Skip navigation
Victoria Bampton 5,302 posts
Apr 1, 2008
Currently Being Moderated

Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 4.3 or later

Dec 18, 2012 1:28 PM

Since the original Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 4.x thread is now a whopping 43 pages long, and many of the original 4.0-4.2 performance issues have since been resolved, it's impossible to figure out who is still having problems, and what they can try.  I'm therefore locking that thread to new posts, and putting a link to this one. 

 

If you're having problems in 4.0 - 4.2, please update to 4.3.  Here are the links: Windows - Mac  You may also be interested in these Performance Hints, many of which were gathered from the long thread.

 

If you're still having problems with 4.3, please then go ahead and post below.  Don't forget to include details such as your system specs (OS, processor, RAM, graphics card, etc), camera model and whether you shoot raw or JPEG, and what specifically you're finding slow (and ideally some timings on how slow).  It's also useful to include notes of things you've tried to fix it.,

 
Replies 1 2 3 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 18, 2012 12:02 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    The biggest change I have seen has been turning off the Detail Section until all rest of my adjustments are complete.

     

    I have been making the Lightroom window small so I would get some responsiveness.

     

    Turning off the Detail Section I can now do my adjustments with Lightroom full screen on a 30" monitor and get near instant screen refreshes.

     

    With Detail section on changing white balance would take 2-3 seconds to update screen.  Detail Section off less than half a second.

     

    This will work for me, I just hope I do not forget to sharpen when I am done!

     

    I have a quad core Core 2 processor q9550 with 8 gigs of ram on Windows 7 64 bit.  Catalog has its own HD, Windows and Lightroom each have their own dedicated cache drives.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 18, 2012 12:55 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    I would also recommend including your Camera Models

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 18, 2012 12:58 PM   in reply to danjpohl1

    Someone in that other thread reported 4.3 RC solving his slowness problems - only to have them return full force with the final 4.3 release. That made me jump, because that's exactly what happened here too. Of course I have no clue why that should be. He was on Mac, I'm on Windows (Vista 64).

     

    Then someone else reported that a full reformat seemed to fix it - until he added ColorEyes Display Pro and 16 bit LUT monitor profiles. Switching to matrix profiles cleared that up. I also use CEDP, so I looked, and sure enough, my monitor profiles were LUT based. I've now recalibrated to matrix based profiles, and everything runs much smoother. Not snap-of-the-fingers instantaneous like Photoshop, but workable. I can live with this.

     

    Incidentally, I also have another system which has performed well all along, so I know it's possible. If monitor profiles are involved in this, it's notable that this machine has two Eizo Flexscans connected, both hardware calibrated to monitor LUT with Eizo's EasyPix. This machine runs Win 7 pro, but otherwise the two systems are very similarly configured.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 18, 2012 2:22 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    I upgraded to Lightroom 4.3 this weekend and subsequently uploaded a batch of photos from my memory card. On the library screen (where the images are seen after import), all of the images turned out to be gray squares in the thumbnail grid. If I'm not mistaken, I changed the specs of the metadata so I could see where and when the photos were taken for my records but I cannot recall much of what else I did aside from upgrading from 4.2 to 4.3. I also removed Lightroom 4 and reinstalled it in the hope of getting this matter resolved. (I am not sure exactly what aspects of Lightroom should have been uninstalled and which ones should have stayed.)  The photos were taken with a Panasonic Lumix DMC FZ-150 camera, whose images worked fine with the previous version of Lightroom.

     

    I had earlier installed Adobe Photoshop Elements 11 along with Premiere Elements 11 and tried to use the former package, but that package was running a bit slow. I also tried to install some of my Nik Software packages (such as Nik Dfine and Silver Efex Pro 2), but those did not work because it was apparent that I did not have the latest upgrades.

     

    As of today, I still cannot see the thumbnail images on the screen or when they are enlarged to full size. However, if I open an image in the edit mode, that image will come up, albeit slowly. I was able to edit a group of photos that way, but I was reluctant to move them to Photoshop Elements as I was doing before I upgraded to Lightroom 4.3.

     

    I would appreciate your input on my problem. Thank you for your help.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 18, 2012 3:18 PM   in reply to Colorado Joe

    Thanks for new thread

     

    Neither 4.3rc or 4.3 have solved my problems re noise slider lag. It is a reall issue for me:

     

    Using the luminance and detail sliders are fine as long as neither hilight or shadow are adjusted. With either of these adjusted, the performance of the luminance slider drops to ~1 second between adjustment and render, this makes it much harder for me to find exact and satisfying balance points between noise amnd image detail.

     

    I do not accept that it is because of the complexity of the new raw engine because looking at the thread utilization shows veruy clearly that without shadow highlight, all cores are being used for noise adjustments but the opposite is true (less cores being used with less activity on those cores) when using noise sliders if shaodw/highlight = +/- anything. More work to do seems to translate to less CPU activity.

     

    Something in the program is clearly throttling CPU useage in this scenario. I have demonstrated it on 4 different hardware platforms and 3 different OSes. Its pretty bad that I have a hexacore 3930k, now overclocked to 4.5Ghz and it still spends most of its time twiddling its thumbs. I have also verified it with other users in other forums.

     

    I do turn off all sharpening and noise slider until I use them at the end. I have reduced the viewing window as much as will be allowed. I have also tried on a much smaller monitor.No difference.

     

    I posted the bug with Adobe but have no real idea if they noticed/read/cared.

     

    Sorry to be negative but I have thrown a lot of money and even more time at trying to fix this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 3:40 PM   in reply to danjpohl1

    danjpohl1 wrote:

     

    The biggest change I have seen has been turning off the Detail Section until all rest of my adjustments are complete.

     

    I have been making the Lightroom window small so I would get some responsiveness....

     

     

     

    I've just created a preset that has only detail, lens correction, effects, and another that has my default settings but with those 3 switched off.

     

    Using LR4.3 full screen on a 27" monitor (2560x1440), with Detail etc switched on (DETAIL etc SWITCHED OFF)

    in develop mode

    switch to a new pic takes time until the full res version loads:  7-8 seconds (4 seconds)

    update exposure slider 7fps (9fps?)

    Rotating a simple exposure grad: 5fps (7fps?)

    Manual lens correction tranform vertical: 2-3fp (5-6fps)

     

     

    So theres a small speed benefit for not having detail on - it makes lens corrections usable - just.

     

    My main issue is that I can still work much quicker than lightroom.  waiting 4 seconds to work on each pic feels like forever. I've now given up on lens corrections and have gone back to useing free transform or ptlens in photoshop.

     

    I'm just about to process a job, I'll try it with detail off until the last step and report back

     

    EDIT: i7 920, 12gb ram, asus p6td deluxe, nvidia gtx275

     

    Changing workflow improved things slightly but lightroom is still the only piece of software I own (and the first for about 10 years) where I can watch the interface be drawn - like its written in java.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 1:25 AM   in reply to bmphotography

    From: "bmphotography

    Using the luminance and detail sliders are fine as long as neither hilight

    or shadow are adjusted. With either of these adjusted, the performance of

    the luminance slider drops to ~1 second between adjustment and render,

    this makes it much harder for me to find exact and satisfying balance

    points between noise amnd image detail.

     

    For a change, I can confirm this lag after adjusting the luminance slider.

    Never noticed it in practice, but it is there. Also using a 3930K.

     

    bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 1:33 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    Victoria Bampton wrote:

     

    Don't forget to include details such as your system specs

    Not to sound too negative, but people have been doing that since day one of 4.0, and still nothing even remotely resembling a pattern has emerged. Hardware-wise, it's just completely random. Yes, PV 2012 is CPU-intensive, but old single core laptops churn happily along while high-end octo-core workstations choke.

     

    I have two systems, one has performed well ever since 4.0, the other one (although older) has had problems in varying degrees with the different versions. Two things that helped were updating video card driver and swithing from LUT to matrix-based monitor profiles. Still, there is something odd going on, and those two things were clearly relieving symptoms but not curing the disease.

     

    Good machine: Core i5 750 (the only quad-core i5), Gigabyte UD3 mobo, H55 chipset, 16 GB DDR3. Win 7 pro 64-bit.

    Bad machine (old, but still performing as new): Core2Duo E6750, Asus P5K, P35 chipset, 8GB DDR2. Vista business 64-bit.

     

    Video card identical, ATI HD 5850, same driver version.

     

    Software installed identical, the two machines are kept synchronized at all times so that I can work on either. WITH ONE EXCEPTION: calibration software. Good machine Eizo EasyPix, bad machine Color Eyes Display Pro.

     

    ---

     

    I'll be replacing the Vista machine in a month or two, and when I do, I'll install Lightroom on a completely naked OS and test for each piece of software added. If time, I'd also like to do the same with the old machine before it's ditched, just out of curiosity.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 2:36 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    From: "twenty_one

    Software installed identical, the two machines are kept synchronized at

    all times so that I can work on either. WITH ONE EXCEPTION: calibration

    software. Good machine Eizo EasyPix, bad machine Color Eyes Display Pro.

     

     

    I seem to remember someone else with problems was using Color Eyes Display

    software. Have you tried uninstalling it and just using a simple sRGB

    profile as a test? Or using the Eizo software on both?

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 5:39 AM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

     

     

    I seem to remember someone else with problems was using Color Eyes Display

    software. Have you tried uninstalling it and just using a simple sRGB

    profile as a test? Or using the Eizo software on both?

     

    Yes, I read the same re ColorEyes a couple of days ago, which is what got me thinking. Up to now I haven't been all that worried since the machine is on its way out anyway.

     

    I know I should test this ASAP, but there's always some urgent work so I keep putting it off...it'll have to be plain old sRGB because the Eizo software won't work with those monitors. I'll see what I can find out. What's certain is that LUT vs matrix made a difference.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 5:53 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    twenty_one wrote:

     

    bob frost wrote:

     

     

    I seem to remember someone else with problems was using Color Eyes Display

    software. Have you tried uninstalling it and just using a simple sRGB

    profile as a test? Or using the Eizo software on both?

     

    Yes, I read the same re ColorEyes a couple of days ago, which is what got me thinking. Up to now I haven't been all that worried since the machine is on its way out anyway.

     

    I know I should test this ASAP, but there's always some urgent work so I keep putting it off...it'll have to be plain old sRGB because the Eizo software won't work with those monitors. I'll see what I can find out. What's certain is that LUT vs matrix made a difference.

     

    I was the one who found that using a LUT profile was causing my horribly long zooming times in the Library module.  Once I changed to a matrix profile both my computers, a MacBook Pro retina running OS X 10.8.2 and the 2007 MacPro running OS X 10.7.5 were more than a factor of 2 faster when zooming.

     

    I think the problem is due to a bug in Lightroom.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 6:36 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    I had a silly performance problem in LR 4.3  - I found it to be a fair bit slower than 4.2 on my Dell XPS15 laptop.(6GB Ram, Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit Intel i7 2.2Ghz, LR4.3 64 Bit)

     

    I noticed the problem in displaying 1:1 in Develop or Compare and exporting to JPG.  I shoot raw files with a Sony A99.  On 4.2, this computer would rip through this kind of stuff without problem (5-8s to export a jpg from raw).  LR4.3 seems to take 45s-60s to perform a single jpg export.

     

    Interestingly, I tried the same .arw file and applied the 'Zeroed' LR preset and hey presto, it would export in 7s again.  I reverted to the applied custom settings and again, it slows to just over a minute.  I thought then that I had a setting that was giving LR4.3 a particularly hard time.  It turned out I had somehow synced a Grad Filter to all the photos in the set with no settings on the grad filter except "Moire 53" so it was basically invisible.   Removing this filter cured my performance issue.

     

    I presume Moire filters are very processor intensive.

     

    However, even with my silly moire setting removed, I looked at the windows performance monitor and it seems LR4.3 never goes about 50% processor use, even if left alone to run a big export (say 45 .arw files to jpg).  Is there a setting that could let LR loose with the full 100% processor use?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 9:00 AM   in reply to Bob_Peters

    Back to ColorEyes Display Pro:

     

    I haven't uninstalled completely, but did disable it from startup, set sRGB as default monitor profile at OS level, and rebooted. I verified in Photoshop that sRGB was indeed the active monitor profile.

     

    No change in Lr.

     

    But actually it's not so bad now, after switching from LUT-based to matrix-based profiles. In Library, 1:1 previews render in about a second. In Develop, switching between images likewise takes about a second until the image snaps and the sliders become active. The sliders themselves are still a bit jerky, but basically follow the cursor and the image updates accordingly.

     

    I guess this is as good as it gets. With the LUT profiles, 4.3 was really, really slow. Still, it baffles me why the RC apparently handled that while the final didn't...

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 12:18 PM   in reply to twenty_one

    twenty_one wrote:

     

    Back to ColorEyes Display Pro:

     

     

    But actually it's not so bad now, after switching from LUT-based to matrix-based profiles. In Library, 1:1 previews render in about a second. In Develop, switching between images likewise takes about a second until the image snaps and the sliders become active. The sliders themselves are still a bit jerky, but basically follow the cursor and the image updates accordingly.

     

    I guess this is as good as it gets. With the LUT profiles, 4.3 was really, really slow. Still, it baffles me why the RC apparently handled that while the final didn't...

     

    Strange, indeed, since my Eizo ColorNavigator software produces LUT profiles which seem to work fine. Perhaps it would be even faster if I used matrix profiles?

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 2:31 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    Lightroom 4.3 64-bit crash.

     

    Trying to import into Lightroom and have had at least a dozen crashes as soon as import is selected by using the import button or the drop down menu.  This crash occurs inside two different catalogs and a new catalog as well.  Have reinstalled upgrade in an attempt to repair and it continues to crash.   Develop module seems operational.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 11:15 PM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

     

    Eizo ColorNavigator software produces LUT profiles which seem to work fine.

    It's probably not LUT profiles as such, only those made by CEDP. If Lightroom spends a great deal of its time reading in the monitor profile (as someone else found out a while ago), a small error could rapidly turn into considerable slowdowns.

     

    I don't know how Eizo's ColorNavigator software (for ColorEdge monitors) differs from EasyPix (for Flexscans), but it's likely that they write profiles in basically the same way - but with an expanded feature set and possibly higher precision. As I noted above, I don't have any problems with EasyPix. Actually it gives vastly better results than CEDP on my two Flexscans, even if I use the same sensor - probably because it calibrates to the monitor's internal 10-bit LUT instead of the video card.

     

    As for the profile itself, some calibrators have been known to cause problems in Photoshop in the past, not strictly following protocol, so errors can happen.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 19, 2012 11:49 PM   in reply to BellaV

    There have been a few similar problems which have been resolved as Lightroom choking on an externally  connected device such as a smartphone or a printer that has an inbuilt card reader. Try disconnecting any external devices one by one to see if you can find one that's causing the problem with Lightroom.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 20, 2012 1:00 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    From: "twenty_one

    I don't know how Eizo's ColorNavigator software (for ColorEdge monitors)

    differs from EasyPix (for Flexscans), but it's likely that they write

    profiles in basically the same way - but with an expanded feature set and

    possibly higher precision. As I noted above, I don't have any problems

    with EasyPix. Actually it gives vastly better results than CEDP on my two

    Flexscans - probably because it calibrates to the monitor's internal

    10-bit LUT instead of the video card.

    As for the profile itself, some calibrators have been known to cause

    problems in Photoshop in the past, not strictly following protocol, so

    errors can happen.

     

    Most profiles are made according to version 2 of the ICC specs, but some

    profiling software gives the option of using the latest v4 spec. However,

    many/most programs apparently have problems handling v4 profiles, so the

    general recommendation is to stick with v2 profiles. It seems that LR does

    not like v4 profiles. If the profiler does not give you the option of v2 or

    v4  in its Prefs, then it is presumably using v2, which should be OK in LR

    (and all other programs).

     

    Is Color Eyes making v2 or v4?

     

    Bob Frost

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 20, 2012 1:28 AM   in reply to bob frost

    bob frost wrote:

     

    Is Color Eyes making v2 or v4?

    It's optional. I think the default is v2, in any case I've always stuck with that.

     

    It's notable that many canned profiles (shipped with monitors) have been v4 lately (this surfaced in the PS forum IIRC). But those profiles are notoriously bad in so many ways that they should be avoided at all costs, few manufacturers get it right. Usually sRGB, or Adobe RGB for wide gamut, is much better. The problem is that many people just run the disc that comes with the monitor, not knowing what it installs.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 20, 2012 8:22 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    I originally installed 4.1 (on both a Mac Intel Core 2 Duo 3.06 GHz with 12GB RAM and PC Core i7 with 12GB RAM), and had agonizingly long load times for both thumbnails and full sized images. Updating to the 4.3 RC on both of my machines fixed these problems. For my purposes, Lightroom functioned fast and flawlessly.

     

    Until the next day, when I was prompted to update to the 4.3 final release. I ran the update on my Mac and the performance problems from the original came back with an exciting new addition. Now, in addition to taking 2~3 seconds to load, I have an additional 3~4 seconds where it seems as though the detail settings are all set to minimum. The image is not pixellated, just slightly blurred. This loading delay does not change with the image size, it is constant. It also doesn't happen more than once on the same image... once an image has loaded, it will load quickly if I leave it and come back to it, unless I restart Lightroom, then I have to wait again.


    The other interesting thing about this update is that now, whenever Lightroom is open, the icon changes to what looks like a lo-res version. I tried re-installing 4.3. The first time I opened Lightroom the icon was normal, but upon subsequent openings it changed back to the picture below.

     

    Screen shot 2012-12-20 at 10.14.43 AM.png

     

    Really, what I want is the Mac version of 4.3 RC, (since I foolishly deleted my installation file before I tested 4.3 final) but it has been taken down from the download site... and apparently everywhere else on the web. I have searched for several hours for a surviving 4.3 RC download or torrent, but it appears that they've all died.

     

    Fortunately I didn't update my PC, so I can still work.

     

    I hate to be the fellow who begs for links, but if anyone has a working link to a Mac 4.3 RC (oh, Holy Grail of download links), I would really appreciate it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 20, 2012 9:44 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    Hi Victoria,

     

    I have a 1-year-old HP with the following specs : Intel Core i7-2600, 8 Go RAM, 3,4 GHz. When upgraded to LR 4.0, it was quite awful to work and had to restart LR every 15min. Upgrades to 4.1 and 4.2 didn't help.

    "Providently" my 15 month-old son played with my computer power switch and I ended up with my Windows Session not starting anymore. I then reinstalled Windows (and then LR), and then magic, LR was working SO fast! So the problem was either Windows 7 or the communication between Windows 7 and LR, some kind of corrupt file or something like that.

     

    Now I just upgraded to LR 4.3 and it sadly seems to be slower. I haven't had heavy editing to do since the update, but I did some printing and, OMG, it is so slow...

     

    Do you think the problem could be related at the Windows / LR level ?

     

    Otherwise I've been using LR for more than 3 years now and the job the team has done is just great, congratulations!

     

    Thanks for your help,

    Arnaud

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 21, 2012 5:21 AM   in reply to derekfeldman

    Exactly the same happened to me but in Win-7 64 bit.

     

    4.3 RC solved my problems, 4.3 resurrected them.

    derekfeldman wrote:

     

    I originally installed 4.1 (on both a Mac Intel Core 2 Duo 3.06 GHz with 12GB RAM and PC Core i7 with 12GB RAM), and had agonizingly long load times for both thumbnails and full sized images. Updating to the 4.3 RC on both of my machines fixed these problems. For my purposes, Lightroom functioned fast and flawlessly.

     

    Until the next day, when I was prompted to update to the 4.3 final release. I ran the update on my Mac and the performance problems from the original came back with an exciting new addition. Now, in addition to taking 2~3 seconds to load, I have an additional 3~4 seconds where it seems as though the detail settings are all set to minimum. The image is not pixellated, just slightly blurred. This loading delay does not change with the image size, it is constant. It also doesn't happen more than once on the same image... once an image has loaded, it will load quickly if I leave it and come back to it, unless I restart Lightroom, then I have to wait again.


    ...

     

    I hate to be the fellow who begs for links, but if anyone has a working link to a Mac 4.3 RC (oh, Holy Grail of download links), I would really appreciate it.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 21, 2012 12:00 PM   in reply to uphotography

    This is getting interesting. That's four people so far, myself included, who experienced the same thing: 4.3 RC resolved all performance problems, 4.3 final returned them. The odds of this being mere coincidence are diminishing, although I suppose it still could be.

     

    So what happened between RC and final? Are the Lr engineers testing something, but decided to hold back full implementation a while longer? I hope so.

     

    Either way, it tells us that this thing can perform like any other software, it is not our machines that are underpowered.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 26, 2012 11:11 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    MacBook Pro 15" early 2011 quad i7 with 16GB running OSX 10.8.2. Camera Nikon D7000 shooting RAW.

     

    LR 4.3 preview updates are extremely latent and changes to develop sliders incurs lag. In some cases, the preview is soft and I have to manually regenerate the preview to correct it. Switching between photos incurs wait time. The spinning ball appears frequently. Often, the sliders cease becoming highlighted when I hover the mouse pointer over them.

     

    LR 4.2 ran smoothly, though it also had the slider-highlighting problem every now and again. But in 4.3, it occurs more often.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 27, 2012 12:37 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    MacBook Pro Retina 15", Core i7, 16GBs Memory, etc. OS X 10.8.2 set to the far right "More Space" in Displays in System Preferences (not sure exactly what resolution that is).  Nikon D7000 shooting RAW.

     

    After updating to 4.3, it's been the slowest, laggiest piece of software I've ever used on this laptop.  Switching between photos hangs and makes the beachball appear for several seconds; adjustments sliders in Develop mode take ages to show the adjustments.  That's all I've noticed so far, but those are the only two things I regularly use in LR.  Debating downgrading back to 4.2 because 4.3 makes me not want to edit anything.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 27, 2012 2:15 AM   in reply to danjpohl1

    Now that is interesting. I've got a lot of backlog to sort today and LR4.3-final is being dog slow, but simply my rolling up the 'detail' panel it's making it a lot more responsive. Very very interesting. Not a solution, but a sticking plaster for today. Thanks.

     

    (MacBook Pro 2.66GHz i7, 8GB RAM, 512GB SSD, dual monitor, running 10.7.5)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 27, 2012 2:16 AM   in reply to twenty_one

    Yes, I'm one of those who had 4.3RC working really well, but then an update to 4.3-final broke it all again.

     

    I tried this again: http://blog.joel.co.uk/2012/09/lightroom-4-speeding-up-on-the-mac/ but I'm increasingly of the opinion it's coincidence that it was fixed.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 27, 2012 5:41 AM   in reply to Jess Rowbottom

    Just for the sake of updating, I did try Joel's method. (thanks, Joel!) It shaved a couple of seconds off of my load times, but performance is still not optimal.

     

    //EDIT

     

    Now that's interesting! My lo-res Lightroom logo has reset itself to its former glory following the removal of the cache from Time Capsule as Joel suggested.

     

    Screen shot 2012-12-27 at 8.38.49 AM.png

     

    Message was edited by: derekfeldman

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 28, 2012 10:34 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    Working on Windows 7 with 16 gigs of RAM, dual monitor, quad processor, Nvidia Quadro 600. Ever since LR 4 was released, I experience total system crashes every time I work in LR. Experience the most frequemt number of crashes when I am sorting and assigning ratings. This is TOTALLY frustrating. While I love the develop module in LR 4, the frustration is not worth it. Please help!!! Thanks much.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 31, 2012 8:40 AM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    No one else seems to have reported an issue with Keywording in the Libarary module, so here it is: It's also painfully slow!

     

    I recently upgraded from LR3 directly to LR4.3 and brought my catalog along for the ride. I use plenty of keywords to keep my photos oragnised, but it's a painfully slow process in LR4.3. The exact steps the cause the slowness are:

    1) Select a photo or multiple photos

    2) Enter a single of multiple keywords in the Keywords Tags box

    3) Click away from the photos for the keyword to be applied

    4) The Keywords Tags box changes to "working..." and it takes 4-5 seconds (for 1 photo with 1 keyword) up to 15-20 seconds (for multiple photos with multiple keywords).

     

    My system is a 15" Macbook Pro, 2.66 GHZ Core 2 Duo with 8 GB of RAM running OS X (10.8.2)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 31, 2012 8:52 AM   in reply to kr1shna_s

    Do you have Automatically Write Changes into  XMP enabled? (Catalog Settings>Metadata tab)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Dec 31, 2012 8:53 AM   in reply to kr1shna_s

    Sorry if I couldn't find them, but has Adobe acknowledged any if these issues yet?

     

    |Ted Manasa

    |Find the answer outside your ocean.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 1, 2013 4:48 AM   in reply to Rikk Flohr

    I do. I've turned that off now. Performance does seem to be somewhat better. Thank you!

    What is the impact of this change? When does metadata get written now?

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 1, 2013 5:45 AM   in reply to kr1shna_s

    Only when you tell it too... You can select a group of files and hit CMD/CTRL S and it will save the metadata. Good thing to do just before going to bed...if you insist upon saving it to the files... Remember your catalog has that info in it already so a good back up on your catalog really mitigates the need to save metadata to files constantly

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 1, 2013 12:12 PM   in reply to Jess Rowbottom

    Now that is an interessting an helpful suggestion: For some reason the "slowest" slider (i.e. most laggy) for me is the White Balance slider. By turning off the Detail panel it becomes as responsive as it used to be. So for now my workflow will include switching off all Detail settings while adjusting the color balance.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 5, 2013 3:07 PM   in reply to Victoria Bampton

    System: Win7-32bit OS, Intel Core i5 750 @ 2.67GHz, 4 gb ram, 180gb Intel SSD and a ATI Radeon HD 4600 Series video card.

     

    I find a multitude of problems with 4.3. I have tried the helpful hints and none nor all of them did anything to change the situation.

    • Using any of the local tools and LR bogs down after about the 2 or 3 adjustment or adjustments on 3 or 4 pictures
    • Not only is it non-responsive for seconds at a time (on the order of 30 - 90 seconds) sometimes it just quits working, or so it seems
    • I find cropping also frequently locks up LR room for multiple seconds, even minutes.

    It appears anything other than simple basic adjustments and LR goes into limbo.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2013 11:53 AM   in reply to ChristianDembowski

    Christian: Ta for the suggestion.

     

    Interesting note: I have started using a brand new Macbook Air (8GB RAM, i7 2GHz CPU, 256GB SSD) for quickly running pics into Lightroom and running a tethered shoot from my 5D Mark III. A completely new catalogue, no history, nothing. It worked brilliantly for about a week then started slowing down - the catalogue has about 500 images in it, in 4 folders. Shutting the Detail panel off helped for a short time, but now it's almost unusable. So, er, I'm pretty sure it's not history related now.

     

    Shutting off the Detail panel makes a very slight - but not life-changing - difference on my big LR4.3 catalogue on the i7 Macbook Pro with 115,720 photos in a hierarchical structure (which is also dual-screen). Worked fine on LR3 of course.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Jan 6, 2013 12:44 PM   in reply to Jess Rowbottom

    Why does it sound like a caching issue to me? Even if it is, I am not sure how to fix it. I can't believe that this program crashes on me - literally shuts down my entire system - after about 15 minutes of work. WTF, Adobe?? Fix this, please!!!

     

    Sent from my iPod

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (1)