On 3/1/04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] disgorged: >So, anyway, just for the story, this guy gets a pass, to tag along with a >photog from a Boston daily. He goes into the photographer's room before the >game, telling us briefly what equipment they're using. First he tells us >about the cams and lenses (all digital, of course), and then he mentions >that they've all got laptops, and further says that the vast majority of >them are Macs (and, Tanya, in NA, PC's predominate for home use, I think). > >I wondered if there's something about Macs that make them good for that >application, ie: quickly editing then sending jpegs back to the >paper/magazine immediately after the game.
In this day and age it shouldn't make a difference - PCs will do the job just as fast and just as well. The difference is that to make things work fast and well on a PC, you have to know what you are doing - more so than on a Mac. Most photographers are photographers first and computer-users second, maybe even third of fourth - they don't have the time or inclination to spend hours setting things up and troubleshooting. They want something to work and get the job done. A PC will do this just as well, sometimes better - if the user is pretty good at knowing PCs, or has access to someone who does. In the end, to most people, it's down to personal choice. In the end, to most working sports and newspaper photographers it's down to what they've come to know and feel comfortable with / get given. Please let's not let this turn into another PC vs Mac thread :-) Cheers, Cotty ___/\__ || (O) | People, Places, Pastiche ||=====| www.macads.co.uk/snaps _____________________________ Free UK Mac Ads www.macads.co.uk
