Skip navigation
Currently Being Moderated

Lightroom 3.5 RC Performance Feedback

Aug 23, 2011 4:30 PM

There are a couple of potentially significant performance related bug fixes in the 3.5 RC (there's a couple more being evaluated/investigated internally) and I wanted to start a thread for feedback on where we stand at this point.

 

I'm really hoping to keep this thread focused. That hopefully means no chatter on functional (as opposed to strictly performance) bugs, chatter and critiques on how we're approaching investigating and getting bugs fixed in dot releases, feedback on versions other than 3.5, or feedback that doesn't involve comparing 3.5 behavior to some earlier 3.x version (noting comparisons to 2.x in addition is fine, of course, but I'm focusing on evaluating how effective the changes in 3.5 are against the reported issues).

 

Example of the kind of feedback I'm looking to gather: "Compared to 3.4.1, when I do X it seems a bit faster. I still see high memory use and correspondingly sluggish performance when I do Y, though. My system is running Windows 7 64-bit and has 8 GB of RAM and 2 Xeon 3.0 Ghz Quad Core processors. My image files are on a striped RAID and I have two 1920x1080 monitors."

 

One other minor inquiry to note (at the risk of maybe doing too much in one thread): For those that do see sluggishness when brushing or applying dust spots, I'd be quite curious to know if it is improved if you clear the history states via the "X" in the upper right corner of the panel. There's a fix that's been confirmed to help that problem and we're considering putting it into the 3.5 final version, but some empirical confirmation that impacted customers would be helped by it would be worth knowing. A short addendum to the above post with "Clearing history [helps | hurts | has no obvious effect] on Develop adjustment interactive performance." will give me some useful information to use to evaluate the likely outcome of including that fix.

 

Thanks as always for your patience and participation,

 

Dan Tull

Adobe Systems

Lightroom QE

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 4:44 PM   in reply to DanTull

    The following is for a new, 13.3 inch (1440 x 900 pixels) MacBook Air (1.7 GHz, Core i5), 4 GB RAM, 128GB SSD running OS X Lion (10.7.1).

    Input files are Nikon D700 NEF.

     

    Calculation time for a 1:1 preview image (average over 100 files):

     

    Lightroom 3.4.1      2.9 seconds

    Lightroom 3.5 RC   4.0 seconds

     

    The relative "slowness" of 3.5RC may just be a reflection of the "RC" nature of the release.  I'd be curious to know the answer.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 5:09 PM   in reply to Bob_Peters

    Bob_Peters wrote:

     

    The following is for a new, 13.3 inch (1440 x 900 pixels) MacBook Air (1.7 GHz, Core i5), 4 GB RAM, 128GB SSD running OS X Lion (10.7.1).

    Input files are Nikon D700 NEF.

     

    Calculation time for a 1:1 preview image (average over 100 files):

     

    Lightroom 3.4.1      2.9 seconds

    Lightroom 3.5 RC   4.0 seconds

     

    The relative "slowness" of 3.5RC may just be a reflection of the "RC" nature of the release.  I'd be curious to know the answer.

     

    Bob, how did you do this?  Did you install both side-by-side, and run them on the same/different/copies of the same images on the same/different catalogs, etc.

     

    I'm worried that you might have populated the Camera Raw cache with 3.5RC and then run 3.4.1 with the cache already populated, thus making it faster, but details would help.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 5:14 PM   in reply to DanTull

    For the kind of information you are asking for with "no chatter" it seems like you need to find an employee, rather than make such a request on a forum, the idea of a forum suggesting a more democratic and individualized presentation of queries and ideas.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 5:23 PM   in reply to Lee Jay-ZyZk56

    Lee Jay wrote:

     

    Bob_Peters wrote:

     

    The following is for a new, 13.3 inch (1440 x 900 pixels) MacBook Air (1.7 GHz, Core i5), 4 GB RAM, 128GB SSD running OS X Lion (10.7.1).

    Input files are Nikon D700 NEF.

     

    Calculation time for a 1:1 preview image (average over 100 files):

     

    Lightroom 3.4.1      2.9 seconds

    Lightroom 3.5 RC   4.0 seconds

     

    The relative "slowness" of 3.5RC may just be a reflection of the "RC" nature of the release.  I'd be curious to know the answer.

     

    Bob, how did you do this?  Did you install both side-by-side, and run them on the same/different/copies of the same images on the same/different catalogs, etc.

     

    I'm worried that you might have populated the Camera Raw cache with 3.5RC and then run 3.4.1 with the cache already populated, thus making it faster, but details would help.

     

    I have 3.4.1 and 3.5RC installed on the MacBook Air.

     

    I did the initial timing with 3.4.1 a couple of days ago and also arrived at a value of 2.9 sec/NEF.

     

    Today, I used the same files for 3.4.1 and 3.5.RC but I did run 3.5 first.  However, the time for 3.4.1 was the same as the other day.

     

    I will repeat the measurement this evening, after dinner.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 6:35 PM   in reply to Gerhardt K.

    DanTull is an employee, an Adobe Lightroom Quality Engineer, his sig says.  Are you saying Adobe should never participate much less ask for information on an Adobe-hosted forum about an Adobe product?  We have people on here complaining about how slow things run, expecting Adobe to reply to them, so he's asking those same people to give feedback during the beta period.  It seems entirely reasonable to me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 6:39 PM   in reply to Bob_Peters

    Bob_Peters wrote:

     

    Lee Jay wrote:

     

    Bob_Peters wrote:

     

    The following is for a new, 13.3 inch (1440 x 900 pixels) MacBook Air (1.7 GHz, Core i5), 4 GB RAM, 128GB SSD running OS X Lion (10.7.1).

    Input files are Nikon D700 NEF.

     

    Calculation time for a 1:1 preview image (average over 100 files):

     

    Lightroom 3.4.1      2.9 seconds

    Lightroom 3.5 RC   4.0 seconds

     

    The relative "slowness" of 3.5RC may just be a reflection of the "RC" nature of the release.  I'd be curious to know the answer.

     

    Bob, how did you do this?  Did you install both side-by-side, and run them on the same/different/copies of the same images on the same/different catalogs, etc.

     

    I'm worried that you might have populated the Camera Raw cache with 3.5RC and then run 3.4.1 with the cache already populated, thus making it faster, but details would help.

     

    I have 3.4.1 and 3.5RC installed on the MacBook Air.

     

    I did the initial timing with 3.4.1 a couple of days ago and also arrived at a value of 2.9 sec/NEF.

     

    Today, I used the same files for 3.4.1 and 3.5.RC but I did run 3.5 first.  However, the time for 3.4.1 was the same as the other day.

     

    I will repeat the measurement this evening, after dinner.

     

    Good catch, Lee Jay.  I completely forgot about the cache!

     

    I repeated the measurements with 3.4.1 and 3.5RC using the same 100, D700 NEF files.  Before each measurement I purged the Camera Raw Cache and verified that it was empty.

     

    Lightroom 3.4.1       350 seconds for 100 files, 3.5 seconds each

    Lightroom 3.5RC     362 seconds for 100 files, 3.62 seconds each

     

     

    I goofed.  Sorry for the false alarm.

     

    Bob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 6:49 PM   in reply to DanTull

    OK, to get things off to a fresh start on an upbeat note:

     

    I have not yet had a chance to test it thoroughly, but 3.5 RC does seem to run more smoothly. Among my early observations: The side panels no longer stutter and flash on startup or when switching between modules; moving from image to image in the Develop module does seem faster - I haven't done any precise timing tests to confirm it. Bob Peters is having the opposite experience, but given the high number of variables involved I expect it's going to be difficult to determining why our results differ.

     

     

    The adjustment brush and graduated filter slider bug that showed up in Lightroom 3.4 has been fixed. Huray!

     

    I'm running a Mac Pro 3GHz quad core; 8GB of RAM; OS X 10.7.1 Lion; both Lightroom and the OS kernel are running in 64 bit mode. I am using a 24" NEC monitor set to a resolution of 1920 x 1200 pixels.

     

    In Lightroom I have JPEG Previews set to Medium Size. Moving between images in Loupe view in the Library module is instantaneous for images that have been recently viewed; for a new image it takes approximately 1.25 seconds for the Histogram to render. When importing images I use Standard Previews. In the Catalog Settings I have Standard Preview Size set to 1680 because I usually have the side panels showing and rarely use full screen mode, so using a larger preview size is a waste of resources for me.

     

    In the Develop module, moving between images takes slightly more than one second for the settings to display on images that have been adjusted; it's a bit faster for images that have not yet been edited. It takes about one second more for the Loading notice to finish. Loading takes maybe half a second longer with Canon RAW files than with JPEGS; other than that, the difference between how large JPEG files and RAW files render seems negligible. So far I see none of the rendering lag that I occasionally observed in earlier versions of Lightroom. To this point my experience with 3.5 RC is entirely positive.

     

    To be clear, I don't mean to suggest that the experience of others is in any way questionable if it differs from mine. If I've learned anything on these forums it's that no one person's experience with the program is conclusive.

     

    Things I have not yet tested include: importing images; exporting images; the affects of extended use of the adjustment brush and graduated filter. I don't use any camera or lens profiles so someone else will have to tell us whether the affects of these have improved or not. To date they are a known performance killer.

     

    Anyway, I'm very relieved to be able to give a positive review of Lightroom 3.5 RC. Of course, YMMV.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 23, 2011 9:31 PM   in reply to DanTull

    I do appreciate that Adobe is comming up with a thread like that. Thanks for that!

     

    On my system (OS X 10.6.8., 2.66 GHz i7, 8GB RAM, HDD 5400rpm) I would say that 3.5 RC ist a bit faster compared to 3.4.

     

    When I go through a collection of images from a shooting I usually do the following: apply a basic set of adjustions and lens correction to all images; rotate most of the images; apply quick corrections (Q) to some of the images.

     

    I feel that rotating became faster and more responsive. The same applies to the correction brush.

     

    I still would like to see performance improvements in two areas: zooming in on an image (Nikon D7000 RAW) and moving through that image at 100% does not feel as smoove as I would expect from a system with the specifications. The second area would be recovery from rotating: when I rotate, I see the additional lines; after I release the mouse, 3.5 RC needs a bit of time before these lines disappear and it accepts R as a key stroke again to exit rotation mode.

     

    But nevertheless: keep up the good work!

    Thomas

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 8:58 AM   in reply to DanTull

    Windows 7, 64 bit, 4 GB ram.  This is my work machine.  Motherboard cannot accept more ram.  This machine has been terribly sluggish when using the arrow keys to make adjustments in the develop module.  Sometimes adjustments would take 5-10 secs to display.  I have only briefly tested the new 3.5 RC, but those same adjustments are displaying in about 1/2 second.  This is a great improvement for me.

     

    My computer at home is Windows 7, 32 bit, 4 GB ram.  It has consistently outperformed my work computer.  I wasn't going to try the release candidate at home, but now I think I will install it tonight.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 12:29 PM   in reply to DanTull

    Lenovo laptop with Windows XP pro (latest security update). Nikon D700 NEF files.

     

    When attempting to make fill light adjustments in the develop mudule it shuts down the program and the usual Windows message about  whether I wish to report the error to Microsoft turns up. I didn't have such a problem with any of the earlier versions. I have now uninstalled the 3.5RC and reinstalled ver. 3.4.1 which runs smoothly without problems. The new lens profiles seems to be intact, though, which was my main reason for installing ver. 3.5RC (especially the profile for Nikon 80-200/2.8 AF-D ED), so I'm happy to use 3.4.1 so far.

     

    Oldane

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 12:39 PM   in reply to DanTull

    I'm using Windows Vista 32 with 4G RAM and a dual core E8400 3.00GHz CPU, I have one 1920X1080 and one 1280X1024 monitor.  My images are Canon CR2 converted to DNG and stored on a vanilla SATA 2 HDD.  Unlike the MAC users, I can't do a direct comparison, but I have some previous notes on applying chromatic aberration corrections.  On 3.4.1 I found a 2-3 sec delay for each ca 20% shift on the slider - with 3.5RC the delay is 1 sec or less, so a real improvement here.  Noise reduction feels quicker and smoother, but I have no quantitative data.  For some reason, I have never found excessive memory usage except when first creating previews.  I have found no negative indications after the upgrade.

     

    Edit after just reading the previous - no issues with fill light.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 2:16 PM   in reply to frank0239

    iMac 27" Lion - The performance seems OK... so far...

    I did notice that an annoying 'bug' with the scroll bars since Lion upgrade seems

    to have been addressed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 3:01 PM   in reply to DanTull

    3.5RC + OS 10.7.1

     

    I think scrolling within the library grid view is just a bit slower.  Has a slight lag feeling to it that I don't get with 3.4.1

     

    I used to have an incessant 'loading' message when I edited a photo in an external filter (such as Nik Color Efex) and then made any adjustments in the Develop module.  This was present on 3.4 and 3.4.1 on an old Macbook running 10.6.8 as well as a new iMac running 10.7 and 10.7.1.  Thrilled to report that the lag and repeated loading messages appear to be gone!  Thank you!!

     

    Have not yet experienced the keyword crash that I reported elsewhere.  Will check on that over time.

     

    Also need to check if the black panes in a second Mission Control space are fixed.

     

    Was just too happy about the second point to hold off on posting this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 3:13 PM   in reply to DanTull

    My machine: Intel i5-750, 4GB RAM, nVidia 250 GTS. Monitor: EIZO SX 2762 (2560 x 1440); Standard preview size: 2048 pixel.

     

    When I worked with 3.4.1 I thought that building the thumbnails in grid view was a bit slow, you could watch how row by row was build.

     

    After installung 3.5 RC, I was stunned how quick thumbnail build was now. It is now almost instantly, very quick. To me a huge improvement.

     

    Switchting to loupe is also quicker, switching to the next image with arrow keys as well. Switching to develop is faster also, it takes about 2 to 2.5 seconds that the image is rendered and the histogram displayed. Moving to the next image with the arrow keys takes about 2 seconds as well.

     

    Switching to 1:1 previews takes a little more than 1 second.

     

    With brushing and spotting I never had problems, so I can't see any difference.

     

    On a notebook , where I experienced performance problems before. all the aforementioned improvement were observed as well, just to a bit smaller effect.

     

     

    Summary:

     

    Thumbnail build up: almost instantly, almost no row by row behavior

    Image rendering in develop:        2 - 2.5 s

    1:1 previews:                               1.5 s

     

     

     

     

    All this with raw files from Canon EOS 40D, Panasonic Lumix GH1 and GH2.

     

     

    Kind regards

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 4:50 PM   in reply to E Oren

    Yup.  The bug when having LR in a second Space where black would appear for all of the panes is gone.  Checked immediately after moving to space and again after a long sleep.

    Good job!!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 7:30 PM   in reply to DanTull

    EXPORT dialog NOW WORKS as it should.

    The  total text is not there immediately but there is NO....'not responding' and wait.

    When the text appears, relatively soon, the main titles are NOT overlapping one another.

    I exported many dngs as jpgs with the mogrify plug in and it continued to operate smoothly. Previously, it would get worse and worse in the context of having to wait while it could get past the 'not responding' and the text dancing all over itself within the export dialog box.

     

    In the previous version I had to use Export Presets for this operation to continue in a smooth manner. I avoided the actual Export command and only went there if I absolutely had to make another preset.

     

    Export when in the Library module had  the result 'not responding' for a brief moment and then it carried on.

     

    BUT....2 black bars were visible at the top of the screen while in the Develop module. If the view screen was moved around these two black bars about the same width as a side panel remained in the position that the view screen was before moving.

    Went over to Library and shut off the panels to the style that they appear if I hover over the arrow. Returned to Develop and those black bars were gone.

     

    Overall everything else does what it should.

    The localized brush with the 'display mask' turned on does not lag.

     

    I'm very pleased with the improvement that affected the Export dialog.

     

    Rose

    Windows 7 professional-64 bit, 4 quad, 8G Ram, ATI radeon 5800  monitor 1680 x1050

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 24, 2011 10:33 PM   in reply to DanTull

    I'm running Windows 7 home premium 64 bit on a Dell XPS 9100 2.80ghz with 12GB ram. This system runs Lightroom 3.4.1 very fast and never had issues. I convert all my images to DNG upon import and have 16,000 images. I installed Lightroom 3.5RC last night and everything install fine. I went to library mode to view some edited images. On several images I tried to view, I get the message "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 64 Bit has stopped working. A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available" and the program shuts down. It seems the same files do it over and over where others are fine. I have purged my cache and purged my 1:1 previews and optimized my catalog thinking there might be something there but no solution. Any idea of what might be happening? Should I go back to the previous version?

     

    Thanks for any feedback,

    Curt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 12:55 AM   in reply to nortoncb

    Quote: "On several images I tried to view, I get the message "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 64 Bit has stopped working. A problem caused the program to stop working correctly. Windows will close the program and notify you if a solution is available" and the program shuts down. It seems the same files do it over and over where others are fine. " End quote.

     

    Is is this problem I too have with v. 3.5RC, though you describe it in greater detail than I did. See my post above. I wondered if it was my machine/setup, but it seem to be present on your (different) setup too. I went back to v.3.4.1. as i is unbearable to have the program shut down after every 2 or 3 pictures.

     

    My setup is Lenovo laptop with Windows XP pro (latest security update), 32 bit. Nikon D700 NEF files (raw files).

     

    Oldane

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 5:41 AM   in reply to DanTull

     

    I'm using a relatively low laptop (2Giga, Intel Core Duo, vista 32), but my pictures files are pretty large (2Terabytes)

    ·         25MB (Leica M9) => 4000 pictures

    ·         50/75MB old scanned 6*6cm => 14000

    ·         250MB old scanner 4*5" => 200

    ·         and since last June 50/75MB digital Hasselblad (50 MPixels/16bits)

     

    Until the arrival of the Hassy Digital, the performance was slow but acceptable. But with it 3.4.1, I had decided to change my machine due to:

    ·         the unpredictable processing time (import, loading)

    ·         the impossibility to do 2 things at the same time (print & develop or manage)

    ·         semi-crashes (not real, but necessity to relaunch LR to get acceptable performances)

    ·         and the global slowness of LR with these very large pictures

     

     

    I'm not able to make a numeric comparison between 3.4 & 3.5, but all in in one, I would say that:

    ·         the global performance has improved significantly (I would say between 15 & 40% depending on the operation)

    ·         the need to change my PC (and swith for Windows64) isn't a "required" anymore

    ·         3.5 behaves with MF pictures as 3.4 did with 24*36 FF (average performance & constitency)

    That's just a first opinion as I tried it for only 8H.

     

    Unfortunately, it seems that 2 bugs occurred with this release:

    ·         the previous "brush spot" aren't displayed anymore (very annoying => I cannot edit them after proving/print)

    ·         the "edit time order" in collections seems to work inconsistently

     

    I've tested the new import of Hassy FFF files & retested the 3FR:

    ·         It seems to work fine for good pictures (equivalent to Phocus/Hasselblad)

    ·         Unfortunately, for the "overexposed pictures" LR has always a bug that Phocus hasn't

    That unfortunate, as I woud like to use only one product for everything.

     

     

    Despite these last defects, 3.5 is a huge improvement.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 2:27 PM   in reply to nortoncb

    I went ahead and reinstalled Lightroom 3.4.1 and my problem went away so I know the problem was with the RC release. The images that were causing lightroom to shut down under RC can be read and work normal under 3.4.1. I hope you can find this problem.

     

    Curt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 3:49 PM   in reply to Chateldon

    Chateldon wrote:

     

     

    but my pictures files are pretty large (2Terabytes)

     

    OT, but - seriously? Two terabytes?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 4:02 PM   in reply to nortoncb

    nortoncb wrote:

     

    I went ahead and reinstalled Lightroom 3.4.1 and my problem went away so I know the problem was with the RC release. The images that were causing lightroom to shut down under RC can be read and work normal under 3.4.1. I hope you can find this problem.

     

    Curt

     

    Curt, I contacted you privately to obtain one of the problematic files.

     

    Becky

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 4:36 PM   in reply to +becs

    Please confirm when you get my email and file so I know you received it

     

    Thanks

    Curt

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 25, 2011 5:25 PM   in reply to Chateldon

    @ Chateldon: I have a few observations: First, I cannot imagine using a Hasselblad with an "old" computer. Processing 50+MB files with any application on a system with only 2GB of RAM is pushing it big time, in my opinion. It seems to me the Hasselblad would justify a new computer all by itself. The 64 bit version of Windows 7 will be able to run the 64 bit version of Lightroom and should improve performance significantly. I say should because up till now people with high-end Windows systems have been experiencing many of the same performance issues those on lesser systems have encountered. It may be that the 3.5 RC will change that dynamic; early reports are encouraging but still mixed, as your experience attests.

     

    Second, I hope with so many files that you are using more than one Lightroom catalog. Though Lightroom is supposed to be able to handle large catalogues with many thousands of images, it seems reasonable to suppose that using smaller catalogues would improve Lightroom's responsiveness. I'm sure someone here will let me know if I'm wrong in this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 29, 2011 1:51 AM   in reply to +becs

    +becs wrote:

     

    nortoncb wrote:

     

    I went ahead and reinstalled Lightroom 3.4.1 and my problem went away so I know the problem was with the RC release. The images that were causing lightroom to shut down under RC can be read and work normal under 3.4.1. I hope you can find this problem.

     

    Curt

     

    Curt, I contacted you privately to obtain one of the problematic files.

     

    Becky


    I'm curious to hear about any possible explanation/solution to this issue.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 29, 2011 11:28 AM   in reply to thewhitedog

     

    Second, I hope with so many files that you are using more than one Lightroom catalog. Though Lightroom is supposed to be able to handle large catalogues with many thousands of images, it seems reasonable to suppose that using smaller catalogues would improve Lightroom's responsiveness. I'm sure someone here will let me know if I'm wrong in this.

     

    All the stuff from Adobe that I have read says that LR will run happily with hundreds of thousands of images, and the general advice is NOT to split your images into several catalogs because you can't search them all then. My catalog only has about 50 K nefs - no problems that I know of due to size.

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 29, 2011 11:39 AM   in reply to DanTull

     

    One other minor inquiry to note (at the risk of maybe doing too much in one thread): For those that do see sluggishness when brushing or applying dust spots, I'd be quite curious to know if it is improved if you clear the history states via the "X" in the upper right corner of the panel. There's a fix that's been confirmed to help that problem and we're considering putting it into the 3.5 final version, but some empirical confirmation that impacted customers would be helped by it would be worth knowing. A short addendum to the above post with "Clearing history [helps | hurts | has no obvious effect] on Develop adjustment interactive performance." will give me some useful information to use to evaluate the likely outcome of including that fix.

     

     

    No sluggishness in brushing, but after a lot of brushes, etc, 3.5 seems to become very sluggish in responding to slider movements. I can have 'dragged' the pointer quite a way along the slider before it actually moves. Win7x64, fast desktop. Clearing history certainly didn't help that.

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 30, 2011 4:37 AM   in reply to DanTull

     

    Sorry to be late, but I’ve been shooting for the past few days without access to the web.

    I’ve received a few comments and inquiries, thanks to everybody.

    To make things clearer:

     

    1 – My global perception about the performance of the 3.5 is definely very good (I would say 25% better than the 3.4), and the global balance of the system is perfectly acceptable within my usual practices. I don’t plan to downgrade to 3.4 despite the 2 issues that I’ve encountered:

    ·         The “healing brush” doesn’t work properly. My corrections are done fine. But when I place multiple healings on the same picture, the previous ones aren’t displayed (gray/black spot), so it’s impossible to adjust easily the corrections.

    ·         The performances are “inconsistent”. From time to time, a "loading" take a very long time. It seems that, If I wait enough, the loading ends well.  But generally I stop and relaunch LR. That takes  2 minutes and everything is fixed for a few hours.

     

    2 – I have no issues to work with a medium/large photo library within a unique database. Currently I’ve 3 LR libraries for Workflow convenience, but I’m confident that I could merge them without difficulties and I plan to do that  as soon as my keywords & catalogs will be safely defined. With a 32bits/dual –pro/2Giga laptop, I manage on a unique disk these libraries:

     

    A – a set of old film/pictures scanned in TIFF (15 000 photos of an average 75MB/each, 80% are 6*6 scanned a 2400 dpi).

     

    B – My “active library” for my digital pictures (5000 photos, 60% being Leica 20MB Dng & 40% being either Digital hasselblad at 100 MB or new scans at 60/200 MB, the largests being 4*5” slides)

     

    C – A thematic library of 2000 pictures taken during a long trip in the US-West (Leica 20 MB)

     

    Depending of the librairies I’ve between 50 & 200 Keywords and catalog (hierarchicalk org). The performance issues aren’t coming from LR as a management tool, but of the processing (loading, development & print) of the very large ones (Hasselbald & 4*5”).

     

     

    3 – My picture data-base is really in the 2 tera-bytes realm:

    ·         450 GB of digital pictures backuped strictly as the are on the memory cards (second copy at the import)

    ·         600 GB of “old pictures” (LR data-base & imported Tiff)

    ·         200 GB of “current pictures”

    ·         100 GB of “USA-travel”

    ·         200 GB of “LR cache”

    ·         200 GB of miscellaneous technical files (transfer for the scanning, LR backups….)

     

     

    4 - I’ve 3 external esata drives (7200 RPM seagate), so the backup is very easy. Once every 2 weeks:

    ·         I update the oldest backup with the active disk (differential Backup)

    ·         This new backup becomes my “active disk for a week”

    ·         I place the new backup in a remote location

    ·         I bring back the middle disk in my lab for the next backup.

     

     

    I would say that with this organisation I’m the nearest of the classical photography that I can be. 2 years ago, I was still souping and I’m still a “paper man”. You can imagine that I’d liked some functional improvements, but that’s another story.

    Thanks “Adobe”.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 30, 2011 7:59 AM   in reply to Chateldon

    Chateldon,

     

    "The “healing brush” doesn’t work properly. My corrections  are done fine. But when I place multiple healings on the same picture,  the previous ones aren’t displayed (gray/black spot), so it’s impossible  to adjust easily the corrections."

     

    Do you mean that when you add a new correction/healing, the previous results are negated?  Or just that the "pin" for those adjustments goes away.  If the pin is going away, try pressing the "H" key, which toggles the pins to hide/show.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 30, 2011 2:36 PM   in reply to DanTull

    I want to thank Becky and Dan for keeping us up to date with their progress in dealing with the issues raised on this thread. As a long-time user/complainer I find their feedback very encouraging. I realize it takes extra time for them to keep us informed, but it makes our efforts in posting here seem worthwhile, which, in my case at least, is good for morale. That said, I have been quite pleased with the performance of 3.5 RC and, for the first time, have recommended the update to friends who also use Lightroom. Keep up the good work.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 31, 2011 8:34 AM   in reply to DanTull

    Hello Dan, here's my feedback after intense working sessions on LR 3.5 RC.

     

    First, I have a PC with 12 Gb of memory, Intel core i7 X980 processor, my catalog is on a ssd and the files on a velociraptor hdd and I've one 1920*1200 monitor.

     

    1 / LR 3.5 RC is faster than LR 3.4.1  to open and to display images, even when zooming, in library and develop module, I don't how many % but it's a strong feeling; nice!

     

    2/ I have problem with brush or healing spot : when adding spot, it becomes sluggish and sometimes it freezes, I have to kill LR and to restart. It was not the case with 3.4.1 (it was with 3.0). It begins on a picture and then it remains slowly even if I change the picture on wich I'm working on. Displaying these pictures is quite long. I tried to clear history : displaying the picture is faster, the brush behave the same.

     

    3/ Deleting files into LR 3.5 RC  is not consistent (deleting on the hard drive, not only from the catalog). It begins fast, then it becomes sluggish, and sometimes it uses 100% of the processor (and not more RAM than normal use) but no file is deleted. I have to stop (into lightroom) and then launch again the delete and this second time it's blazing fast. It happened many times (I've made some cleaning in my catalog, so I think I've made some deleting 20 or 25 times in 3 days, each time I had to stop and start again the process.). Never had this with 3.4.1.

     

    Hope it can help!

     

    Eric

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (0)

Answers + Points = Status

  • 10 points awarded for Correct Answers
  • 5 points awarded for Helpful Answers
  • 10,000+ points
  • 1,001-10,000 points
  • 501-1,000 points
  • 5-500 points