Review of the 2018 Macbook Pro for Photographers

I just picked up a top of the line 2018 MacBook Pro. How good is it for photography? Surprisingly good. I was expecting a modest bump in performance, but I got a lot more than that in some areas…


Why upgrade a 2-year old Macbook Pro?

My laptop is the single most important part of my business, it touches everything I do – image editing, software development, travel planning, my website, etc. I put a lot of value on speed improvements.

That said, I debated this purchase a bit. First, Apple computers are not cheap (though that cost offset was significantly by the high resale value of my old laptop, as well as tax deductions for a business expense for the amount the new computer costs over the resale of the old one). There’s no doubt I could get same or better performance for less money with a Windows machine, I’m very comfortable with them having built them myself for years, and Windows 10 eliminates my old hangups about Windows quality. But I just prefer Macs now after years of use, and I have a fair bit of Mac-specific software (including scripts I’ve written to package and update Lumenzia). So an Apple laptop is still worth paying a premium to me (though I’d probably recommend Windows machines for any photographer looking for the best performance/cost ratio).

Secondly, I had some concerns about potentially reduction in battery life with the new RAM used to support 32GB. Apple previously stated that battery life would take a hit with the type of RAM they’ve put into the 2018 MacBook Pro, but they’re now saying that the battery capacity was increased enough to offset that issue. That raised questions for me, but I was still willing to give it a try (knowing that I could return the laptop if it didn’t perform as expected).

In reviewing the benchmarks I’ve seen on the CPUs and system performance for the 2016 and 2018 laptops, I was expecting about a 30% increase in speed, which means a 25% reduction in the time it would take to complete a given task. I generally feel that a 20% difference is required to be noticeable, so this isn’t much above my threshold. But I wasn’t too sure what I’d really see. Photoshop isn’t generally optimized for multi-core performance and this laptop improves speed in multiple ways (CPU, RAM speed, 32GB of RAM to avoid using the SSD disk for memory, SSD speed, and a modestly improved GPU).

Ultimately, I decided that the performance gains would likely be worth the investment, and I’d have a few weeks to test things out and return it if I was wrong. So I put the new laptop through it’s paces when it arrived.


Tested specifications

Both of these machines are the maximum specification you can by in their respective year.

  • Old laptop: 2016 with a 2.9GHz Core i7 CPU, 16GB of LPDDR3 RAM, and 2TB SSD.
  • New laptop: 2018 with a 2.9GHz Core i9 CPU, 32GB of DDR4 RAM, and 4TB SSD (yeah, I’m that guy who sprung for that insane SSD – I’ve already got 8TB of working data and want to take more of it with me).

I was particularly interested in the jump to 32GB of RAM. Even when I close everything but Photoshop, my files are complex enough that my computer is routinely using the internal drive as virtual RAM. That creates a potentially significant speed penalty. The better CPU should of course benefit performance, but there is no reason to think the larger SSD would outperform any of the smaller (and much less expensive) options.



Computer reviews always seem to have these fun benchmark numbers that are somewhat meaningless to me. I get the numbers, but they don’t really tell me much about how the computer will perform for what I need. For example, I trust that new laptops get 10 hours of battery life for surfing the web or even watching some videos. But when you are creating videos like I am, that can easily mean the battery is completely drained in less than 2. So I thought I’d share my own personal test results with typical photography work.

This isn’t a rigorous scientific test, but I’ve been truly impressed with the performance I’ve seen. The numbers below are based on head to head tests with everything kept as similar as possible. I ran the new machine on a clone of the old one and worked from same apps and images. The test numbers are based on the average of 1 to 3 samples for any given test.

General disk speed (tested with Black Magic)

  • ~75% faster write, going from roughly 1500 to 2700 MB/s (about a 43% reduction in time to complete a theoretical task). It’s hard to be too specific about the speed, as Black Magic doesn’t offer an average test run and the 2016 performance varies a bit from run to run. Needless to say, the 2018 is clearly faster and is by far the fastest disk I have ever seen.
  • ~85% faster read, going from roughly 1500 to 2800 MB/s (about a 47% reduction in time to complete a theoretical task)


  • Surface blur on D810 image: 15.2 vs 23.7 (reduced time by 36%)
  • Image resize to 300dpi 40×60″: 20.0 vs 33.3 (reduced time by 40%)
  • Nik on 40×60″ Smart Object: 12 vs 70s (reduced time by 82%)
  • Smart Sharpen on 40×60″ Smart Object: 15 vs 253/213 (94% reduction)
  • Unsharp mask on 40×60″ Smart Object: 2.3 vs 8.5 (73% reduction)
  • Gaussian blur on 40×60″ Smart Object: 3.7 vs 19.1 (81% reduction)


  • 9 image pano in LR: 48.4 vs 78.5s (38% reduction)
  • Build 560 standard previews: 182 vs 264s (31% reduction)


  • Export 10 minute video: 182 vs 231s (21% reduction)
  • Transcode 10 minute video: 139 vs 184s (24% reduction)

I was truly stunned by these results. Everything I do for photography seems to involved about 30-90% less waiting. These are huge differences that will truly save me a lot of time. I was shocked at how much faster Nik and Smart Sharpen are in particular.

I was also surprised by the video performance, but by how it improved less than my Photoshop work. It is clearly a valuable jump, but I though I’d see the most gains here given videos apps are generally better optimized for multi-core work and the 2018 has 6 cores vs 4 in the 2016. As I spend more time creating photos than videos, I’ve very happy with the overall performance.

I can’t say how much each component added to performance (since I don’t have other configurations to test or test methods that would more clearly differentiate). The CPU certainly matters. 32GB should matter (though I tested under heavy RAM loads, I did not yet encounter performance hits on the 16GB machine). I would expect the SSD size does not (I haven’t read anything about different controllers or performance).

If I were buying this with a tighter budget, my priorities would be (in order): (1) screen size (unless routinely using an external monitor), (2) SSD size sufficient to allow recent work to run off the internal drive (probably 1TB), (3) faster CPU, and then (4) the 32GB RAM option. The SSD is very helpful for opening and saving files (it runs about 58-77X faster than an external spinning drive, and nearly 7X faster than my external Thunderbolt SSD). My recommendation for the CPU here is that it offers a 31% boost in base clock speed, while the 32GB RAM would only boost speed under heavy load and I wasn’t yet running into that under relatively heavy conditions (simultaneously opened Firefox, iTunes, LR and PS with a large layered file). At some point, the increased RAM will certainly matter. If you do a lot of panos or other memory-intensive work, 32GB of RAM may be a higher priority. I don’t know if the video card upgrade is really meaningful for Photographers (I suspect potentially for creating video), but it’s a smaller incremental cost if you want to go for it.


RAM performance testing

The theoretical advantage of having more RAM (32 vs 16GB) is that the computer’s performance does not degrade as you work on larger files or otherwise use more memory. To get a feel for things, I tried testing stripped down (just running Photoshop with the single layer test file described above), vs with a large file in Photoshop, vs with other apps running (iTunes, Lightroom, and Firefox). I was very surprised at how well OSX manages 16GB of RAM. Whether memory compression or other techniques, I found that the 16GB machine did not slow down much until I started to really use abnormally large amounts of RAM (beyond what I would normally do).

I tried using Photoshop’s Image Resize (Preserve Details 2)  to enlarge the same D810 image by 10X horizontally and vertically (which Photoshop estimated would create a 23GB image). This took 95.2s in the 2018 vs 204 in the 2016 (a 53% reduction in time). So clearly, the performance gap has started to widen from the 40% benefit I saw above, but this is also a file size (and certainly resolution) well beyond what I normally use.

I then tried using the same resizing to take that D810 image to 100,000 x 66,739 pixels (which Photoshop estimated would create a 37GB image). This took 165 vs 904s (an 82% reduction). So clearly, the gap has widened at this point and suggests that the extra RAM is important (but this scenario is well beyond any foreseeable use I have for Photoshop).

This is a fairly simple test, so I also tested a file with enormous numbers of layers (closer to my normal use case). I did not record the numbers from that testing, but did not see the 2018’s performance benefit grow significantly even when testing files that had far more layers than I typically use. That’s not the result I expected, but that’s why it is important to test things yourself and not just rely on theoretical benefits.

Bottom line, 32GB of RAM matters, but nearly as much as I expected. Kudos to Apple and Adobe, they seem to manage limited memory better than I assumed. Unless you are doing serious panos or other work with very large files (probably 8-10GB files or larger PSB files, which is unusual), I’d recommend upgrading the CPU before the RAM. The CPU will benefit nearly any work you do, where the RAM upgrade will only create a benefit under certain conditions.


Other considerations

I upgraded for increased speed and storage, pure and simple. But there are some other nice enhancements that I appreciate in the 2018 update:

  • The speakers are better, which is impressive given how much the 2016 speakers blew me away.
  • The keyboard is somewhat improved. It’s a bit more quiet, and the dust/crumb improvements are welcome (though I never ran into the reported issues with the 2016 butterfly keyboard)
  • The T2 chip should offer some extra security (I don’t really use Siri much, so I don’t know that I’ll benefit from that part of the upgrade).
  • Bluetooth 5 may turn out to be something I appreciate down the road, I’m not really sure.
  • My initial experience with the battery seems very similar to the 2016. That may actually mean an improvement of sorts given how much more work I can do in “10 hours”. In other words, I would bet that when Photoshop needs 15s vs 4+ minutes to do Smart Sharpen, there’s probably more battery power used while I’m waiting. At a minimum, it seems my fears about battery life potentially being impacted have not materialized.

Note that photographers should turn off the new “true tone” display option in system settings – this runs counter to proper color management.


Overall impressions

Any computer upgrade is a big expense, especially a Mac, but I’ve been truly impressed with the performance improvements compared to a laptop that is only 2 years old. The performance is the whole story here, there aren’t any other updates I’d really call very notable (and no compelling reason for PC users to take a second look for this update). If you’re willing to invest to get the best or are coming from an older Mac, this is a very nice laptop for photography that’s definitely worth a closer look.  The 4TB SSD is definitely overkill for most users, but getting the 1 or 2TB SSD to be able to edit your latest photos from the internal drive is definitely worth considering for the speed boost. The 32GB of RAM is a particularly nice option and highly recommended for photographers working on complex layered images. Without a doubt, this is the fastest I’ve ever used.

How to Stitch a Multiple Exposure Panorama

There are so many insanely great techniques these days for creating images that go beyond the limit of camera sensors and lenses. Blending multiple exposures can be used to expand dynamic range for more stunning color and detail. Panoramas can be used to create extremely wide angles of view for unique and powerful compositions. I previously showed how to create and correct a super-wide pano with a single exposure. But some scenes, like this waterfall and mountain image, require both blending and panorama techniques.

To capture this scene, I took 24 RAW exposures (8 different camera angles with 3 exposures for each position). Combining all those images sounds like a scary task, but it was actually very easy to do right in Lightroom using the following workflow:

Step #1: Combine all the exposures for each camera angle. This should be done first, because creating multiple panoramas can create alignment challenges.

  • Select all the exposures for a given camera angle by <shift> or <ctrl/cmd> clicking on them.
  • Right-click and choose Photo Merge / HDR.
  • Turn off auto-alignment if you shot on a tripod (as there is some risk that it may actually cause misalignment).
  • I generally leave “auto settings” off, but it doesn’t matter. You can change them later in the Develop Module (this option just presets some Develop Sliders, typically to boost shadows and reduce highlights and compress the overall tonal range).
  • Set de-ghosting to low (if you have some moving clouds, water, etc) or none (otherwise). If you have substantial moving elements in the image, you may need to clone later in Photoshop or consider a more advanced tool for your panorama. The “show de-ghost overlay” just shows where de-ghosting will occur and has no effect on the output.
  • Check “create stack”, as this helps to keep things organized.
  • Repeat the process for each view (using the same settings for all).

Step #2: Combine all the new HDRs into a panorama.

  • Select all the HDRs by <shift> or <ctrl/cmd> clicking on them.
  • Right-click and choose Photo Merge / Panorama.
  • Try the Spherical or Cylindrical projections (it is unlikely you’ll need perspective). A single-row pano theoretically should use cylindrical, but the spherical can sometimes produce a desirable result.
  • Turn off “auto crop” initially to see the edges of the image.
  • Adjust “Boundary Warp” as desired to fill in areas of missing pixels.
  • Turn on “auto crop” as needed to remove any remaining missing pixels, or leave it unchecked if you prefer to use content aware fill in Photoshop to fix these areas instead. Both are good options, depending on how critical the content is at the edge of your image.
  • Check “create stack”, as this helps to keep things organized.


At this point, you should have a final RAW (DNG) file which may be processed just like any other RAW file in Lightroom and Photoshop. If you want to learn how to multi-process RAW files to extract maximum color and detail using luminosity masks, be sure to check out my new Exposure Blending Master Course.


Dubai Marine Layers

Some mornings are just magical. I scoured the AirBNB listings in Dubai ones that might have a good view. There are never really any guarantees with these things, but I feel like I hit a home run this trip. I had open access to the pool deck on the roof, a great view of the Dubai Marina, and the perfect amount of fog. Fog can be a tricky thing in Dubai, there’s a good chance you’ll be stuck in a cloud if you aren’t on top of a very tall building. This view probably doesn’t exist on a lot of foggy mornings, so I considered myself lucky to have thick but low fog.

This view also also relaxes me for another reason. I stayed here for hours with my laptop working on updates to Lumenzia. I consider myself pretty lucky to be able to have a view like this while working on a computer.

Color Grading with BlendIf

One of the best ways to give an image more emotional impact is through color grading. “Color grading” generally refers to any alteration or enhancement of color for artistic purposes (unlike “color correction”, which is about accuracy). In practice, it can mean a lot of things. Punching up sunset colors. Toning a portrait to give it a hipster look. Adding a color theme to a movie to convey a subtle message.

From a more technical standpoint, you can think of color grading as remapping colors and tones to create an effect. Photoshop includes several tools that enable this, including Color Balance, Selective Color, HSL, Lookup Tables (LUTs), RGB curves, Solid Color layers set to overlay blend mode, etc. However,with the exception of LUTs, these tools aren’t very precise. Color Balance adjustment layers are a great example.

With Color Balance layers, you get an option to target “shadows”, “midtones”, and “highlights”. Sounds perfect for split-toning, right? Not so fast. This tool probably doesn’t work at all like you might think. There are several important things to know about Color Balance:

  • For the most part, it really doesn’t target shadows, midtones, and highlights – unless you adjust a few of these at the same time. For example, adjusting the “shadows” will create significant changes well into bright highlights, and adjusting “highlights” will affect very deep shadows. You can, however, adjust shadows and highlights in opposite directions in the same adjustment for greater control (ie, you can set blue shadows and yellow highlights and you’ll see better targeting). But the key thing to know is that shadows/midtones/highlights are NOT giving you very precise control. The simplest solution here is to use BlendIf, which we’ll cover below.
  • The same adjustment values can create very different colors when set under shadows, midtones, or highlights. For example, using 100 Red and -100 Yellow will cause a shift toward yellow when set under shadows, orange under midtones, and red under highlights. You can make some adjustments to the sliders to try and match results, but it can be an exercise in frustration. I generally take the approach of making adjustments first in the most relevant area (ie, highlights when targeting highlights) and then tweaking as needed. Also note that negative adjustments in shadows affect highlights more than making the same adjustments in the highlights. So if you really want to push yellow or magenta into your sky, try using those adjustments in shadows in addition to in the highlights section. Or just duplicate your layer for twice the effect.
  • “Preserve luminosity” is very unpredictable, and often causes MORE change in luminosity. It can cause significant changes in color as well. I almost always leave this option off. If you want to avoid luminosity shifts, just set the blend mode on the layer to “color”.

You can make some great enhancements with a Color Balance layer on its own, but using a more precise targeting by shadow, midtone, or highlight will allow you to properly split-tone and color grade your images. There are two basic ways to do that targeting: luminosity masks and BlendIf. While luminosity masks offer more control, they are generally overkill in this situation. And they have some drawbacks: you may need to re-create them if you change underlying layers and they can increase the size of your file substantially. BlendIfs produce great results that dynamically update as you change the image and add nothing to the file size. I do nearly all color grading with BlendIfs.

In the video tutorial and written instructions below, you’ll learn how to use BlendIf to use Color Balance with greater precision. Once you get comfortable with that, try using the technique on other types of layers, this is just one example of how to color grade with BlendIf. You can apply the same general workflow to any adjustment layer, including: Solid Color layers (probably using a blend mode like soft light or overlay), Selective Color, Color Lookup, and HSL.

If you want to take things further, be sure to check out my new Exposure Blending Master Course, where I go into great depth on many ways to get incredible color from your images using more techniques like this.


I’ve built advanced BlendIf support into my Lumenzia luminosity masking panel. If you have it, here’s the workflow you should use to color grade with Color Balance layers:

  1. Click the Color Balance icon in Lumenzia
  2. Either switch to “BlendIf:under” mode or hold the key while clicking on any of the preview buttons such as L2, D4, or Z8. If you want to see what areas of the image are being targeted with the BlendIf, click the “If” button at the bottom of Lumenzia for a green overlay (and click “If” again to clear the visualization). You can do this after adjusting the color balance layer, but it often helps get to the right settings in Color Balance more quickly if you have some rough targeting to start.
  3. Adjust the Color Balance layer. If you are targeting highlights or shadows, you may get better results by adjusting the sliders in those sections, as you’ll probably find the colors respond more the way you would expect.
  4. You keep iterating by adjusting the Color Balance layer, by trying different BlendIf buttons, or double-clicking the squares icon on the layer to manually customize the BlendIf further.

If you do not have Lumenzia, use the following workflow:

  1. Create a new Color Balance layer in Photoshop
  2. Adjust the Color Balance layer. You’ll need to do this first, or you won’t see what you are affecting when you adjust the BlendIf sliders. If you are targeting highlights or shadows, you may get better results by adjusting the sliders in those sections of Color Balance, as you’ll probably find the colors respond more the way you would expect.
  3. Double-click the right-side of the layer (the blank area right of the name) to open the “layer style” dialog, where you’ll see “Blend If” at the bottom.
  4. Adjust the black and white sliders for the “underlying layer” to roughly target the shadows, midtones, or highlights.
  5. The initial result will have some rough edges, so you need to split the sliders (which creates a transition from areas which are included or excluded in the mask). To do that hold and click and drag on the sliders.

Soft Warmth on the North Shore

There’s nothing like watching the sun rise over Lake Superior. The skies are spectacular. The water feels pure and clean. And you almost always get the view to yourself.

I created this image primarily with luminosity masks using techniques shown in my Exposure Blending Master Class and dodging and burning.

Waves from Lake Superior crash into a small rocky island of evergreen trees and the North Shore of Minnesota during a golden yellow and cloudy sunset

See licensing for Commercial and Creative Commons (Non-Commercial, Attribution) Licensing terms.
Join my affiliate program.
See my ethics and privacy statement.