I shoot a lot and process a lot. Wish it was more, but I'm staying busy. At first LR4 was unacceptable. Now with LR4.1 RC, the performance issues are long forgotten. The only thing that reminds me of my previous issues are the pesky notificartions every time someone posts in this thread. If my 4.1Rc is slower than 3.x, I just don't notice anymore. The AMAZING color temp brush alone is worth a 20% hit to speed and performance for me.

Why don't ya'll quit ******** and start working.  Perhaps you too will find the enhancements worth the percieved diminished performance.

Quote:
Why don't ya'll quit ******** and start working.  Perhaps you too will find the enhancements worth the percieved diminished performance.

Huh?

Why don't we what?

NOTHING is worth a 20 second freeze just because I chose another photo in the filmstrip....for me LR3 was light greased lighting...LR4 is (and I don't throw this word around easily) UNUSUABLE....period.

I can't afford to move a slider and have the screen go black and redraw, the CPU peg at 100% for 20 seconds only to find out that whatever amount of slider I changed wasn't correct.

I love the enhancements, but THOSE ISSUES clearly aren't even close to being worth it for me.

Yes...I've heard that going to the old 2010 process is much better and on my machine it is much improved...but not nearly like LR3...it's only "better" but not useable.

LR 4.1 RC2 is a pig compared to 3.6.  I'm seriously thinking about going back to 3.6 until Adobe remembers how to write software again.

Now I'm wondering if I could get CS 6 given the seeming decline in quality of the Lightroom line.

I'm not going to bother with a refund.  I'm sure in time a well working version will materialize . The fact remains that this was in no way ready for release. But with that said I do like what I see from what I have used it just needs to be fixed. Untill then I have my 3.6 ..

But have you updated it to the 2012 processing yet? I think earlier on in this thread someone mentioned that was when they experienced the lag/issues.  I noticed that same thing with mine.  When it offered to update my photo processing to the 2012 I decided to give it a try for the first time.  This is the only time I experienced the lag. I think this is what the issue is.  Prior to doing this, my other photos had no problems being edited in the 2010 processing version. I hope it gets fixed soon.

I agree. but I don't want to go back and forth between the "same" software. I understand your frustration. I guess I didn't notice it as much because I just recently tried to edit a set in the 2012 version for the first time. definitely frustrating.

Sent from my iPhone

I wish I knew what the problem was -- it is very strange -- myself and many others have no problem at all.  I have both 4 and 3.6 available to me and I can see no difference in time in develop, with the sliders, with refreshing etc.

So this is not something inherent in the basic design, it "basically" works just fine.  Something is occurring for some people -- the interesting is what is the "something"??

my setup is considerably slower than yours.

I have a

2011 MacBook Air 11.6"

Core i5 1.6ghz

256GB SSD

4GB RAM

Intel HD Graphics 3000 364mb alotted

and it does this to my system.  I updated my catalog and optimized it.  For

me, I only started to notice the lag once i clicked on the option to update

photo processing to the 2012 process.  Then everything got considerably

slower. I want to open the catalog back up in my 3.6, but I'd have to redo

all my edits.  It's really frustrating.  I shouldn't have selected the 2012

process option.  I think that's the key point for me.

I use it on my

Mac Mini 2011

2.5Ghz Core i5

500GB HD

4GB RAM

ATI HD graphics card.  I think it was the 4650, not 100%.  But it is

definitely better than my macbook air's graphics card and it's discrete

(dedicated).

I still get the same kind of lag on that as well... Don't know what the

difference is... I think it's the fact that I selected process using 2012

process.  not 100% sure though.  I'll leave the deductions to the Adobe

Techs to figure out.  I'll provide whatever info I can.  I just want the

problem fixed so I can continue on with my editing.  I didn't buy LR4 to

only have to go back to LR3. know what I mean?

The fact that it "seems" to be worse on higher end machines may actually be reasonable.

Scheduling algorithms and often multi-process applications are written to fit certain response times.

Our office has run into such a case.  We run a high performance object database.  It runs really well

on SSD's -- "except" that if you run some task that runs for a long time and does lots of disk accesses

it kills most other sessions -- because, we think, it hardly ever gives up the CPU to wait for disk accesses.

all- I mean no offense to any of you but I'm in the camp that has the problem and trying to hypothesis the root cause of the issue for over 2 months now is something you are certainly free to do but 1) Adobe doesn't look here; 2) Other users have yet to be able to solve it or understand root cause and 3) Lets be optimistic that Adobe is smart enough to understand all of the possible causes since they are a applcation developer and are working on it.  My net point is, I think the best course of action is to post your concern or status on the Lightroom bug/problem website which is the one that is actually monitored- not here.   I subscribe to this thread just in case there is in fact a post entitled "problem solved!!"...but after over 2 months of waiting I'm not hopefull at all.  I've already goten a refund on 4 and am back on 3.6 and am very very unhappy esp when trying to process RAW files from my new Canon 5D MIII !!!

If you really are compelled to share your HW config and hypothesis, pls do so on the forum that counts in this case so that Adobe doesn't forget us..I am certainly envious of those that don't have this problem and I congratulate you but there are MANY of us that do and I really would appreicate if you post your ongoing issues here:  thx!

  http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_0_reacts_ext remely_slow

Natsukashi53 - as you can see I'm stil subscribed

Points taken... just as a quick point of clarification, I was not suggesting to start any new thread anywhere..thats the last thing we need...but instead to continue to 'rant' (or copy your rant from here) and double post it to a place Adobe monitors- granted if I worked there, I'd prob tune everything out at this point!

One thing that I did suggest to Adobe 3-4 times now but they haven't taken the bait yet (and I'm not smart enough to do it or I would) is to provide those willing to give feedback ( alot of us!) a format or template such that we each provide the *same* type of information about or environment/config... I can't possibly imagine Adobe being able to easily analyze root cause with everyong providing random HW config status, logs, etc... How can they (or us as a user group) try to get to the bottom of this when information is streaming in in bits and pieces from everyone.  Wouldn't it be nice to be able to more or less fill in a template (or heaven forbid allow us to provide our HW config ONCE in our profile so we dont have to repeadly do it) and for all of us to have a better basis for developing our hypothesis?  There are a lot of smart people here!

Well I'll chime in and say that I've noticed 2 things. My SSD gets eaten up (went from 130gigs free to a handfull before I tracked it down) by a temp file that is created since I installed RC2 and I have actually run out of ram... that is fricken nuts because I have alot of ram!

Winders7pro

intel core i7 970 (3.2GHz times 6 cores)

24GB ram (I've been at 99% used a few times since RC2 install).

GeForce GTX 570

I've got all the settings in both CS6 and LR4RC2 maxed out to allow full usage of everthing (it is an editing machine after all!).

I sure hope they fix these leaks soon, I love most of the new updates in both products.

It was the same on iMac. 2.6 was fast as nothing which was slowed down with the introduction of rel. 3. It gets worst with every release. Release 4 is just a nightmare. I upgraded my memory from 8Gb to 16Gb but LR4 doesn't get impressed by doubling the ram.

Don't know if this will help anyone but Lightroom 4 was very slow on my machine which is not the highest spec in the world but I was in preferences / file handling and discovered that my cache memory  on my drive was

( drive N / Adobe raw cache ) so I had a look for the cache folder and couldn't find it so I created a cache folder, incresed its size to 20 gig and tried Lightroom 4 again and my PC is running much faster,I can go between grid and develop as quick as I could in Lightroom 3.6, I can now zoom instantly without a two second lag, certain sliders in the develop module are still a little bit jumpy ( I'll leave that one to Adobe ) but overall a huge improvement.

Hope this helps.

Let me know how you get on.

@robbie2006 did you happen to also change the location of your cache? maybe to a separate drive or anything?

Sent from my iPhone

@lynne,

I think it may be due to the file size that you're getting out of the D4. have you tried shooting in mRaw or sRaw? not that it should really make a difference, but that's the only thing that I can think of. also, make sure your software is up to date with camera raw. do a software update in your Lightroom. I believe the d800 an canon5d are the latest updates I've had to download for my Lightroom. maybe that's what's missing on yours? (the latest camera raw updates)

Sent from my iPhone

Putting the cache on a separate harddisk from your images and operating

system is an old and well-known way to increase camera raw's (and by

extension Lightroom's) performance. I've never seen the cache location

being assigned to a nonexisting disk, but I guess it is possible and should

be fixed if that's the case.

I looked up software updatesin LR 4 and it says I'm up to date. I DO have a humongous catalog - will this slow me down? I tend to keep most everything in one place.

Lynne