From: "Bach 59

Bob, common among working pros is to have a catalog for each shoot as to

avoid corruption issues. Having 65,000 images in one catalog is very

risky. But to my point, it isn't a catalog issue, it is a slow down during

devolpe mode and I will have the 500 images open all at once. If I process

them in smaller batches, say 50-80 images maybe the issue would lessened.

I'll have to try it..... but why should I have to?!

LR is designed to use large catalogs - no problem, just back them up

occasionally or frequently depending on your nervousness. Lots of small

catalogs prevent searching and collections to collate stuff - one of LRs

great features.

LR doesn't 'open' files, so not sure what you mean here.

Bob Frost

I'm running Mac OS 10.6.8 on an Intel Zeon 2 x 2.8 Quad Core with 16Gb Ram.

I've followed every bit of advice I can find about optimising catalogues, fast HDDs, preview rendering etc etc etc.  My catalogue has around 8,000 CR2 RAW files.

LR4.1 runs like a snail on mogadon, with the develop module being the killer.

The lag between switching tools, showing results of a slider tweak etc is killing me - typically 4-7 seconds, irrespective of which tool I use.

Much as I love the new Raw engine, I'm going back to LR3 until Adobe get this turgid pile of doggy doos sorted out.

Who do I approach for a refund, as this software is patently not fit for purpose.

Paul Wright Photography wrote:

 

Accept it. Just about everyone who uses LR4 is justifiably cranky about the speed issues.

Unnsupportable hyperbole. The complaints are coming from a vocal minority.

Do you really think that what you're reading on here is the voice of all of the tens or hundreds of thousands - probably millions - of Lr owners?

Remember, Paul, that most of this 900 post thread was before 4.1. There's still too large a minority who still have problems, but it is a small minority.

Does someone shooting 1600 images a day 4-5 days a week count as "busy, high volume commercial work"? One guy I work with hits those numbers and has experienced no problems at all. In other words, just don't extrapolate too much from your own experience or from the others who are (rightly) complaining.

I realize that some people aren't...I wish I was one of them!

Of the cross section of people that I know that use LR 4,....unscientifically I'd say about 50% have problems so badly that they are in the "doesn't work for me" camp.

I don't know if my experience is typical...but there you go.

Also, I've been bouncing back and forth between 3.6 and 4.1...when i need to actually get something done I choose 3.6.

I exported a large file today using 3.6 and when I glanced up at the progress bar on the left side of the screen there was nothing there...I thought...wait! I just chose export...did something malfunction? (I'm used to seeing LR4's progress bar stay there for 20 to 30 seconds on a large raw file.

Nope...nothing was "wrong" it was just that LR3.6 had processed the file before I could even glance up at the progress bar. I've been so used to LR4 and sort of "mentally accepting" it's speed limitations that I plum forgot just how lightning fast LR3.6 was!

Staying with LR3.6 for now...though I must say...I LOVE LR4.1's lens CA correction control...it's a vast improvement over 3.6's.

bob frost wrote:

 

But it's all that new stuff that takes the extra processing time.

That, but also there are bugs causing abnormal performance...

"is there a summary at any point on "work-around" strategies to help smooth the way until Adobe gets back from lunch and ships the fix-up."

For the first time since I upgraded to LR4 at the start of the year I have had cause to work on some jpgs rather than RAW files.

LR 4.1 was as speedy as I remember 3.6 performed. With RAW in 4.1 I have to sit looking at the 'loading' message for several seconds each time I call up a new RAW file. In 3.6 it was almost  instant and with a jpg in 4.1 it is also almost instant.

Maybe this is the basis for a work around. When, as some does in a recent post, processing 1,600 files a day five days a week, do all these need to be poster print quality? Is the solution to shoot raw and jpg simultaneously and only convert the raws for the images chosen by the client.

Not ideal - but a work around.

Tony

bob frost wrote:

 

Leaner upgrade?

No comment.

I'll stick with no gain until the pain is removed from LR4

Not psychic, but I am capable of deductive reasoning...

So...how did you deduct that you are certain of the exact percentage of users that use LR? and then on what basis did you know with certainty how many have accounts here..? And on what basis did you deduct with certainty that of those that have accounts they are they represent the users who are having problems and not the overall cross section of users in general?

I'd be fascinated to find out how in the world you did that.

I never said any of those things - please do not attempt to put words in my mouth - I am hereby spitting them out.

Yes, of the 1600 (Nikon D3S raw only) maybe 300 are needed at top quality after corrections for low light levels, multiple artificial light sources. So it's pretty demanding with a turnaround that can be overnight but is usually 2-3 days.In other words it's "busy, high volume commercial work" and LR4.1 has always worked just fine with a single 430k catalogue. We've done nothing unusual so have not needed workarounds. It's the same kind of modern Windows 7/64 bit machine that others have, ATA Radeon (Nvdia seems to be mentioned a lot here).

Possible workarounds - leave Clarity till later, lens corrections too. Lots of dust spots used to cause slowdowns on my own machine, but no longer, but that would be another thing to leave till later - if you can.

The worst thing here is to generalise and make ludicrous claims such as 50% being unable to use LR4 or wrap oneself in the "professionals" flag and claim one's own experience is widely representative. Equally, we can't pretend that there isn't still, even after 4.1, too big a minority that is hitting a variety of different but probably-related problems. Hype and blather here won't help - details and specifics will.

John

A C G wrote:

 

"is there a summary at any point on "work-around" strategies to help smooth the way until Adobe gets back from lunch and ships the fix-up."

 

....

 

Maybe this is the basis for a work around. When, as some does in a recent post, processing 1,600 files a day five days a week, do all these need to be poster print quality?

Yes...that was my point.

I claimed a number of users that i'm aware of that have issues that are severe...then you told me that I was hyping the number...I asked how you could possibly know that...i asked if you were psychic....you said you deducted it...

I wondered just HOW you could deducted it..

Was that not you?

From: "A C G

If this thread is intended for Users to help Users please stop cluttering

it with "I don't have a problem" posts. My previous post was a suggested

work around. Even if it only helps one LR user it'll be more use than me

swanking about not having any problems.

No 'swanking' - just correcting the wrong impressions some give that

'everyone has got problems'.

I've posted quite a few things to try, so to summarize:-

Export catalog to new catalog, before creating all new previews and acr

cache.

Create all standard and 1:1 previews overnight to speed up Library.

Remove/rename old prefs before trashing current prefs, otherwise LR may use

them in the new prefs.

Update your Bios.

Make sure you are using the latest drivers, particularly graphics and

mouse/pen.

Don’t install or uninstall all the extra add-ons beloved by graphics card

makers - just install the basic video driver.

Use SSD for catalog and previews.

Use internal drives for images wherever possible, don't put catalog and

previews on external drives.

Don’t use very large monitors.

Put LR on All Photographs and leave overnight to do all its checking

routines.

Don’t expect most laptops to work as fast as desktops.

If your old processor can't cope with the new develop routines, use the 2010

process until you can upgrade. You still get all the rest of LR4.

That will do for a start!

Bob Frost

It was not.

then I apologize and curse the blasted reply system here ...

Bob,

A useful list. Someone should make it a sticky.

But what do you mean when you say "Put LR on All Photographs and leave overnight to do all its checking

routines."

What menus/dropdowns are you using?

Tony

rpavich1234 wrote:

 

I'll stick with no gain until the pain is removed from LR4

Have you tried taking aspirin with your 4.1? 

Bob Frost

Have you tried taking aspirin with your 4.1? 

Lol...yes..I really did.

Minute that the beta was available I downloaded it and used it...I've WANTED it to succeed!...I WANT to use it and have it be just as responsive as LR3.6.

I've tried over and over again; I've done all of the workarounds with high hopes...

I'm not bad-mouthing it because I have some grudge against Adobe...on the contrary...I recommend LR to everyone I know because it's such a great piece of software...however when I do...I make sure that they understand that I'M having problems and they MAY too.

I know that the dev cycle isn't over...there are more bugs to be squashed...I have high hopes that whatever it is bugging me will get squashed.