Skip navigation
This discussion is locked
Karim Nassar
Currently Being Moderated

[Consolidation-Locked] Lightroom 4.1 Performance

Aug 6, 2012 4:05 PM

hello my lightroom 4.1 copy is so slow, in the develop module when switching between raw files the "loading" logo keeps spinning for a long time before I can edit the file, and the same happens when I click on the image to zoom in, takes forever to do so.

 

I run windows 7 64 bit

Xeon 16 core 2.4 gb

32 gb ram

the OS and the raw files are on two seperate sata 6 SSD drives

 

theres is no way  it should be so slow to simply switch from raw files or zoom in?

Even in loupe mode when clicking on a file to zoom it takes forever.

 

Photoshop cs6 camera raw does not show performance issues, when importing the same raw image in photoshop zooming in is immediate instead of many many seconds in lightroom.

 

I tried the optimization suggestion by adobe, setting the camera raw cache to more than 10gb, optimizing the catalog etc... but nothing changes. (http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.htm l)

 

If you have any suggestion I am very interested because at the moment it is very frustating to use the software

 

Message title was edited by: Brett N

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2012 3:21 AM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    Are you saying it's just slow, or that it's slower than LR 3.6? 

     

    I have both LR 3.6 and 4.1 installed, and doing the test you describe (going from one raw image to another in Develop Module) the speed is about the same in both. In Develop module, switching to the next image takes 2-3 seconds or less (that's choosing images not edited recently, so probably not in the ACR cache).   It can sometimes take up to 5-7 seconds initially to switch to Develop Module, but usually less. 

     

    That's using an i7-930, 12G RAM, W7 64-bit, SSD drive C with ACR cache, conventional 7200 RPM single drive D containing images, catalog and previews. 

     

    LR 4.0 seemed a bit slower than 3.6 and  4.1. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 6, 2012 4:06 PM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/971581

     

    [Moderator: This topic is already being discussed at length on thread linked above, please post further comments there]

     

    Message was edited by: Brett N

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 4, 2012 10:08 AM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    Can you try converting one of your raw files to DNG in LR4.1 with the new fastload and see if that improves the load time please.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 5, 2012 10:28 AM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    Thank you for that. I'll pass the information on to the ACR team.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 5, 2012 2:53 PM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    I found LR4.1 to be extremely slow and unacceptable.  After screwing around with different suggestions I found one that workde amazingly well.  It seems that the preview file from LR3 has some sort of issues in LR4.  My solution was to discard all 1:1 previews via LR, shut down LR, and drag the preview file tot he trash, start up LR4 and let it create a new one and then re-render my 1:1 previews. 

     

    Worked like the proverbial charm!  Before doing that, even though images were rendered 1:1, they still would seem to take about 3-4 seconds to render on every viewing or zooming.  Trying to drag image files from one folder to another was taking about 20 seconds for each file!  Afterwards files flew from one folder to another just like they did in LR3.  I think importing & 1:1 rendering is faster too but not sure since I normally import files just before leaving the studio and let it run overnight, but right now each 1:1 rendering is taking about 5 seconds.  Just curious, if this is normal, fast or slow?? Anybody??  I'm on a 2009 Mac Pro Dual-Quad with 16gB RAM and a graphics card that I should replace (a NVIDIA GeForce GT 120 with 512k vRam...I'm embaressed to admit). 

     

    BTW, thinking of getting a Nvidia GTX 285...anybody care to chime in on what kind of performance boost I could expect in LR from that??  There seem to be conflicting opinions on how important a vid card is with LR.

     

    KInd of a pain in the b*tt to have to re-render my library considering it number close to 100,000, half of which are RAW 35mB files but computers work while I sleep so not a big deal.

     

    Anyway, Hope this helps others since this sort of sluggishness is just plain rediculous and almost had me going back to LR3.  I really have to wonder why Adobe didn't make this issue (and solution) more obvious.  I really have a love/hate relationship with Adobe.  They make the most amzing software but never seem willing to admit faults and offer effective workarounds...oh well, what can you do?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 6, 2012 1:21 PM   in reply to aerfoto2

    Why Lightroom 4.1 is so extremely slow???

     

    Writing extremely slow I mean about 2-3 minutes to open one photo in develop module and then to zoom it (1:1)

    I think a lot of "spot removal (Q)" is making this slowness.

    My "slow" pictures has about 200-300 add-and-update spot removal, brush for skin, and other global correction.

    In this workflow - lightroom is totaly useless.

     

    During opening photo in develop module overall processor load is 12,5% at 3.8 Ghz. It looks like during this operation Lightroom can't work as more than one thread application. Processor has 4 cores + ht = 8 threads. 100% / 8 = 12,5%. Even if Lightroom could work on 8 threads simultaneously, still would be too slow (aproximately 15-20 seconds)

    Exporting one photo to JPG takes about 40 seconds.

     

    I tried to remove all cache file. It changes nothing

     

    Other pictures works rather ok. However opening raw photo without any changes and open it in develop module takes 3-4 seconds.

     

    My configuration is:

    Lightroom 4.1

    Catalog size is: 1.4GB

    Photos are from Canon 5D (12Mpix/RAW)

    Intel Core i7 3.6 Ghz (Sandy Bridge 3820)

    16GB RAM (4X4GB Corsair)

    ASUS P9X79

    SSD 120GB (Lightroom catalog and cache)

    HDD 2TB (RAW Photos)

    Gainward GTX 680

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 6, 2012 2:45 PM   in reply to bartel128

    I am working on RAW files predominantly from a Canon 50D and am disappointed by Lightroom 4.1's performance having just upgraded from 2.4.

     

    I am running a much lower spec machine (AMD Phenom Quad core 9750 2.4GHz/Win Vista/4Gb RAM/standard SATA drive) than the ones often described in these posts and frankly the problem with LR4.1 does not seem to be affected by how powerful your machine is as I should be a lot worse off than you guys.  

     

    I have tried a few of the fixes including those above and they did not seem to help much. 

     

    I then immediately went through looking for options to turn off that I was not going to use. 

     

    I have turned off all the metadata options in the catalogue settings (in particular the "suggest settings" one)  - which did not seem to have much effect. 

     

    I then went into the view options settings in both the Develop and Library modules (why these are not on the edit menu options I don't know) and turned off the "show message when rendering or loading photos" option.  Not only does this get rid of the "Loading" message it also seems to remove quite a bit of the delay that I am experiencing in connection with "Loading", particularly with images that I have recently viewed.

     

    Well it doesnt fix everything but, it's worth a go...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 7, 2012 3:09 AM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    LR 4.1 is soooooo slow for me also! When editing pictures in the library module, after 15 to 30 mn, pictures become very slow to load, as LR4.1 is rebuilding preview. And I have to close LR and launch it again. Never happened with LR3.6. Raw files from 5d MKIII, on windows seven 64 bits and a powerful pc :

     

    12 Gb RAM

    ATI FirePro V4800

    Intel Core i7 Extreme 980X

    my catalog is on a 256 Gb ssd

     

    LR is my main working tool after my camera and LR4.1 is making me lose so much time these days...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 7, 2012 3:25 AM   in reply to Rico_LR3

    Rico_LR3 wrote:

     

    LR 4.1 is soooooo slow for me also! When editing pictures in the library module, after 15 to 30 mn, pictures become very slow to load...

    How slow do you mean?  I find that opening an image in Develop Module takes anything from less than a second to about 3 seconds if it's been edited recently (i.e. it's probably in the ACR cache) or up to about 5 seconds if it's not been edited recently.  Very occasionally (less than 1 in 20) it takes up to 10 seconds.  Your machine is quicker than mine (I have i7-930) so ought to be a but quicker.  Is that very slow?  I guess I'd prefer it always to be instant, but for me it's acceptable.

     

    I assume from your comment you're getting much longer delays?  Have you tried increasing the size of the ACR cache?  Edit menu, Preferences, File Handling tab.  I've set 20G.  That should increase the chance that files open in develop module faster. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 7, 2012 4:05 AM   in reply to CSS Simon

    Well, 5 to 10 seconds is not acceptable for me. Anyway, the problem is a kind of freeze while editing a lot of pictures in library module more than opening up a picture in develop module, you know I rate my pictures X / U / P quite fast before retouching. And yes I've increased my cache, I've set... 95Gb, and it is placed on another ssd... I've done everything Adobe talked about in its white paper about LR performance. But maybe it'a alos a problem with the 5d MK III files.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 7, 2012 4:21 AM   in reply to Rico_LR3

    Rico, do you have Autowrite to xmp turned on? I'm wondering about either the write to file or write to catalog speed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 8, 2012 2:32 PM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    Just wanted to indicate that I am another victim of the upgrade to release version of 4.1.  I have never had any problems with prior versions of LR (beginning with 2.2 through the 4.1 RC), I am now having identical problems to those listed here -- 8 to 10 seconds before the loading symbol goes away every time I move from one raw to the next in the develop module (it also seems to take a longer to time to load than before).  I am using an AMD Phenom II 920 at stock speed, Win 7 Home 64 bit, SSD for my C: drive (with program and cache); the raw files are on a 7200 rpm 2 terabyte drive, I only have 4 gigs of memory. Autowrite to xmp is off, cache is set at 25 gigabytes, 3 for video.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 9, 2012 7:32 PM   in reply to m scooler

    Ditto, ditto, ditto. I too am running on a more than capable machine - brand new screamer from Dell and 4.1 bogs down, locks up, creates errors in the middle of edits -- A TOTAL WASTE. Editing a batch of photos that took 30 minutes under 3.x is now taking 3 hours. The release should be renamed 4.junk!  Yes, my machine greatly exceeds the minimum requirements, yes I have gone through all of the suggestions above, yes I went through the recommend optomizations from Adobe. No, nothing helped. I am going to reload my last version of 3 until Adobe gets this resolved.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 9, 2012 8:43 PM   in reply to bartel128

    Indeed the spot healings are the culprits. I have one image that takes over 6 minutes in a 12GB i7 980X hexacore oveclocked to 4.3 GHz. But those that don't have an over-the-top number of spot heals are much faster, and of course those with few if any load pretty much instantaneously. But I do have quite a few that take over two minutes.

     

    Whatcha gonna do? Grin and bear it for now .

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 1:14 AM   in reply to DJ-G

    What I find very strange is that some people are saying "it's totally unacceptable and unusable" and others (like me) saying "it's OK".  Now I don't suppose any of us is lying, so is this just difference in requirements, or are there factors that lead to very different performance?

     

    I came home yesterday with 650 images from an event, selected 130 all of which needed processing.  The event was indoors in poor light, mostly with flash, but leaving uneven illumination requiring graduated filter, local adjustment brush and some spot removal (sometimes extensive).  And all of them required major work in tone mapping in the basic panel.  As I was under time-pressure to get stuff back to the organisers, I used Photoshop only for those where I definitely could not do the job in LR (about 5 images).  Some of the images have extensive edit lists, including long lists of "Update Spot Removal" and "Add brush stroke".  Most had clarity adjustment.  These were not causing major slow down on rendering.  There are times (for a minority of images) where I get a 5-10 second wait in opening a fresh image for develop; maybe that's a bit slower than LR3.6, but most operations are similar speed.  It would certainly have been slower to do all the work in Photoshop. 

     

    I can't see this simply as a difference in perception or requirement.  I just don't think I'm getting the delays others are reporting.  My machine isn't top performance - a 2 year old i7-930, 12G RAM, slow-ish SSD for drive C and ACR cache, normal speed hard drive for images and catalogue. 

     

    So why the difference?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 4:17 AM   in reply to CSS Simon

    CSS Simon wrote:

     

    I can't see this simply as a difference in perception or requirement.  I just don't think I'm getting the delays others are reporting.  My machine isn't top performance - a 2 year old i7-930, 12G RAM, slow-ish SSD for drive C and ACR cache, normal speed hard drive for images and catalogue. 

     

    So why the difference?

     

    Some of us have made this point umpteen times, Simon - the problem cannot be purely of Adobe's making.

     

    There must be something "local" in each case which is hurting Lr's performance: some factor that's specific to the user's machine, and not specifically correlated to its spec, which is causing Lr to lag.

     

    My Win 7 64 bit machine "only" has 8 gb of RAM, and a mid-range Intel Quad Core (lower spec than an i7) and yet Lr 4  fairly zips along. Images are on external drives, the cache is on the same drive (not an SSD) as the software, and I have no performance concerns.

     

    It's not lower expectations on my part either, just before anyone decides to go there - I came home from a shoot earlier this week with over 1000 images (over 600 after an initial cull) and I was done with the conversion of these files (Canon 7D Raws converted to 16 bit tiff) within a morning. This included a lot of per-file adjustment, too - it wasn't a "fire and forget" batch job.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 9:03 AM   in reply to CSS Simon

    I believe the differences are in the local environment. Every image is different - some have lots of micro texture, others are smooth. Some spot heals are just that, small dust spec removals, others may be taking out an unwanted SUV :D. Same for local adjustments.

     

    Differences in the images and corrections easily account for different processing times, all other variables remaining equal, which they won't in addition. I see these differences in my fairly high-powered system.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 9:12 AM   in reply to DJ-G

    Where it that easy to simply guess what is happening with others.  I took the same batch of photos to another machine on which I installed Lightroom 3 - a marked improvement in speed and performance was realized. No delays, no lookups, no waiting. This is not an issue of expectations nor of image differences.nit is an issue of a software problem.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 9:23 AM   in reply to Kensound

    If you read my post again, you'll see I'm saying different images with different processing needs will make a difference, given all else remains the same. You took the same images and moved them to a different processing environment, of course it will probably make a difference . No discussion on that from my post!

     

    And indeed, it's hard to hazard a guess at what's happening in somebody else's rig.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 9:35 AM   in reply to Kensound

    Kensound wrote:

     

    I took the same batch of photos to another machine on which I installed Lightroom 3 - a marked improvement in speed and performance was realized.

     

    That hardly undermines the "local issues" argument, though - the fact that on another machine you got better performance really doesn't provide evidence that Lightroom is the problem.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 12:29 PM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    Just installed 3 on the SAME machine. Problems disappeared. Marked improvement. Like many are saying, 4 has a problem. I'm leaving 3 on it until 4.2 or whatever comes out.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 12:53 PM   in reply to Kensound

    Kensound wrote:

     

    Like many are saying, 4 has a problem.

     

    And - like many are saying - it hasn't, on their machines.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 1:30 PM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    Then explain to me why LR4 works normaly when i change PV from 2012 to 2010 and the moment I change it back to 2012 it is like all hell broke loose. LR 4 has a problem and Adobe should do something about it.

    And I am happy for you not having issues...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 5:45 PM   in reply to aerfoto2

    I'm running v4.1 and certainly seeing slowness on the 1:1 previews, or at least this is where it's interrupting me the most.  More specifically it's in Develop that I expierience it, the loading delay is in the region of 5-10 seconds but my 1:1 previews in Library are loading as I would expect.  More generally working in Develop feels slower than v3.x but I haven't directly compared yet, like some others I've also noted a dificulty using the spot remval tool, my CPU spikes for a little while which makes it awkward to use, I guess there's alsways going to be some form of hit here I'm just not sure on the best way to optimise around it.

     

    As the performance optimisations page suggested I've increased the Camera RAW Cache size for good measure, now I've figured out it was more about Develop mode I'm not sure whether this was necessary in my situation.

     

    I've tried converting a few images to DNG to see if flicking between them in Develop is made any quicker and I didn't observe any noticable improvment.  That being said over the course of writing this my use of the modes has become more controlled and I'm moving about quite quickly, I'm deliberately using Library when scanning through and making multiple spot removals on an image and performance is good where as earlier it I was finding the mouse become jerky quite frequently and encountered frequent loading messages on 1:1s.

     

    Feels like some of my problems may be with how I'm choosing to move around in Lightroom, 2 hours my first serious editing in v4 and things are getting easier.  I've also just gone through a 2,000+ image import so not sure if that has any bearing on things, all of the above was expierienced after the import had finished and previews rendered etc.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 10, 2012 10:49 PM   in reply to Ripster1981

    Ripster1981 wrote:

     

    Then explain to me why LR4 works normaly when i change PV from 2012 to 2010 and the moment I change it back to 2012 it is like all hell broke loose. LR 4 has a problem and Adobe should do something about it.

    And I am happy for you not having issues...

     

    How in God's name should I know? Because you run Lr on on a barebones, low-spec box with multiple browser instances open, PS running HDR in the background, into twin 30 inch monitors with auto-write XMP on, while playing HALO?

     

    It's very well known that PV2012 is very resource intensive - it's clearly hitting a bottleneck on your machine.

     

    But it's an utterly irrelevant question. What you should be asking is: if it's only Lr that's the problem, what's special about my modestly-specced machine that completely isolates me from the slowdowns others are seeing? Surely, if the problem is only Lr, wouldn't we all be seeing the lag?

     

    I've asked that question a number of times now. Still haven't seen anything like a cogent answer...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 11, 2012 2:30 AM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    When I installed LR4.0, it was workable in comparison to the reports of other users. Version 4.1 rc 1 was less smooth, version 4.1 rc 2  was even worse and version 4.1 didn't resolve performance issues for me. Working with Lightroom has become something I try to minimize. I reverted back to Bridge and Camera Raw - witch works very smooth with PV2012. I'm happy that LR 4.1 is working well for a number of users. Maybe it is a local problem. Maybe it depends on the graphic card. Maybe ...

    I now upgraded my motherboard, CPU, hard drive and RAM to a higher standard and did a clean install of W7 64 bit. It did not make LR 4.1 smoother in any way.  I also tried every suggestion made in this forum with no luck. I see users with massive powerfull systems having even slower response when working in LR than I have.

    So I have come to the end of the line. If there is still a bottleneck in my system that prevents a smooth working LR4, then so be it. My other Adobe software (PS6, Illustrator 6) is working great by the way.

     

    Jos

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 11, 2012 6:03 AM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    I get the same thing exactly, loading then waiting.

     

    Another frustration is the spot removal tool, removing one spot takes 27 seconds...TWENTY SEVEN SECONDS.

     

    I have a fully loaded Alenware m14xr2, 16gb ram, lightroom running from an SSD and seriously, WTF?

    First thing I loaded on this system other than an AV was Lightroom 4.1 after I purchased the upgrade.

     

    Lightroom 3.x on my old POS Core2Duo runs faster, considerably faster and

     

    Lightroom 4.1 has a new catalog, new images being imported as DNGs, autowrite to XMP is off, fast load (LOL) is on.

    I have read every forum, looked at every solution, basically tried everything to fix what could be a problem with my system, but seriously, a freshly loaded high performance laptop with only AV and LR4 loaded and I get THIS joke of a program.  I even uninstalled the AV and went offline and....still the same.

     

    Luckily I have my LR3 on my old system so I can process the 2 weddings and model shoot from this weekend, this is affecting my productivity and costing me time, which is money.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 11, 2012 10:01 AM   in reply to Keith_Reeder

    In response to keith reeder.  Don't know about the others, but with no obvious changes to my machine (software has been updated, but I haven't added any new programs), the final version of 4.1 has become very annoying to use because switching between files takes a noticeable amount of time.  I had no previous issues with the release candidates, not sure if they were faster or slower than LR 3 or 2, but there wasn't this noticeable delay even though I am not using a pro state of the art machine.  It would appear to me (based on my experience) that something changed in the final 4.1 code that  affects certain people with certain machines.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 11, 2012 8:27 PM   in reply to Karim Nassar

    Hello All, finished a chat today with Adobe help. Thought I would post this info for those having the same trouble. For reference, my specs for the new machine I built are:

     

    Win7, 64-bit; 16GB ram; 4-core AMD Phenom processor 3.2 GHz; SSD with Win, Photoshop & LightRoom installed on it; Nvidia GeForce 560 1GB; photos on secondary drive. CS5 12.1x64, LR4.1 CR 7.1

     

    Installed 4.1 updated viseo drivers, tried all the "remedies" such as enlarging & clearing the cache, etc. Nothing worked. LR was SLOW SLOW, taking 5-9 seconds to be load and accept adjustments each time I selected a new image to adjust (no big deal for 10-20 images, but for 800 image weddings from 2 cameras, quite a long time to wait on the computer!!!) Called Adobe, they said they were aware of performance issues on some machines, and were working on it.

     

    Got on Adobe chat help today. The following is the conversation, with superfluous comments etc. edited out. The simple procedure sped my LR performance up by at least 60-70% in my estimate. Amen.

     

    I do not surf the forums, and this is only my second post ever, so please don't expect me to answer questions right away, though I'm sure others will. I am just posting this conversation so that others might try the same, and maybe it will help them. Good luck!

     

    Help Chat with Adobe's "William", June 11, 2012:

    William: I understand that you're experiencing performance issue. Am I correct?

    Jojo: Oh yes

    William: Please close all windows except this chat window.

    William: Click on Start button.

    William: Type %appdata% in the search box and press Enter.

    William: Double click on Adobe folder.

    William: Check for the folder of Lightroom and rename it to "OldLightroom".

    William: Click on Start button.

    William: Type %temp% and press Enter.

    William: It will open Temp folder.

    William: Empty the files and folders inside it.

    Jojo: ok done. it still has files that could not be deleted for Win Explorer and Google Chrome (the browser I use)

    William: Okay.

    William: Launch Lightroom and check if you're getting the same issue.

    Jojo: that seems to have sped it up significant;y

    William: Perfect.

    William: Please double check if that works fine now.

    Jojo: Much faster, but all of my presets are gone

    Jojo: Export presets, etc

    William: It was due to corrupt preference that was causing this issue.

    William: Close Lightroom.

    William: Click on Start button.

    William: Type %appdata% in the search box and press Enter.

    William: Double click on Adobe folder.

    William: Check for the folder of Lightroom and rename it to "2OldLightroom".

    William: Now check for the folder "OldLightroom" and rename it to ""Lightroom".

    William: After that open Preferences folder inside it.

    William: Check for the file "Lightroom 4 Preferences.agprefs" and rename it to "OldLightroom 4 Preferences.agprefs".

    William: Launch Lightroom and check if that works fine for you.

    Jojo: Oh yes, that's working well!

    William: Perfect.

    Jojo: Much better!

    William: You can start working with the product smoothly now.

    William: Great.

    William: I'm happy to help you.

    Jojo: Hey, are they fixing this in a release? I know a lot of photographers who are VERY upset about this performance issue

    Jojo: I was ready to change back to LR3

    William: Corrupt preference may cause Lightroom to work slow.

    William: We renamed the preference file and it is working fine.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 12, 2012 9:07 AM   in reply to jojohere61

    Your sollution didn't work for me. No changes when opening photos in develop module and zoom to 1:1. It still takes a lot of time: up to 90-180 seconds for one photo. During this time Lightroom is frozen.

     

    This situation is totally unacceptable

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Victoria Bampton
    5,302 posts
    Apr 1, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 12, 2012 1:56 PM   in reply to bartel128

    Are your system specs in this thread bartel?  Where are you photos stored?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 12, 2012 11:27 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    Victoria, I wrote my specs in post #7

     

    Lightroom 4.1 / Windows 7 64 Professional

    Catalog size: 1.4GB

    Photos are from Canon 5D (12Mpix/RAW)

    Intel Core i7 3.6 Ghz (Sandy Bridge 3820)

    16GB RAM (4X4GB Corsair)

    ASUS P9X79

    SSD (system drive) 120GB (Lightroom catalog and cache)

    HDD 2TB (RAW Photos)

    Gainward GTX 680

     

    I think a lot of "spot removal (Q)" is making this slowness. My "slow" pictures has about 200-300 add-and-update spot removal, brush for skin, and other global correction. In this workflow - lightroom is totaly useless.

    I noticed one rule: the more spot removal, the slower lightroom is.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 13, 2012 12:29 AM   in reply to bartel128

    bartel128 wrote:

     

    I think a lot of "spot removal (Q)" is making this slowness. My "slow" pictures has about 200-300 add-and-update spot removal, brush for skin, and other global correction. In this workflow - lightroom is totaly useless.

    I noticed one rule: the more spot removal, the slower lightroom is.

    Perhaps that's the issue.  I often have 50 spot removals or "Add Brush Stroke" but not 300. (I tend to go to Photoshop if I need that many.)  No reason we shouldn't expect LR to perform well with hundreds of edit steps, though. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 13, 2012 1:40 AM   in reply to CSS Simon

    CSS Simon wrote:

     

    bartel128 wrote:

     

    I think a lot of "spot removal (Q)" is making this slowness. My "slow" pictures has about 200-300 add-and-update spot removal, brush for skin, and other global correction. In this workflow - lightroom is totaly useless.

    I noticed one rule: the more spot removal, the slower lightroom is.

    Perhaps that's the issue.  I often have 50 spot removals or "Add Brush Stroke" but not 300. (I tend to go to Photoshop if I need that many.)  No reason we shouldn't expect LR to perform well with hundreds of edit steps, though. 

    I dont think so. 200-300 is sum of all actions on one photo (add and update spot removal). Workflow usually looks like: click (+1) and then move (+1) and size (+1). Dividing 300 by 3 - we have max 100 spot removal.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 13, 2012 9:15 AM   in reply to jojohere61

    I tried jojohere61's Adobe Chat Help solution - it did not work for me - things still very slow. I'm running a 32bit Win 7 Pro OS Dell PC.  PS workd fine along with all my many other applications. LR 4.1 continues to be a bummer.  Frustrating indeed. By the way, I hardly use LR's spot removal.  I have also started LR with a catalog of ten raw images, non of which had changes.  LR continued to be slow when working on them.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Victoria Bampton
    5,302 posts
    Apr 1, 2008
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 13, 2012 1:29 PM   in reply to bartel128

    bartel128 wrote:

     

    I think a lot of "spot removal (Q)" is making this slowness. My "slow" pictures has about 200-300 add-and-update spot removal, brush for skin, and other global correction. In this workflow - lightroom is totaly useless.

    I noticed one rule: the more spot removal, the slower lightroom is.

     

    Thanks Bartel, I couldn't find them.

     

    I have seen some performance issues with spot removal, so you're probably right about the observation.  'Totally useless' may be a little extreme, but I understand the frustration.

     

    There's one thing you could try to help - clear the history (or create a virtual copy).  It may not help, but considering your number of history states, it may improve things.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 14, 2012 10:04 PM   in reply to dbeifeld

    I had the same experience. Using a i7-2720QM Dell laptop with 8GB RAM and an SSD, even with a fresh install of LR 4.1 and a library of only 10 RAW files I still have bad performance. Spot healing (3-4 spots is enough) can totally stall LR. And everything else is slow, too.

    When LR slows/stalls, CPU usage never maxes out nor gets the RAM used up. It usually remains at ~12% CPU and 1.6 GB memory use. Why?

     

    Interestingly, I tried the same catalog and LR4.1 on an old Core 2 Duo laptop and the performance was much faster. Very usable. Even spot healing was fine.

    Is there a particular incompatibility between LR4.1 and modern i7 processors?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jun 16, 2012 11:05 AM   in reply to Tobi72

    SOLUTION - at least for me

     

    You gave me a great IDEA  - I opened LR4.1 and then in task manger and messed with the affinity settings - I found that if I set it to only use 0,2,4 that LR performed MUCH faster. Then I set the Priority to High and now it is mostly usable for editing.

     

    Setting affinity back to normal - Lightroom is SLOW again.

     

    I made a Bat file  with this line

     

    start "lightroom" /high /affinity 15 "C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 4\lightroom.exe"

     

    It runs Lightroom at high priority and on core 0,2,4 on my 8 core system. Seems lightroom doesnt like to run hyperthreaded (if thats the right term" . Granted this still seems more sluggish than LR 3X but since I like and use the new features in 4x it will just have to do.

     

    FYI any three from core 0,2,4,6 work four slows things down again and no combination of 1,3,5,7 seems to work in fact seems to make things worce. Mixing main with hyperthreads also does not seem to work.

     

    FYI asus g73, 16 ram, 2 disk one devoted to LR. Installed every version from 2x including the beta of 4. Upgraded beta to full version and also upgraded catologue.

     

    I hope this helps you

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (2)

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