Skip navigation
This discussion is archived
tobylong
Currently Being Moderated

Camera Raw 7 CS6 adjustments slow to operate.

Jul 14, 2012 2:04 AM

I have updated to Photoshop CS6 and I'm having a problem with camera raw adjustments.

 

When loading a batch of images into camera raw all is fine then after a few images have been adjusted everything slows down. Adjustment controls take 1-3 seconds to activate when clicked on.

 

Using MacPro 2.66 Nehalem 8 core, 32GB RAM, OS 10.6.8, ATI Radeon HD 4870

 

Any suggestions welcomed.

 

Have tried:

disabling all plug-ins

Launching Camera Raw from Photoshop and Bridge

Closing all other programs

Adjusting Camera Raw Cache(currently 10gb)

 
Replies 1 2 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 14, 2012 2:30 AM   in reply to tobylong

    .

    Have you updated the ACR plug-in to version 7.1?

     

    I'm not familiar with your video card.  How much VRAM is there on it?  Just mentioning this in case that is the bottleneck.  I do not know, obviously.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 14, 2012 4:28 AM   in reply to tobylong

    I noticed that in neither of your two threads have you mentioned trashing your Photoshop's preferences, which is normally the very first thing to try.

     

    Hold Down Command+Option+Shift as you launch Photoshop until you see a dialog box allowing you to delete and re-set all your Photoshop's preferences.

     

    One more thing:  Do you have a dedicated, physically separate (preferably internal) hard drive set up as your primary Photoshop scratch disk?  Is it sufficiently large?  Figure on up to 100 times or more the size of your largest file multiplied by the number of files you have open.

     

    Even with 32 GB or 64 GB of installed RAM, Photoshop always creates a scratch disk the instant you open an image file or create a new document.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 14, 2012 7:11 AM   in reply to tobylong

    I just tested the scenario you described (I have a PC, but with similar compute power) and even when I'm adjusting controls with 50 raw files selected the preview is updated virtually instantaneously.  I even went through all 50 individually and adjusted controls specific to them.  It was fast to the last.  Your hardware should definitely be providing you better performance than what you're seeing.

     

    I have a friend who has told me he has the exact same issue you're reporting (he said "2-3 seconds for control responses" and "worse when working on groups of images"), but with Lightroom on an i7-based PC (Windows 7).  I created a thread some time back about it.  He ended up buying a new high-end video card (switching from nVidia to ATI in the process) and while it the more powerful GPU made a little difference for most everything across the board it specifically did NOT solve this problem.  He said the very latest Lightroom release (just weeks ago) helped a lot, but it still slows down some after a while or under some conditions he can't nail down.  Perhaps this is something Adobe has found and fixed, and we will see it in Camera Raw 7.2.

     

    I have not yet seen a fix or workaround that directly addresses this for the people who are experiencing it.

     

    Some additional questions about things that might be pertinent on your system:

     

    • Are you using a lot of spot adjustments in the images?
    • Do you have lens corrections enabled by default?
    • What camera do you have, specifically?
    • Are there power-saving (vs. performance) settings on your computer (I'm not familiar with Mac) and if so how are they set?

     

    I think there's a basic problem somewhere in the software that is triggered only under some conditions or on some systems.

     

    Station_two, I take it your control response in Camera Raw is fluid?

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 15, 2012 2:10 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I have found the same thing. When processing my d800 files the slowdown becomes so severe that I can no longer use ACR 7.1 and fire up photoshop 5.1 to work. Another thing I notice even with my d3s files, is that processing and saving batches of images is much slower. In PS5.1 I can watch as ACR saves 4 images simultaneously. You can see the processing indicator on 4 images at a time and file saving (I usually process to large JPG for client delivery and reprints of weddings)  Yet with the new ACR, it works on one image at a time while processing and saving and according to my stopwatch, is almost 4x slower to process and save a batch of raw images to jpg than ACR 6.7 (or whatever the last update was with cs5.5)

    This is in addition to finding all the slowdowns described above during the adjustment process itself. I can not use this version.

    System info, mac pro, 12 core 3.2 gz 32 mb ram 512 gb ssd drive as scratch disc. I usually process 50-80 images at a go and it is a mix of global adjustments and some spot adjustments in ACR. Using 7.1 and quite unhappy with it. The quality is a bit better, but not as a trade for several extra hours of computer time per wedding.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 15, 2012 8:24 PM   in reply to tahoelight

    With that powerful a system, it's indeed unfortunate you are seeing performance issues. 

     

    The one thing you might want to try is disabling the intrusive and useless Spotlight.  Above all, make sure it's not trying to index your SSD scratch disk drive and/or your image-file storage drive. 

     

     

    OFF TOPIC:

     

    Is there an industry-wide standard size (in pixels) at which wedding photographers deliver JPEGs that are represented to clients as being "full resolution JPEGs"?  I'm asking because the pro that covered my daughter's wedding a couple of years ago did a super fantastic job but the large-group-pictures JPEGs are a wee bit too small to be printed.  They're only 1280 by 1920 pixels from a Canon EOS 5D.  There were several thousand shots, and I can see why that shoot would have been tough to handle at a larger resolution. Thanks in advance.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 16, 2012 2:14 AM   in reply to tobylong

    tobylong wrote:

     

    …How do I disable Spotlight? I've uncheked all boxes in preferences.

     

    Just make sure that all drives you do not want indexed and searched are so listed in the Privacy Tab of the Spotlight Preferences Panel in System Preferences:

     

    Privacy_tab_Spotlight_PrefPanel.png

     

     

    tobylong wrote:

     

    Several thousand shots seems an awfull lot…

     

    Yes, indeed.  She and her assistant started shooting the "Getting Ready" sequence in the morning and went on through the ceremony, reception, formal dinner and all-night party until the wee hours of the next morning.  Yes, my guess is also she was shooting low-res JPEGs rather than RAW.  She did a wonderful job of lighting and post-processing, and all but the large groups are super!

     

    Thank you for your off-topic response. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 16, 2012 2:18 AM   in reply to tobylong

    tobylong wrote:

     

    …The scratch disk is 335 GB on the same drive as the operating system and photoshop…

     

    The size is good, but the problem with its being on the boot drive is that the Photoshop scratch disk will be constantly competing with the swap files of the OS for the use of the one set of read/write heads of the single drive, slowing you down.  I have no idea how this affects ACR, but it definitely bogs down Photoshop.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 16, 2012 6:47 AM   in reply to station_two

    Thanks, I'll try spotlight. But right after I posted, I went back to toning more raw files, but switched back to PS 5.1 and no problems, so unlikely is scratch disc. I think Adobe has some work to do.

    As for wedding, we shoot full day, getting ready to bitter end and it usually works out to around 600 images. Full size file delivers means at the camera native resolution after any cropping. Personally, I would never give jpg's straight out of the camera even as proofs, though they are getting a lot better these days. Some photographers hold back the full size files to make more money on reprints and usually have an option for you to buyout the disc. Maybe try contacting her/him

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 16, 2012 10:53 AM   in reply to tahoelight

    I just want to stress here that this CANNOT be a simple performance issue.  There's definitely something up when two similar 8 core machines with similar video cards yield performance that differs from 3 seconds to an imperceptible fraction of a second, EVEN IF they're running different OSs.

     

    To summarize:

     

    tahoelight:  Dual quad core Xeon (Nehalem) 2.66 GHz , 32 GB, Radeon HD 4870:  1-3 second control response

    Noel Carboni:  Dual quad core Xeon (Harpertown) 3.16 GHz, 16 GB, Radeon HD 5670:  (estimated) 0.1 second control response

     

    Relative performance (higher is better, courtesy Passmark Benchmark):

     

    Dual Xeon X5550 2.66 GHz:    10,727

    Dual Xeon X5460 3.16 GHz:      9,583

     

    Radeon 4870:  1,737

    Radeon 5670:  1,234

     

    Clearly the more powerful machine should not be 1/10 to 1/30 as fast to interact with the user!

     

    Adobe has said the GPU doesn't play into Camera Raw performance, so what's up here?

     

    Adobe seems to be a bit silent across the various forums lately.  I hope they haven't been instructed to avoid participating...  That would be a shame, as it's one thing Adobe has been doing right.

     

    FYI, station_two will be happy to know I've disabled Windows' equivalent of spotblight (indexing).  Some concepts are universally good. 

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 19, 2012 8:47 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Just to clarify, I'm on a 2010 dual 6 core Xeon 2.66 ghz, 32GB Ram, ATI Radeon HD 5870 card.The last wedding I shot was with my d3s's, I left the D800 at home and working with photoshop 5.1 and ACR 6.7 I still have no delays in adjustments and redraws of previews compared to acr 7.1 AND ACR6.7 saves over twice as fast to my ssd drive. Both versions use the SSD drive for scratch also and have the same memory allotment (80%)

    In short, I have photoshop 6, but unless I want to waste extra HOURS per wedding I can not use it. It sits useless on my computer while I work in cs5.1  I have 5 other machines that are NOT going to be upgraded until Adobe gets on this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 20, 2012 12:07 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    Adobe seems to be a bit silent across the various forums lately.  I hope they haven't been instructed to avoid participating...  That would be a shame, as it's one thing Adobe has been doing right.

     

    They (I'm assuming you mean Eric) haven't been active on the forums because some of the engineers are taking time off while planning for the future. After a major release (LR4 & ACR 4) there's a serious lack of energy and spending a lot of time on the forums isn't how you get your juices back flowing...

     

    As regarding performance problems, it really, REALLY depends on what you are doing and how you've done it. There are lots of image adjustments that are processor intensive and when added together are likely to compound performance issues. Lot's of little isolated things can add up to painfully slow working...I've seen it at times. Lens Corrections plus high noise reduction plus multiple adjustment brush pins plus Grain (reducing noise and adding grain can be a real slowdown when previewing and zooming). If you decide to show the brush mask expect another performance hit.

     

    Add this on top of PV 2012 which is much more CPU intensive than PV 2010 and things multiply...sometimes geometrically.

     

    So, either the engineers need to speed up the pipeline or we need to wait for new, even faster CPUs...both will take some time...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 20, 2012 4:52 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Having the same problem on a Windows 7 x64 quadcore machine running Bridge/Camera Raw CS6. CS5 runs fine. I notice it most on an 18MP image (DNG format) when I paint a large Adjustment Brush area -- any new strokes peaks all the CPUs to 100% and hangs the system until the screen refreshes (4-5 seconds each). Oh well. I've learned not to buy any Adobe products until at least the first patches are released.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 23, 2012 2:36 PM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    Jeff Schewe wrote:

     

    So, either the engineers need to speed up the pipeline or we need to wait for new, even faster CPUs...both will take some time...

     

    Jeff, your comment seems inapplicable to the specific problem being discussed here.  It's been clearly shown that a faster system is delivering a 10x slower user interface experience.  This is beyond just a performance issue.  That's obvious even to a casual obsever.

     

    For those of you having the problem, please describe exactly what you see when you open a fresh image (without prior settings), what your default settings are, and what response times you're seeing from which specific controls.  Ideally, post a raw image and the XMP that goes with it (as saved by your copy of Camera Raw), then others can try to reproduce the problem using the same operations you're using, and you'll have direct comparison info.

     

    Those experiencing the problem need to make it clearly known that the problem is more than just an annoyance, because people may try to downplay it, but rather it is a serious issue (several seconds to see a screen update absolutely isn't acceptable, when it's been shown it can happen in a tiny fraction of a second). 

     

    Someone at Adobe who knows what they're doing needs to take this seriously.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 23, 2012 2:42 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Nicely put Noel .

     

    Hopefully Adobe is listening even if not talking...

     

    Rob

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 24, 2012 2:35 AM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    Noel Carboni wrote:

     

    Jeff, your comment seems inapplicable to the specific problem being discussed here.

     

    I guess you missed the part about the difficulty in determining EXACTLY why some people are seeing slowdowns and other are not?

     

    Lately I've noticed a real slow down when turning on the Adjustment Brush mask preview and trying to work...painfully slow (and I've pinged Eric about it).

     

    If there was a repeatable use case where the engineers could say, if you do this then things turn to crap I suspect they would work hard to fix it in a dot release...the problem is that as far as I know there's no reliable method of determining exactly what series of steps results in serious slowdowns. Can you shed light? If not then you are just adding to the chaos and not resolving any issues...let us know when you have any definitive answers...otherwise you're taking a stab in the dark like the rest of us.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 24, 2012 10:47 AM   in reply to Jeff Schewe

    If you can describe exactly what adjustments were made both local and global and also if you could submit files with xmps attached, (as Jeff mentioned), it would be very helpful to us. Including the OS spec is also useful. You are welcome to send me files via dropbox, my email is : aohlmeye@adobe.com. Thanks!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 24, 2012 5:05 PM   in reply to adriana ohlmeyer

    Adriana,

     

    Thanks for joining in here. In my case I usually shoot weddings. Sort a take by camera model, then start toning in groups of 30-80 images depending on whether they are in similar lighting situations. If I have an outdoor ceremony and 30 family photos all on the same body, usually nikon d3s, I may tone 80 similar images at once in camera raw. But not always. Most of my adjustments are global. Pulling in highlights, shadows, color tweaking, contrast. Very few require spot or local adjustments, but when they do, I start to notice the redraw slows down and I begin to have to wait a few seconds between adjustments. This wait will get longer the more photos I have to tone.  Also, after 10-15 images, even making global adjustments, such as blacks, whites, shadows, will start to make me wait up to a couple of seconds before I see the redraw and can move on to the next adjustment.

    Finally, on saving the images, I notice ACR7.1 saves literally 1/2 as fast. I have timed this. IF I make NO adjustments and save 30 raw .NEF files with ACR7.1 it will take 2x longer than ACR 6.7.

     

    Finally, on everything I said above, none of this happens in ACR 6.7  No lag in redraw, no pause between operations and faster save. I am on 2010 MacPro, 32GB RAM SSD drives dual 6 core 2.66GHZ processors and ATI Radeon 5870 graphics card with 1gb dedicated graphics ram.   I do think the quality of ACR7.1 is better. BUT camera sensor resolutions are growing, and ACR is slowing. I have 2 d800's (36Mp sensor) that I can not use for weddings unless I want to outsource my processing because it takes days.  I would be perfectly happy if your next iteration of ACR had NO improvements in quality whatesoever. It is already pretty good, but if you can double the speed it works out, you would save me hundreds of $ in computer time per job!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jul 24, 2012 8:37 PM   in reply to tahoelight

    Thank you for the detailed response. I will talk to Eric and we will investigate. -adriana

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 1, 2012 2:01 PM   in reply to adriana ohlmeyer

    Hi Adriana

     

    I'm Expericing the same problems, CR7 is extremly slow and lags on my iMac Quad i7 with 16GB RAM and with a SSD. Just changing the temperature of a CR2 or Tiff makes Bridge lag with about 4-5 seconds.

    This must be a software related issue, because if I choose to revert from the 2012 Raw Engine profile to 2010 Raw Engine Profile, everything suddenly runs smoothly within the Camera Raw Editing tools.

    I seriously hope Adobe has this on top priority and will focus on fixing this ASAP, since CR7 is basicily useless with it's current horrible slow speed....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 1, 2012 2:38 PM   in reply to tahoelight

    Just as a follow up. Do you see slowdowns when working with a single image? You said it is more prominent  when using local adjustments and also while saving, correct? If you can send me exactly the controls you are using it would be very helpful. For example, when using adjusment brush, do you feel it is slower when using the exposure slider, or the noise reduction slider? What controls and values used cause this to slowdown? Do you have masks on or off? Any detailed information will help us reproduce and narrow down the issues reported. If you could share an image with the adjusments and the xmp file will be very helpful. Thank you!!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 4, 2012 2:17 PM   in reply to tobylong

    Just so we're all on the same page...

     

    • Camera Raw 7 is a little slower than all its predecessors because it does more and produces higher quality results.  But only incrementally slower.

     

    • Some people are seeing MUCH slower performance from Camera Raw 7 than with its predecessors.  Like 10x slower.

     

    It's important not to confuse the two.

     

    In order to differentiate between the two, everyone here needs to be VERY specific about the speed they're seeing (as tobylong has done).  Those who have said, for example, that it takes several seconds to see updates on their screens when moving controls are clearly in the second category as compared to others who are seeing nearly instantaneous display updates.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Aug 5, 2012 12:02 PM   in reply to adriana ohlmeyer

    Hi Adriana,

     

    I get slowdowns in the multiple seconds category, sometimes with as little as one image, but always with 10 or more. For example, load 10 nikon d800 raw files, start going down the line adjusting WB, shadow, highlight, blacks, etc, and by the 3rd image, I guarantee you will be having to wait a second or two before you see your adjustments redraw on the main preview image. After that, I usually use the adjustment brush for simple burning,dodging, mostly of faces, or darkening distracting areas. Then the slowdowns really increase. I almost can't use the brush because I have to wait so long for the adjustment to show up on the preview. I have automasking on almost always. But really, just fine tuning your image by nothing more than adjusting WB, Shadows, Highlights, etc and after a few images you will see slowdown. My system specs are above. I agree that the quality is better, but currently I use cs5.1 for all my work except for a couple images that I really wanted but over exposed, then I crank up cs6 and have been able to save them, otherwise I don't use my expensive new software at all because it takes forever! I haven't returned it yet because I hope you will fix it, and also, one image it saved for me was worth the cost of the update, so on that I guess we're even.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 12, 2012 11:23 AM   in reply to tobylong

    Just to be clear, Toby, would you say Camera Raw from Photoshop CS5.1 is twice as fast, or more than that?

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 15, 2012 4:33 AM   in reply to tobylong

    I have nothing to add, except, like I mentioned in another post, confirming that CR7 is extremely slow. So, it's not an isolated problem. Adobe has to react quickly and provide an update to boost performance.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 15, 2012 8:37 PM   in reply to Moi 87

    Since we're hearing essentially nothing more from Adobe on this problem, one could be forgiven for assuming they're trying to ignore it, passing it off as performance issues being reported by people with old/slow computers.

     

    I sense that it is more than that - that there's a 10x performance difference being observed in some cases between similarly powered systems, and THAT is why I'm encouraging people to post more specific information instead of just saying it's "slow".

     

    You'd be wise to be VERY specific, even using a stopwatch as needed, and post your timings.  It's ESPECIALLY helpful to post the specific differences between the versions of Camera Raw, if you have more than one installed.

     

    I've tested a number of different versions of Camera Raw myself, and yes, it IS slowing down as they add more features, but something like 2x or 3x in recent versions - NOT anywhere near as much as what's being seen by some folks!

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 15, 2012 9:06 PM   in reply to Noel Carboni

    I process up to 600 images from a shoot. Even a 2-3x slowdown is HUGE for me, like hours!

    I'll try to get a stopwatch out and do some measurements soon, once the summer wedding furor dies down. PS, I moved to lightroom 4.1 or whatever is newest. I find it LESS slower than ACR by about 2-3x in terms of redrawing the image, and how long you have to wait for your adjustments to show on your preview, but it takes about 3x longer to save an image. The good thing about the way lightroom workflow is organized, is that I can tone a whole take before I have to save anything. Currently I export (save the raws to JPG or DNG as required) at night, then go to bed. It's done in the morning....All in all, I save about 2 hours per shoot using lightroom, but I would rather ACR focused on improving speed in its next iteration, because all the cameras coming out now are 24 megapixles plus, and trust me, those big files go A LOT slower. My next post will have a concrete comparison between ACR 6, ACR 7 and lightroom, but it might be a month or so.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Noel Carboni
    23,484 posts
    Dec 23, 2006
    Currently Being Moderated
    Sep 15, 2012 9:36 PM   in reply to tahoelight

    I'm looking forward to seeing that info, tahoelight, and I hope it furthers the cause, but I suspect Adobe feels that their latest software can expect to be run on ever more powerful computers, and as a result they're free to do more in pursuit of better looking results.

     

    I can offer some recommendations for improving your computer performance if you're interested.

     

    I've just plunked down quite a few thousands myself this year to increase my own PC workstation performance radically.

     

    -Noel

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 Previous Next
Actions

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