paul-w wrote:

 

My question - has anyone else checked if the LR cache is being written to?

 

 

Yes, I have....and it is. Although much smaller entries compared with LR2 cache entries. If you are using DNG are you also using the new Fast Load Data feature, as that will have an impact on the ACR cache.

Some discussion about the ACR cache wrt LR4 in this thread: http://forums.adobe.com/message/4284553#4284553

LR4 is un-beleivably slow on my system, which is very robust (mac pro, dual 3ghz 9 gigs ram). LR3 ran perfectly, just made the upgrade and it looks like I will be going back until they address these perfomance issues. At this point the new version is un-usable for me. Too bad

rsmith4321, what operating system are you running? I just realized that I am not on Lion which could be part of the deal.

I´ve Know a couple that shoot Weddings and they just bought a brand new

Lenovo i7 2nd Generation, SSD 250gb, 16gb ram, 2gb Nvidia, and lags a lot!

They are moving back to Lr3 until they solve this problem!

Marcelo Trad

Much better now.

With D700 and D90 RAWs almost perfect and some lags while adjusting D70 ones.

CPU usage seems to be lower - 75-80% max. so it's much better than 99-100% :-).

Ok, time for testing!

There is a test version available which addresses the slowness issues. Go to http://forums.adobe.com/message/4300818

I am seeing a significant improvement using 4.1 dev slider response on a macbook pro 4GB.  THANKS.

Rory

Much improvement here as well! Excellent!

By the way I have a Core i5 3gz, 8gb ram, 128gb ssd, 4tb raid 0 made from 4 1tb drives, Windows 7x64.  I don't really know what I could upgrade to help

 

I'm going to up the ram to 12gb but I don't think that will really help.

a fast i7 (2600k, 8320) would make a much bigger difference

Just for what its worth....  My issue with dual monitors and develop module sliders was fixed with LR4.1RC....

I agree: how can someone know that "the vast majority" of Adobe users are not having this problem? Just because only a fraction of them decided to post about it doesn't mean tha those are the only ones having it.

I upgraded to LR4, and to be honest, I regreat it. The improved Development module doen't justify the lack of responsiveness and slowness I am experiencing. It is a price way to high to have a few improvements. (Meaning, I do value my time and I cannot/don't feel like spending 10x the time to do a similar job in LR4 than I did in LR3)

If I recall correctly, a request made when LR4 was being developed was "Increase the speed of the Develop Module" -both switching to and working in. Well, it almosts feel like a joke when what happened is actually the opposite. I cannot believe that Adobe didn't notice this problem before.

Btw, as it was suggested (and I tried it) working with a second monitor or not will greatly impact on LR4. Who are they programming this for? Professional photographers? Most of us work with 2 monitors.

The specs on my Computer are:

RAM: 12 GB

Video RAM: 1 GB (on video card)

Dedicated Scratch HD

Raid - Only for Photos and Catalog

Dedicated HD To System and software.

All HDs are eSATA

Intel Core i7 at 3.07 GHz

64 Bit Operating System. Windows 7

No, LR4 is not suppose to be slow on a system like that. Photoshop flies, LR3 works good. (Even with 100+MB TIFF file on develop module with the Brush AND 2 monitors)

I am really dissapointed. If this would be a "tangible" good, I would be returning it to the Store.

Just thought of something: So, LR4 was supposed to be a Ferrari, the only problem is that if someone sits on the passanger sit, then it cannot go faster than 80 km/hr

Cheers,

uphotography wrote:

 

I agree: how can someone know that "the vast majority" of Adobe users are not having this problem? Just because only a fraction of them decided to post about it doesn't mean tha those are the only ones having it.

 

I upgraded to LR4, and to be honest, I regreat it. The improved Development module doen't justify the lack of responsiveness and slowness I am experiencing. It is a price way to high to have a few improvements. (Meaning, I do value my time and I cannot/don't feel like spending 10x the time to do a similar job in LR4 than I did in LR3)

 

If I recall correctly, a request made when LR4 was being developed was "Increase the speed of the Develop Module" -both switching to and working in. Well, it almosts feel like a joke when what happened is actually the opposite. I cannot believe that Adobe didn't notice this problem before.

 

Btw, as it was suggested (and I tried it) working with a second monitor or not will greatly impact on LR4. Who are they programming this for? Professional photographers? Most of us work with 2 monitors.

 

The specs on my Computer are:

 

RAM: 12 GB

Video RAM: 1 GB (on video card)

Dedicated Scratch HD

Raid - Only for Photos and Catalog

Dedicated HD To System and software.

 

All HDs are eSATA

 

Intel Core i7 at 3.07 GHz

 

64 Bit Operating System. Windows 7

 

No, LR4 is not suppose to be slow on a system like that. Photoshop flies, LR3 works good. (Even with 100+MB TIFF file on develop module with the Brush AND 2 monitors)

 

I am really dissapointed. If this would be a "tangible" good, I would be returning it to the Store.

 

Just thought of something: So, LR4 was supposed to be a Ferrari, the only problem is that if someone sits on the passanger sit, then it cannot go faster than 80 km/hr

 

Cheers,

And how do you know that a majority has performance problems?

Really, such comments do not help at all. Adobe works on the problems and the most serious ones have already been fixed in LR 4.1 RC.

Lightroom 4.1 is fast (even faster than 4.0), no slider lags whatsoever. It is not related to machine power and probably more related to the plethora of PC configurations out there in reality, including peripheral stuff such as RAID systems, network drives and so on. Not possible to catch all problems during beta testing. You have to test drive the software before deciding if it works in YOUR production environment.

Upgraded to LR 4.1RC.  Speed seems to be improved.  Slider responsiveness is very acceptable now.  Switching between modules is a bit slow on the first access but after that very acceptable.  Did have to reboot because I ran in the problem of CS5 blowing up on start after installing LR4.1 RC1.  System in Xeon 3GHz, 8GB ram Win7 Pro.  I'll update other original issues in the appropriate threads.

Overall a pretty good update for a RC1.

Tony...

I'm the user from the UK with only two gig of RAM - who never had any trouble with 3.6.

The new 4.1 seems OK once I deleted all the Camera Raw cache (using WE rather than relying on LR's preference menu) and running without the film strip. In my experience the Noise slider was what brought 4.0 to a standstill and now it slides quite smoothly. The effect of the change does not appear until the cursor leaves the slider - but I can live with that until the software team find a fix.

I'm pretty sure that LR4 produces better looking images than 3.6 so I am happy to work with it now - assuming it will get faster as the bugs get stamped on.

The best bit of news is that those of us with only two gigs don't need to rip their system apart to run LR4.

Tony

tgutgu said:

[quote]

And how do you know that a majority has performance problems?

Really, such comments do not help at all. Adobe works on the problems and the most serious ones have already been fixed in LR 4.1 RC.

Lightroom 4.1 is fast (even faster than 4.0), no slider lags whatsoever. It is not related to machine power and probably more related to the plethora of PC configurations out there in reality, including peripheral stuff such as RAID systems, network drives and so on. Not possible to catch all problems during beta testing. You have to test drive the software before deciding if it works in YOUR production environment.[/quote]

But you've just made a blanket satement by claiming "Lightroom 4.1 is fast (even faster than 4.0), no slider lags whatsoever". yet you're complaining about the statements of others.

Lightroom 4 and 4.1 certainly has slider lags here

Quote button in message editor.

În data de 01.04.2012 01:54, "John Spacey" <forums@adobe.com> a scris:

**

   Re: Lightroom 4 is slow  created by John Spacey<http://forums.adobe.com/people/John+Spacey>in

Photoshop Lightroom - View the full discussion<http://forums.adobe.com/message/4305110#4305110

Not sure if this is the place to raise this one but when sychronising in the develop module only the exposure setting for say 100 images only the first 6-12 are changed.  When synchronising CHECK ALL is used then the exposure is changed on all the images?

Lightroom 4.1 made a lttle improvement on my computer! Blending out the Filmstrip helps, but i still wished a little bit more performance!

There is one very strange issue i found. working on 5dmkII, 7d and 1dmkIV files is quite fast now with 4.1 not perfrect but fast. i downloaded quite a lot 5dmkIII raw files from iso 100 till iso 25000. i imported these raw files in lr 4.1 rc1 and they qre much much much more sluggish than 1dmkIV, 5dmkII and 7d files. very strnage cause 5dmkIII files are not larger than 5dmkII files and do not have so mcuh more megapixels. whats the problem? i will have my 5dmkIII in 2 weeks and hey man.....this is pretty bad. working with 5dmkII ok, working with 5dmkIII BAD. Please fix that QUICK adobe or you would make my experience about the new cam very BAD *g* go go go :-)

king regards chris!

Ok, so I downloaded and installed Lightroom 4.1 RC since it was impossible to work with LR 4.0.

I've seen that many claim that slider lag and speed problem (specially when using a second monitor) are gone in LR 4.1 RC. Well, I agee with that... partially.

These are my findings:

LR 4.1 RC does indeed solves the speed and lag time when using a second monitor... but only for a "short time". I cannot edit a whole wedding without LR 4.1 going nuts, slow, irresponsive and plainly doing things that I cannot even find the logic behind.

When using Survey on a second monitor, the first 100 photos (in sets of 6-9) are ok. From then on, it takes sometimes iterally minutes to get to do its fancy reordering when a photo is deleted or even to delete a photo from the surveyed group.

When moving to the Develop module, the first time takes a bit longer, as expected, and then further changes to the Develop module go fast. Actually as fast or faster than 3.6. BUT after some time, it becomes a nightmare again to move to the Develop module AND back to the Catalog module.

I have found that sometimes, after all the crazyness start, sometimes a black rectangle appears as a background to my photo info in Loupe mode. At the beginning, the black goes away after some time, but I've got to points where it just stays there.

Generating previews under some circumstances is slower than you can imagine.

Toggling the second monitor on/off with F11 works... sometimes... Sometimes LR decides that I need my second monitor and brings it up, sometimes, for no apparent reason, it turns it off.

And now moving on to Photoshop. I have CS5 which until I installed ACR 6.7 was amazing! CS5 + LR3.6. Great combination. CS5 + ACR 6.7 + LR 4.0 (4.1) Makes me want to stop with photography or simply go back to film and not work behind the computer anymore. Yes, it is that bad on this end.

I have noticed that Photoshop has started to be unstable, to the point that I close the program and it leaves a process running behind taking care of 6 (yes, six) Gb of my physical memory. I would say that that is a pretty big chunk of memorey use for a "quick launch" executable.

LR keeps craving memory and resources, specially CPU, even when doing practically nothing. And it has also decided that it is on trial now... Apparently the money and license from Adobe LR4.0 is not good enough for LR4.1.

Last but not least, actually, this is probably one of the MOST CRITICAL points is that any image sent to Photoshop and back to LR, even without any editing (just DNG - TIFF conversion) results in an image where many things change in a quite obvious way. Brightness, contrast, and much more! (In B&W it even looks like a filter was applied so sometimes the oranges get dark and the blues lighter). I mean, consistency should be priority number one and this is far from acceptable.

I mean, this is not me using a third party program that might not work very well with Photoshop, or... whatever, this is Adobe Photoshop Lightroom with Adobe Photoshop...

Adobe, get your act together. Stop with the bells and whistles (like Blurb for LR) and work on the core that we ALL need.

Thanks,

If you want more details on how I use LR / Photoshop or system configuration, please let me know.

Cheers,

p.s. I have a pretty solid system with an intel i7 3+ GHz, 12 GB RAM, 1 GB Video on Card, Can't remember what card I have right now but I remember it was one of the best when I bought it. All HDs are eSata at 7200 rpm. 64 Bit OS. and some more bells and whistles.

I don’t mind alerting them to the problem. In fact I searched the Adobe website for some time trying to find a place that I could log the issue with them. The only support pages I could find made it very clear that I would be paying for any support issues I had. I was rather disgusted at the thought of paying for Lightroom and then paying for support for non-functional software.

If they would like more people to log the issue then I believe they should make support more available to their own customers. The only reason I sought out this message board was because support is fee-based and therefore unreachable.

Geoff