I've been using LR since v.2. WHen I upgraded to 3.0, there was a dramatic slowdown in processing time. Now, I read from time to time on this forum same news about 4+. Is the current version of LR so much better to risk another slowdown?
Additionally, I'm at CS4. If I go to LR 4+, will I still be able to edit in CS4 or will I have to upgrade this one too?
Thank you very much to anyone who would care to take the time for a reply to this post.
No, it isn't the consensus. Many of us haven't had any significant slowness. For some people it is slow, but they are a much smaller number than when 4.0 was released. There's no clear pattern, so install and try for yourself.
Editing in CS4 will be just as before.
There have been one or two posts on this subject to this thread: http://forums.adobe.com/thread/971581?tstart=0
olvierpsmile@yahoo.com wrote:
Do you know if it would be reversible, i.e. if I find it does not work for me, would it let me go back to my previous version?
Sure. LR4 creates a copy of your LR3 catalogue.
John
johnbeardy wrote:
olvierpsmile@yahoo.com wrote:
Do you know if it would be reversible, i.e. if I find it does not work for me, would it let me go back to my previous version?
Sure. LR4 creates a copy of your LR3 catalogue.
John
However, stuff you subsequently do in your LR4 catalogue can't be converted back to LR3 catalogue format.
PS - I agree that there is no consensus about LR4 being slow. Some report severe reductions in speed, but I (and I believe the majority of users) find it similar to LR3 for most functions, slower for some (e.g. switching modules, especially the first time in a session).
olvierpsmile@yahoo.com wrote:
Is the current version of LR so much better to risk another slowdown?
Yes. The quality of results in Lr4 is significantly better than Lr3 (once you learn it).
On my machine, Lr4 is a little slower than Lr3 at some things - the price for improved quality. At some things, it's faster than Lr3 (Adobe also made some marked performance improvements in some areas).
If it's *a lot* slower, then there is problem...
The trial will tell you if Lr4 will be problematic on your machine.
olvierpsmile@yahoo.com wrote:
Additionally, I'm at CS4. If I go to LR 4+, will I still be able to edit in CS4 or will I have to upgrade this one too?
I don't know, but a valid concern - definitely check it before purchasing...
Rob
Concenus = no, but yes many of us have experienced poorer performance. Mine was terrible initially, but after finding info via these forums regarding negative caching and corrupt preference files, my performance, while slower on certain tasks, is otherwise now similar to 3.6.
I'd download it (all 800 MB !!!!) and give it a whirl ....... overall I find that the new process version is a nice improvement.
I don't think the version of Photosop should be a problem, as you basically create a new image to work on in PS e.g. JPEG, TIFF or PSD. Obviously the version of ACR with CS4 will be a problem, but I assume RAW processing will be entirely done in LR
I attempted to move over to 4.1 after its release; I'd given up on 4.0 as too slow. 4.1 is faster, but still takes waay too long to render dng files in Develop. I'm going back to 3x. I have been attempting to research suggestions/comments made here and elsewhere, but it's very hard to do so: I tried on the term "negative caching" and wound up on a thread devoted to Windows users (Mac here). This should not be so hard to learn.
If there are known, actual 'fixes' which will pull 4.1 up to appropriate speed, a sticky here would be of invaluable help.
olvierpsmile@yahoo.com wrote:
THank you, Thank you, thank you!
You've not moved forward much since your original question and my answer. There is no consensus that it is slow, but there is consensus that some have a problem. Install it yourself and make your own mind up.
John
FYI - I'm running Win 7 32 bit .... this is what helped me...
Corrupt preference files: http://photocamel.com/forum/computers-software/162752-help-lightroom-4 -1-slow-performance-problems.html
Negative caching - this from another poster (John Spacey)....... http://forums.adobe.com/message/4535489#4535489 (see #37)
******************************************************************
Here's an update on what changed in RC2 relative to Develop performance.
For starters, in RC1 we experimented with turning off sharpening while sliders were moving. We got a fair amount of negative feedback on that, and have reverted that behavior. Instead, we moved more of the rendering to a background thread, which keeps the sliders moving smoothly. One caveat with the behavior in RC2 is that those background renders can pile up if you're moving fast. The final 4.1 release will do a better job of trimming these when possible.
I worked with a number of you who volunteered to try an experiment a couple weeks ago that turned off something we call negative caching. The results were mixed; a couple people said it was a clear improvement, others didn't see a benefit. But I'll offer it here in case it helps others who find performance starts out reasonably then suddenly, consistently goes south until a restart.
What the following will do is turn off a cache which saves some of your most recent work done in Develop such that if you revisit a recently touched image, it loads faster. However, if our calculations are off, this cache can sometimes get too big and cause ACR to use virtual memory instead of RAM.
To try it:
1. Create a text file called “config.lua” and put the following line in it: AgNegativeCache.enabled = false
2. Launch Lightroom, go to the Preferences dialog, Presets tab, and hit “Show Lightroom Presets Folder”.
3. Close the Preferences dialog, quit Lightroom.
4. Drop the attached config.lua file into the Lightroom folder that was opened in step 2 (do not put it in one of the preset subfolders). So the path to the file will look like this:
Mac: /Users/[yourname]/Library/Application Support/Adobe/Lightroom/config.lua
Win: C:\Users\[yourname]\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom\config.lua
You’ll know this switch to turn the cache off is working if you see the “Loading...” symbol even when you revisit the previously edited image in Develop. (When caching is on, you can often revisit a recently edited photo without the Loading warning showing.)
******************************************************************
Thank you to all who replied, it helped me a lot to make my decision: for now, I'll stay with what I have. I work in Win7 64 bit and my workflow now is OK. Cannot afford to waste the time to try and then erase and go back, I'll just wait for Adobe to come up with another update, hopefully better and watch the reactions of the users. Thanks again
North America
Europe, Middle East and Africa
Asia Pacific