One specific file is very slow

[adams72573143]

My library is relatively small at 2.87 GIG.  I started working on a 4x5 film scan that is 900 megabyte file.  When I first started editing it, edits (like masking) were immediate.  Suddenly, the masking process became basically unresponsive---I say basically because the operation will eventually occur, but it takes minutes to render.  My first step was to optimize my catalog.  Second, I upped the cache to 50 gig, and tried turning off graphic processor preference.  Then, I deleted all history and snapshots for the file.  Then, I moved the file to an external hard drive, created a smart preview and disconnected the external hard drive---the smart preview made absolutely no difference.  Not sure how the smart preview can be equally as slow.

The original file was 140 megs.  Lightroom developer metadata is what bloated it to 900 megs.  The file size didn't shrink when I removed history and snapshots.

My library, including other large scans, functions fine---it is just this one file that is so slow I can not finish editing it.

Does anyone have any other ideas?

Thanks

Adam

[dj_paige]

What exact tool in Lightroom do you mean by "masking"? Is it the slider under Detail? Or auto mask on the adjustment brush? Or something else?

Please let's discuss the size of the file in megapixels and not megabytes, which is irrelevant to this problem.

[adams72573143]

Sorry---I should have said "Adjustment Brush".  I have 8 different masked created using the adjustment brush tool---one of which is very complex (masking out a tree).  The file is 4377x5600 pixels, which puts it at about 24.5 megapixels. 

[dj_paige]

Lots of brushing (made worse by complicated masking) will cause Lightroom to slow down to a crawl. This is a known issue in Lightroom. It gets worse if you have a 4K or larger monitor. Some things you can try:

1. Don't use the masking
2. Perform the brushing/masking as the next to last step of your editing, and the last step is to turn on Lens Corrections and Transformations if desired
3. Perform the brushing/masking in Photoshop or Photoshop Elements
4. Get a faster CPU

[adams72573143]

Thanks so much for the response!  If I perform brushing/masking in PS are those edits still editable/reversible...or, is it locked in once I send the file back to LR?

[dj_paige]

Anything you do in Photoshop is locked in when you do the Save from Photoshop.

[adams72573143]

That's what I thought.  Thanks so much!  I will trudge on.

[dj_paige]

I forgot to mention you should turn off the GPU acceleration. Go to Preferences, click on Performance, uncheck the box that says Use Graphics Processor.

[adams72573143]

done.  thanks.  Can it speed up workflow to store develop metadata in the library rather than in the file?  I have "include develop settings in metadata inside JPEG, TIFF, PNG, and PSD files" unchecked in order to keep the file size down.

[dj_paige]

The edits are ALWAYS stored in the catalog file. You can't turn this off. So the answer to your question is that the location of the edits will not change the speed.

[Rob_Cullen]

If I perform brushing/masking in PS are those edits still editable/reversible.

Maybe.!

If I need to do a lot of cloning, spot removal, Heal Brush, work, then it has to be Photoshop.

In Ps you can create a new empty layer above the background and set the tool option to "Current and Below" so that all the re-touching work is on its own layer (or multiple layers) that you can re-edit (in Ps). BUT only if you save the (PSD, TIFF) file to PRESERVE the layers.

You will see the image in the Lr library, but 'Preserving the layers' in the file means- never doing any further edits in Lightroom, and always re-opening the file in Photoshop (Edit-In) with the option "Open Original"

Note: The reason to "Open Original" is:  If you do edit the file saved from Ps with further Lr Develop module adjustments, opening this adjusted image will flatten the layers and all the Ps layer information is lost.

Hence the reason why many experts & gurus, recommend that do as much as possible in Lightroom and then Edit-In Photoshop as the last step in the editing workflow.

[adams72573143]

Thanks for the reply.  I sent the file to PS and am finishing it using layers and masks.  It would be nice to maintain all editing within LR---especially considering that I do not need layers.  Hopefully, Adobe will work out why large complex masks (adjustment brush) negatively affect LR performance.

It is alarming how much the file size grew.  I am away from home and do not have access to the original backed-up file, so I can not verify its original size.  The only reason I indicated it was originally 140 megs is because I simply resaved the image out of PS without any metadata and it went from 900 to 140.  In any case, LR can not handle the large complex masking (adjustment brush)---and, PS is the better tool for the job.

One other note --- I did witness the file size growing with subsequent saves while working on the adjustment brush masking in LR.  It does not make sense that metadata could be so large...but, I have no other explanation at the moment.

[Todd Shaner]

adams72573143 wrote:

One other note --- I did witness the file size growing with subsequent saves while working on the adjustment brush masking in LR. It does not make sense that metadata could be so large...but, I have no other explanation at the moment.

I can't replicate what you are seeing using my own film scan TIFF files. Clearly something is wrong.

I applied three detailed Local Adjustment Brush masks to a 226 MB film scan file and saved the Develop metadata to the file. The file size increased by a tiny 122 KB with every setting in the Adjustment Brush panel applied to the three detailed masks.

SUGGESTION

Set your Catalog settings as shown below. Next select a scan file for editing and write down the file size. Edit the scan file, but do NOT use CTRL + S or the menu item 'Save Metadata to File' until all editing has been completed. See if this improves the Adjustment Brush performance and minimizes the file size increase.

[Todd Shaner]

adams72573143 wrote:

The original file was 140 megs. Lightroom developer metadata is what bloated it to 900 megs. The file size didn't shrink when I removed history and snapshots.

My library, including other large scans, functions fine---it is just this one file that is so slow I can not finish editing it.

You need to determine WHY the file increased in size from 140 MB to 900 Megabyte. This is most likely causing LR's performance issues. Even with 'Include Develop settings in metadata' checked the scan file size should only increase by a 10-100 Kilobytes per mask.

You say, "The file is 4377x5600 pixels, which puts it at about 24.5 megapixels." Is the file still showing as 4377x5600 pixels inside LR and PS, or something else? Also check the actual file size in MBs again using Finder or Windows Explorer.

4377x5600 = 24.5 megapixels x 2 (16 bit) = 49 megabytes x 3(RGB) = 147 Megabyte uncompressed TIFF file size

[dj_paige]

trshaner wrote:

adams72573143 wrote:

The original file was 140 megs. Lightroom developer metadata is what bloated it to 900 megs. The file size didn't shrink when I removed history and snapshots.

My library, including other large scans, functions fine---it is just this one file that is so slow I can not finish editing it.

You need to determine WHY the file increased in size from 140 MB to 900 Megabyte. This is most likely causing LR's performance issues. Even with 'Include Develop settings in metadata' checked the scan file size should only increase by a 10-100 Kilobytes per mask.

I can't agree with this. Lightroom ignores the xmp information in the file (if that's what is making the file so big, hard to imagine but maybe), Lightroom reads the image portion of the file (regardless of how big it is), stores the image in memory, and then uses that for editing. The file size does not affect editing speed (it may effect the loading speed of the file).

[Todd Shaner]

dj_paige wrote:

trshaner wrote:

You need to determine WHY the file increased in size from 140 MB to 900 Megabyte. This is most likely causing LR's performance issues. Even with 'Include Develop settings in metadata' checked the scan file size should only increase by a 10-100 Kilobytes per mask.

I can't agree with this. Lightroom ignores the xmp information in the file (if that's what is making the file so big, hard to imagine but maybe), Lightroom reads the image portion of the file (regardless of how big it is), stores the image in memory, and then uses that for editing. The file size does not affect editing speed (it may effect the loading speed of the file).

If in fact the file size is inflating to 900 Megabytes due to extensive Local Editing metadata then those edits (resident in the catalog) will make LR very sluggish. The question then becomes what Local editing settings is the OP using that appear to cause this inflation...if in fact that is the cause of the file size increase? There may be a "fix" for whatever is causing the issue if it can be identified. I do quite a bit of film scan processing in LR and haven't had any issues, but I don't apply extensive local edits in LR.

dj_paige wrote:

The file size does not affect editing speed (it may effect the loading speed of the file).

If the file size increase is due to something other than metadata such as re-editing in PS that increases the image dimensions it will slow down LR. That's why I asked the OP to check again and confirm both file size (MBs) and image size (pixels x pixels) of the LR edited file.

[dj_paige]

If in fact the file size is inflating to 900 Megabytes due to extensive Local Editing metadata then those edits (resident in the catalog) will make LR very sluggish

This I agree with. It is the amount of edits in the catalog, not the size of the file nor the amount of edits in XMP, that will make LR sluggish.

The question then becomes what Local editing settings is the OP using that appear to cause this inflation...if in fact that is the cause of the file size increase?

Maybe the issue is of interest to the OP, but it is not relevant to the question about LR speed.

dj_paige wrote:

The file size does not affect editing speed (it may effect the loading speed of the file).

If the file size increase is due to something other than metadata such as re-editing in PS that increases the image dimensions it will slow down LR. That's why I asked the OP to check again and confirm both file size (MBs) and image size (pixels x pixels) of the LR edited file.

I was very specific to talk about FILE SIZE, and you are talking about IMAGE SIZE ... we're not talking about the same thing. I agree that if somehow the image size dramatically increased, this would also cause LR to slow down.