Skip navigation
This discussion is locked

Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 4.x

Aug 6, 2012 3:58 PM

  Latest reply: Victoria Bampton, Dec 18, 2012 11:37 AM
Replies 1 2 3 4 ... 43 Previous Next
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 6, 2012 11:42 PM   in reply to hamish niven

    Cache files and previews file were both deleted. But the speed is still exactly the same on my Mac Pro 3G, 8-cores.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 6, 2012 11:50 PM   in reply to AndyYau

    keep the positive pressure on to Adobe and hopefully LR4.01 comes out and it flies like an eagle

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 12:02 AM   in reply to hamish niven

    Lightroom 3 never really sped up for me from 3.0 ro 3.6: I've got a now aging i920 with 12gb ram. Lightroom was always reasonably painful to use.  (And to Rob Cole - who said that 1/2 sec per clone stamp was fine - I think a practical definition of slow is that if you end up being quicker than the computer.  Waiting? then its slow.  I find in photoshop there are very very few things I need to wait for).

     

     

    I kept asking exactly what hardware adobe were using for their development.  Dual Xeons? SIngle Xeons?  WOrkstations?  How much ram?  It would be good to know because it would give the rest of us a basis for comparrison.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 12:09 AM   in reply to hamish niven

    I'm beginning to wonder if I'm on the same planet...LR4 in develop is very snappy here, virtually as fast as LR3.  In fact, I have had exactly zero of the very few problems I experienced in the LR4 beta.  For me, so far at least (he says crossing his fingers) LR4 has been a very well executed update.  I still have a few more plug-ins to check but all of my Nik and Jeff Friedl plug-ins work without issue.

     

    27" iMac i7; 2.93GHz QuadCore CPU; 16GB DRAM; ATI Radeon HD 5750 1GB RAM

     

    All of my test images have been raw files from my 7D converted to dng as I imported them.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 12:47 AM   in reply to CR Henderson

    good on you if you're not having any speed issues. maybe you are right, we're on a differernt planet.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 1:08 AM   in reply to Firillu

    Slider responsivness is very sluggish in LR4. For me that was a problem since LR1. Also, if you have made many local adjustments and are "zoomed in", even panning is very slow and you can see tling in screen redraw. LR could be so much better, if it was as fast (on screen) as Capture One with OpenCL enabled.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 4:03 AM   in reply to klsteven

    Too bad they didn't include an option to use either process, I.e. switch from 2012 to 2010......  Definitely seems to be the 2012 and not all sliders.  Using the histogram is more responsive than the sliders.  ???  I like the final output BUT after a shoot with a 1DMkIV, 1DMkIII, and 5dMkII. (soon 5dMkIII) of 2,000 - 3,000 RAW images....way too slow.  Adobe HELP!!!!!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 4:23 AM   in reply to shamus1585

    Yes, you can switch the different processes.

    That option is in the "camera calibration" panel.

    But why upgrade if you use the old process?

     

    Too bad they didn't include an option to use either process, I.e. switch from 2012 to 2010......  Definitely seems to be the 2012 and not all sliders.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 4:58 AM   in reply to shamus1585

    Yes, you can switch the different processes.

    That option is in the "camera calibration" panel.

     

    I just double-checked, comparing LR3 and LR4 using the old process.

    The old process eases the CPU-load somewhat, but still the interface is much less responsive.

    I tried moving the clarity-slider on the same image.

    On LR3 the numerical display follows dragging of the slider more or less instantaneously. When changing the numerical value with the cursor up/down button the number changes in increments of 1.

    On LR4 (old process) the display jumps about 10-15 units when moving the slider. When using the cursor buttons, the number jumps up or down in increments of 5 or 6.

    To me this is pretty much unusable.

     

    MacPro 8core 3GHz, OS 10.7.3. manipulating NEF-files from Nikon D3 (12MP)

     

     

    Too bad they didn't include an option to use either process, I.e. switch from 2012 to 2010......  Definitely seems to be the 2012 and not all sliders.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 5:08 AM   in reply to j. scriba

    The upgrade is not solely for new features... I am upgrading one camera to a 5DMkIII  and Adobe will usually not let older software versions use the newer camera raw.  Thanks for the tip.  I REALLY want the new process to work like the old as I like the results.  I shoot dance events and usually have a large number of large raw files so a slower adjust response is a major issue.  As stated before, Dell i7, 12 gigs Win 7 Pro, 3 tb internal, NVida 2 gig ( latest drivers), dual monitors...  LR3 was always quick....  Hoping Adobe does something for 4.1.  I do have Capture One Pro 6 & the new Corel (old Bibble Pro 5) but always preferred LR3 as my RAW converter.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 6:16 AM   in reply to j. scriba

    @j.scriba: I just tried to reproduce what you described with the Clarity slider. I see no difference in speed or behavior (granularity/step of updates) between 3.6, 4.0-2010 and 4.0-2012. Each did the same thing and at pretty much the same speed. I'm going to try on a PC with less RAM and will chime in later.

     

    EDIT: BTW, this is operating on Nikon 16MP NEF files (from the D7000).

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 6:28 AM   in reply to BCormier

    Try the manual lens correction feature.  I could have sworn I heard my laptop actually backfire.  It was almost comical watching the image spasm and distort for a good minute after I took my finger from the track pad.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 6:29 AM   in reply to BCormier

    Same here, LR4 very slow in some cases.  The library module was slow at first but has improved.  Now, the spot healing tool takes a LONG time to respond.  I didn't notice this with the beta and LR3 was impressively fast and responsive.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 6:49 AM   in reply to BCormier

    I sure hope Adobe is monitoring these comments and working on it.  I depend on LR for my photography business and will eventually need LR4 due to body upgrades for new camera raw. 

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:06 AM   in reply to BCormier

    Thanks, frankc1978, for your detailed post. LR4 is unacceptably slow for me also - MacBook Pro 8gb ram 24" cinema display - but it's nice to see it's also slow for those of you in SSD land - I don't have to think about that expense for now!

     

    I tried doing what you and hamish niven suggested - deleted the Preview file and also purged the RAW cache, but to no avail.

     

    LR4 is not only terribly slow, but the real deal breaker was when I went to edit out a photo in PS, and LR4 said I would need Camera Raw 7 - what? There is no Camera Raw 7 that I know of. And when I opened the photo in PS anyway, LR4 had sent it the unmodified RAW file, not the one that I had worked on in LR4!

     

    Back to LR3.6 I go. Four hours of work yesterday down the drain, along with the $79 upgrade price.

     

    Finally - let's look at the file sizes: LR3.6 is 102.4 MB. PS CS5.1 (the mother of all apps) comes in at a whopping 410.8 MB. Did I say "whopping" - fuhgeddaboudit. Here's the new whopping - LR4 is 922.3 MB. Over twice as big as PS. I think Adobe has created a Swiss Army Knife behemoth. Time to go on a diet.

     

    - Kip Shaw

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:13 AM   in reply to edentonkip

    Helli Kip Shaw.

     

    I do not use PS so far, but i red on facebook. ps still uses camera raw version 5.6 (or something like that) like lr 3.6 did. of course ps will not understand the prozess 2012. adobe made a release candidate today available for adobe camera raw for ps which you can download here:

     

    http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/cameraraw6-7/

     

    This will help you using LR4 with Photoshop..........but it will still be slow as hell hehe! Want 4.1 update NOW with about 800% more speed. Everything else would be useless!

     

    Frank!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:25 AM   in reply to frankc1978

    Frankc1978 -

     

    Thanks for the Camera Raw link, but, like you said, still will be slow. And what's really weird is that LR4 says you need Camera Raw 7??? You'd think that there would be a bit more compatibility especially since LR4 now has "Photoshop" as part of its name.

     

    Do you know if there has been any official response from Adobe - in the Forums here or anywhere else - about these reported problems?

     

    - Kip

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:31 AM   in reply to BCormier

    I used LR 3 and now upgraded to LR4. I have a small laptop (I5, 6 Giga Ram, 1024 Video card,  from HP). I really do not notice any significant difference.

    The cursors are still super fast. What takes time (but is was true before) is to zoom in at 100%. I use Raw file from Canon 7D. It takes me about 4 to 5 seconds to zoom 100% in the Development mode. But again, no difference with LR3. As I'm not a pro, such 4 to 5 seconds delay is not a big issue for me.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:32 AM   in reply to edentonkip

    Hi Kip!

     

    Nope sorry. As i said, i do not use PS. I just red in facebook, that now LR4 works together with PS with this download. Just found it and gave it to you, but i have not found the time to search otherwere about these issues. I hope employes of Adobe do read here with us and will soon make a statement about these performance issues.

     

    King regards Frank!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:41 AM   in reply to BCormier

    Although I am disappointed that the only plug-in I can use at the moment with Lightroom 4 are my onOne Perfect Suite 6 plug-ins, I am very happy with how fast the program is. I've noticed a huge improvement from Lightroom 3.6 at least on my machine. Win7, i72600k, 64 bit, 16gb ram, amd radeon 6800 series graphic card etc. Lightroom 4 is running better than any version since the very first roll out of Lightroom, too bad they didn't get everything completely right, but it seems they've figured out the resource issues to me.

    Now if I could just work out getting all of my Nik software and Topaz plugins to work without having to install a trial version of cs5 which I have absolutely NO interest in using, I'd be completely happy.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:44 AM   in reply to correspondanc

    Corresondanc!

     

    I was used to work in realtime. Not 1 seconde and not even 5 seconds when zooming in. Klick and zoom. 0.1 seconds. i zoomed, moved sliders and delted, exported and so one. a raw converter today should be able to give the customer a fast and speedy workflow when the customer has a high end machine at the state of the art. i am not a pro too, but i love to take photos, organize them and do some nice adjustments to them. if you do not have a fast computer and you do not need/want this performance everything is ok for you. but people like me are used to work fast and fluid and without having lags and sluggish sliders.

     

    you say lr 3.6 was slow (5 seconds when zooming - oh my god) and lr4 is still slow. so it is clear that you can´t see andy difference. for people like me lr 3.6 was a realtime workflow and lr4 is now ......you know what hehe.

     

    Like i said on a 7D and on a 550D the workflow for me is much better like on 5DMKII files. Nikon D800 will come with 36MP. What will that give? 2seconds delay? Hasselblad - move a slider and go drink a coffee?

     

    Please people stop telling us that lr4 is fast like 3.6 when you had and have a slow computer. in lr 3 people were able to put some money in some nice hardware and then had a nice and fast workflow, but lr4 is not even able to be fast on high end machines and that is my real problem with this software.

     

    King regards Frank!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 7:46 AM   in reply to robo_detroit

    I does indeed help to turn off modules.

    It seems like even turning off modules that are neutral (like HSL) makes the basic sliders more responsive.

    The sharpening/NR module ("details") has quite some impact.

    So it might be a good idea to turn of lens correction and "details" and do the basic adjustments first, then work your way down the modules.

    A somewhat unsatisfying workaround, but this program seems to need every performance boost you can get to feel responsive.

     

    Try the manual lens correction feature.  I could have sworn I heard my laptop actually backfire.  It was almost comical watching the image spasm and distort for a good minute after I took my finger from the track pad.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 8:19 AM   in reply to j. scriba

    I am starting to believe it's a graphics driver issue. All the people who reported that LR4 is snappy have ATI while the others (me included) who reported slowness have Nvidia or Apple.

     

    Not sure if it's related as well, srolling the text in the about window is so sluggish!

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 8:27 AM   in reply to hinzo

    I haven an ATI Radeon HD 5770

    Three monitors connected. Sluggish LR4, snappy LR3.

     

    I am starting to believe it's a graphics driver issue. All the people who reported that LR4 is snappy have ATI while the others (me included) who reported slowness have Nvidia or Apple.

     

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 8:37 AM   in reply to hinzo

    Sluggish on this for me:

     

    Chipset Model:NVIDIA GeForce 9400M
      Type:GPU
      Bus:PCI
      VRAM (Total):256 MB
      Vendor:NVIDIA (0x10de)
      Device ID:0x0863
      Revision ID:0x00b1
      ROM Revision:3427
     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 8:55 AM   in reply to BCormier

    I have a relatively new Dell XPS 8300 and I find LR4 to be as quick as LR3. The only sluggishness I've noted is the initial switch to the Develop module in a new folder. Subsequent uses of Develop in that folder are less than a second.

     

    I'd like to post more details on my computer, but I don't have access to them at the moment.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 9:58 AM   in reply to BCormier

    I used LR4 Beta since it was released and found it sluggish like hell when processing G10 & 450D raw files.

     

    And after installing LR4 release version, I found the same problem. Using sliders was always in slow motion and

    it took 1-3 secs to response.

     

    After reading this forum, I tried the so-called solution by deleting cache and preview files serveral times and nothing was chagned.

     

    And finally I tried changing a profile of a photo from 2012 to 2010 and then back and forth. The strange thing is that when switching from 2012 to 2010,

    all adjustments to the photo was lost. The result was the same as a reset. Is this normal?

     

    Besides this, I also tried import raw files using Copy As DNG to see if DNG will work better.

     

    After these operations, my LR4 works as fast as LR3. I do not know what was happened. I tried to touch serveral ten photos and LR4 is still fast.

    And slider operation is almost instant. And all other operations is at lest 2-3 times faster than it was before.

     

    My computer is always the same unit: Mac Pro 3GHz, 8-core, 16G Ram, System Disk: SSD, Data Disk:Raid0 x 3, OS X 10.7.3.

     

    It seems I am dreaming but it is true. I even tried to check the screen if I am using LR3.

     

    I do not know if LR4 will slow down again....

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 10:39 AM   in reply to eswrite

    OK, I just installed and tried it out on my i7-quad 8GB laptop, a fairly new machine. Same result. Just as fast as 3.6, I don't notice any hicups. I wonder if I got lucky because I have new machines (no more than 1 month old)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 11:29 AM   in reply to AndyYau

    .

    

     

    AndyYau wrote:

     

    I used LR4 Beta since it was released and found it sluggish like hell when processing G10 & 450D raw files.

     

    And after installing LR4 release version, I found the same problem. Using sliders was always in slow motion and

    it took 1-3 secs to response.

     

    After reading this forum, I tried the so-called solution by deleting cache and preview files serveral times and nothing was chagned.

     

    And finally I tried changing a profile of a photo from 2012 to 2010 and then back and forth. The strange thing is that when switching from 2012 to 2010,

    all adjustments to the photo was lost. The result was the same as a reset. Is this normal?

     

    Besides this, I also tried import raw files using Copy As DNG to see if DNG will work better.

     

    After these operations, my LR4 works as fast as LR3. I do not know what was happened. I tried to touch serveral ten photos and LR4 is still fast.

    And slider operation is almost instant. And all other operations is at lest 2-3 times faster than it was before.

     

    My computer is always the same unit: Mac Pro 3GHz, 8-core, 16G Ram, System Disk: SSD, Data Disk:Raid0 x 3, OS X 10.7.3.

     

    It seems I am dreaming but it is true. I even tried to check the screen if I am using LR3.

     

    I do not know if LR4 will slow down again....

     

     

    Thank you Andy,

     

    Tried the import Copy As DNG and the loading, sliders and adjustment brush are all quicker.  Like you said, don't know if it will last, but it's good for now.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 12:38 PM   in reply to j. scriba

    I have two monitors connected.  I turned off the second and the speed increase was noticable.  I hope Adobe fixes this as I like the two (Hope the new CS6 dosen't have the same issue as I REALLY use both in PS).  For now, only one monitor .  I have an NVidia card with 2 gig (rare as mose desktops are 1 gig) and the latest driver. (just checked)

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 12:57 PM   in reply to jeret44

    If so, I think I have to apply a LR4 patent for this! 

     

    Adobe may want to remind us there is something call DNG.

     

    Actually there is no need to edit raw files using DNG format. After of Copy As DNG, LR4 become very responsive for all my CR2 files.

     

    I also notice the CPU activity is much lower as shown by Activity Monitor.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 7, 2012 9:41 PM   in reply to BCormier

    SPECS: Core i7 950 not overclocked, Asus Sabertooth mobo, 12 GB RAM, Radeon 5700 video with 1GB, Win7 Ultimate 64bit on SSD with programs (including LR), images on separate 2TB HDD, Dual displays.  In other words, quite capable hardware that runs anything I have ever thrown at it with aplomb.

     

    I'm going to chronicle my experiences thus far:

     

    1. Installed LR4 beta when it came out and made a test catalog of about 2000 images.

    2. Noticed sluggishness immediately, especially in develop when moving sliders.  Chalked it up to being beta and went back to LR3, waiting for LR4 final.

    3. Yesterday, excitedly installed LR4 final, which updated my LR4 beta test catalog

    4. Experienced the same sluggish performance.  Thought it was maybe because the catalog was made with the beta.

    5. Created a new LR4 catalog, and imported about 60 "fresh" raws (Nikon NEFs) to test it out.

    6. Experienced the same sluggish performance. 

     

    Sliders are slow to react to mouse dragging, and the image preview is slow to update to the adjusted values once the slider has finally moved. The slider handle doesn't follow the mouse pointer unless dragging really slowly, and it is difficult to make fine adjustments - e.g. the exposure slider sort of jumps along in 0.2-0.4EV increments.  The second display lags behind the first by as much as 4 seconds.  There is a less severe but still noticeable sluggishness to the overall navigation, such as switching between modules or scrolling and clicking in the filmstrip.  LR4 is virtually unusable in this state.  CPU activity monitor spikes on all 8 threads everytime a slider is moved.

     

    Frustrated, I started experimenting further and found some suggestions on this thread to try:

    1. Performace increases to the point of usability with the second display disabled, but this isn't a solution.  I need my dual displays!  And even with a single display, it isn't as smooth and responsive as LR 3.6

    2. PV2010 vs. PV2012 doesn't seem to matter in terms of performance.  Both are unusably slow.  But again, PV2012 is where it's at, so it needs to work!

    3. Building fresh previews doesn't seem to help, since performance was poor with the beta test catalog and with the newly created one with newly rendered previews.

    4. I imported a batch of 180 images into the LR4 catalog using "Copy as DNG" to see if that helped matters.  I have never used DNG before.  The conversion and preview rendering took about 4-5 min total for all 180 images (12mp NEFs).  Seems reasonable.

    5. Again performance seems a bit jerky but usable with only one display in use, but slows to a crawl with both enabled. The second display lags significantly behind the main display.  So DNG doesn't seem any better than just the regular NEFs for me.  And again, using DNG isn't a solution anyways, just a workaround.

     

    Soooo, I'm in a rut.  Nothing I do really seems to fix the problem.  Looks like Adobe has some investigation to do, so lets hope these posts help shed some light on the source of the problem.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 1:14 AM   in reply to aross4242

    Across 4242,

     

    I have another system than yours (WIN7 64, Q6600/2,8GHZ, GTX 470, 8GB RAM) , but this is exactly my experience. You seem to have a very fast system and LR4 is still slow. I`d like to hear something from Adobe on this.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 1:28 AM   in reply to AndyYau

    Thanks, it seem to be a solution to get a workaround.. yes switching from profil 2012 to 2010 reset all my previous adjustments but then, even with NEF files, LR4 is now working fine as fast as LR3. After installing beta LR4 I've found that from this precise installation time, even LR3 is becoming more sluggish than before. I've also noticed a very long time to wait when switching from Library to Development module, back and forth (LR4, not LR3). This too seem to be right now with LR4, but I don't understand why ?

     

    Config is : iMac27 i5, 16 Gb, Radeon 4850, some external FW800 HDs. OS X 10.7.3.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Calculating status...
    Mar 8, 2012 4:52 AM   in reply to BCormier

    I have had a call back from Adobe support and there would seem to be issues with settings imported from beta and previous versions.  There advice and it worked for me to to remove the LR4 beta version with windows software then reboot your machine.  Then in windows 7 go to c:users/pc/appdata/roaming/adobe and then drag the lightroom folder to the desktop.  Then start LR4 and create a new catalog.  DO NOT IMPORT OLD ONE.  This will create a virgin set up.  LR4 on my machine now performs as well as LR3 did.  Have not yet loaded a old catalog from LR3 so hoping that will be OK

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 4:56 AM   in reply to BCormier

    After playing LR4 with speed improvement for the whole night. I find it is still smooth.

    All of you can check with the video in order to compare with yours.

     

    See description in the video for more information.

     

    http://youtu.be/2vfK5iJ-kbw

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 5:11 AM   in reply to terry275

    Of course we cannot delete our existing catalogs and start new ones. That is not a fix.

    terry275's fixes are Windows-specific, fwiw: I use a Mac.

     

    This is a major drag, literally. Fortunately I still have LR3 installed, and only one or two catalogs 'upgraded' to LR4 slowness.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 5:22 AM   in reply to Etnier

    AndyYau,

     

    I`ve watched your video, especially between 0:46 and 1:03, where you adjust the exposure slider. Would you call that smooth? Screen redraw looks very jerky. Or is it just your video recording? Is what you see in that video what you see on screen in this situation?

    If yes, it`s as jerky as on my PC. The means, you pull the slider, but what you see on screen is an update maybe two or three times a second.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 5:42 AM   in reply to klsteven

    I have just verified with LR4 and also LR3.

    It is my hand, not LR4. I did not keep my mouse constantly moving.

     

    I think you do not encounter the slow issue of LR4. When this problem happens,

    your mouse is almost sticked to the slider. And every movement take 2-3 seconds.

     
    |
    Mark as:
  • Currently Being Moderated
    Mar 8, 2012 5:44 AM   in reply to AndyYau

    Andy, so it is smoother than what the video shows? I`m wondering, because the slider movement in the video seems much more constant than the screen update.

     
    |
    Mark as:
1 2 3 4 ... 43 Previous Next
Actions

More Like This

  • Retrieving data ...

Bookmarked By (3)

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