That's ok, I wanted to read your comments. I learn a lot from you guys. Denise
----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 1:26 PM Subject: [filmscanners] Re: Video card for imaging Oops. sorry I thought I was off-list. sheesh, not enough coffee this morning. Ken ----- Original Message ----- From: "Ken C" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 12:25 PM Subject: Re: [filmscanners] Video card for imaging > Alex, > No worries about being "on topic" since we're not "on list". Just about any > decent modern video card will do fine for image editing these days. > Something with 32 meg of memory would work fine, and should be reasonably > priced. Where the new video cards are headed, with high costs, is in the > realm of performance for games. So unless you're a major gamer who has to > get the best frames-per-second performance as your hero kills or maims his > opponents, you don't need to go for the latest and thoroughly expensive 64 > meg nVidia whatever card. > > Having said that, if you do 3D graphics development that involves having to > render the file, I'm told that a fast video card can help speed that up, > though a fast cpu is what determines how quickly your file will be rendered. > What graphics apps do you use? > > I built my latest pc with the express purpose of using it for graphics and > web work. I have a Sony 19" monitor and was finding it bothersome and slow > to have to always drag the application's dialogue boxes out of the way to > see parts of the image I was working on. This was always a sore point with > me for PhotoShop, and I found it a pain with Dreamweaver. So, I built this > box specifically to run Windows XP so I can run dual monitors. My second > monitor is a 15", which is fine because I just drag the dialogue boxed onto > it. Just completed that mod this weekend and I love it. You need to > install a 2nd video card, unless you get a special video card (Matrox sells > one) that are dual head. This second card only needs to be basic enough to > run a monitor at the resolution you need (and must be compatible with this > function onXP). > > If you run XP you'll need lots of RAM but if I recall you were going to > start at 512 meg, which is what I have and is certainly enough for XP - more > would be better of course. And if you have more than 1 pc, networking is a > lot easier to set up with XP as is Internet access. I have used W98SE > successfully but it's not as stable, but be sure to avoid Windows ME, it's > not a good product. > > Feel free to ask anything else, I'm in and out but can usually respond > fairly quickly. I don't mind having a conversation with someone with > similar interests. > > Regards, Ken > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: "Alex Zabrovsky" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Sent: Sunday, January 13, 2002 11:30 AM > Subject: [filmscanners] Video card for imaging > > > Well, to be on-topic one additional question which is related to PC > hardware: is it important to chose certain Video Adapters for further image > editing or just anyone available today will do fine ? > > Regards, > Alex Z > > -------------------------------------------------------------------- ------ -- > ------------ > Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe > filmscanners' > or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title > or body > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- ------------------ Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Unsubscribe by mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED], with 'unsubscribe filmscanners' or 'unsubscribe filmscanners_digest' (as appropriate) in the message title or body
