25, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    413
    Boomer
    Oct 8, 2003
  2. Rhys

    video editing

    Rhys, Oct 17, 2003, in forum: Computer Support
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    432
    °Mike°
    Oct 18, 2003
  3. BillKirch

    add better video card to an intergrated video card??

    BillKirch, Feb 1, 2004, in forum: Computer Information
    Replies:
    4
    Views:
    2,070
    Tom Dyer
    Feb 1, 2004
  4. devilboy

    Good video card/monitor combo for editing?

    devilboy, Apr 21, 2005, in forum: Digital Photography
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    258
    devilboy
    Apr 21, 2005
  5. Giuen
    Replies:
    0
    Views:
    750
    Giuen
    Sep 12, 2008
Loading...

Share This Page