1 25 26 27 28 29 Previous Next 1,716 Replies Latest reply on Dec 18, 2012 11:37 AM by Victoria Bampton LR Queen Go to original post
      • 1,040. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
        bob frost Level 3

        From: "bcw99

         

        Looking through this thread, I don't see any response from Adobe?

         

         

         

        That is because this is a User-to-User forum, where users help each other.

        If you want to report bugs, problems, or make feature requests, you should

        either use Adobe's Help lines, or use the other Adobe Forum where Adobe does

        participate -

         

        <http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/products/photoshop_family_photoshop_lightro om?sort=recently_created&style=topics>

         

        Bob Frost

        • 1,041. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
          areohbee Level 6

          Reminder: if changing preview size makes more than a little difference in performance, it's due to a bug.

           

          Last time I was doing performance testing based on preview size (not Lr4, Lr3 I think) I noticed some *very* strange phenomenon, which neither Adobe nor any users were able to explain (observed by some other users, but not observed by all users):

           

          e.g. 1680 preview rendering size was *larger* than the 2048 size...

           

          (I never noticed any difference in performance, so I kinda forgot about it)

           

          Moral of the story: never assume Lightroom is working properly .

           

          PS - Rendering 1:1 previews renders standard previews too - no need to do both.

           

          Cheers,

          Rob

          • 1,042. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
            DavePinMinn Level 1

            Actually, if I recall correctly, there are some of Adobe's Lightroom people that do participate here on a purely volunteer basis.  Unfortunately, given the performance issues that come up with every major release, they may have decided their time would be better spent elsewhere - hopefully figuring out how to speed things up...  But, I believe there are some around.  Of course, they may not be able to hop in here and tell us much...

             

            I recreated my little test catalog.  It contains 146, NIkon D300, 12 megapixel images in .dng format.  I turned off the import preset.  I turned off everything as far as I know.  Imported and then did a 1:1 rendering.  My preview size is now set to 1680 with high quality.

             

            I then recreated it WITH the import preset and jumped back and forth...

             

            As near as I can tell, and this is PURELY anecdotal, NOT doing the lens correction didn't make any difference to how fast images display in loupe.  Nor did it change how fast they display in 1:1.  Nor did it improve performance in Develop, which is where the worst display speed is.  Not DOING anything, just moving from one image to the next. 

             

            I'll have to go back to the "real" catalog to see how much improvement there is from going to 1680 instead of 2048 for previews, but it doesn't APPEAR to be much if any......

             

            I could be more certain if I had a way to have something automatically open say 10 images in loupe, then go to develop and walk through 10 images to see how long that took, but I don't know of a way to do that in Lightroom.  So, I'm going with what it looks like when I manually hit the arrow to move from image to image and just watch the clock.  Not very precise.  What I CAN say with some confidence is that it's slower than V3.

             

            Anyhow, it is what it is.  bwc99, yes, there are number of threads in a number of forums.  I've waded through some of them looking for a magic bullet, but so far I haven't found it.  I don't think Adobe's strange, I just think they're responding the way any company that has a virtual monopoly does. 

            • 1,043. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
              areohbee Level 6

              Note: the size of the standard preview makes no difference whatsoever if you have 1:1 previews built. It only matters if you DON'T. (assuming Lightroom is functioning normally, which it may not be)

               

              Why?

               

              When Lightroom renders 1:1 previews it actually renders 7 different versions in one fell swoop (or 6 if image smaller to begin with...), plus ACR cache info for develop (alias fast-load data if you use DNG):

               

              1. 1:1
              2. dimensions half of 1:1
              3. dimensions half of 2
              4. dimensions half of 3
              5. dimensions half of 4
              6. dimensions half of 5
              7. thumb: dimensions half of 6.

               

              This is what's known as the preview pyramid, or stack.

               

              If you render standard previews only, and not 1:1, it skips:

              • Largest (1:1) rendering
              • ACR cache info.

               

              I always keep 1:1 previews rendered at top quality (I would use medium, except I also use PreviewExporter for quick yet high quality exports), and ignore standard preview settings.

               

              Rob

              • 1,044. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                DavePinMinn Level 1

                So, if I do 1:1 previews, nothing else matters.  That takes care of everything...

                 

                Interesting... 

                 

                BTW:  UNTIL V4, I NEVER RENDERED 1:1 PREVIEWS...  Literally, NEVER.  And it was STILL at LEAST as fast (and in truth I believe develop was FASTER) on the old version than V4 is WITH 1:1 previews...

                • 1,045. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                  areohbee Level 6

                  Lr4 is not running well on your system.

                   

                  Lib module sequencing is lightning fast for me, if requisite previews are available.

                   

                  Dev mode is slower, because of additional processing (NR, CA, PV2012), but lib module: like greased lightning in Lr4.

                   

                  R

                  • 1,046. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                    DavePinMinn Level 1

                    That's good to know Rob... 

                     

                    When you walk through images in the library module, how fast does the loupe info update?  'Cause on mine, the previews aren't instantaneous, but the loupe info text is definitely BEHIND the image update.

                    • 1,047. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                      areohbee Level 6

                      davepinminn wrote:

                       

                      When you walk through images in the library module, how fast does the loupe info update?  'Cause on mine, the previews aren't instantaneous...

                       

                      The delay when stepping from one image to the next in fit-view is barely noticeable, so I would estimate less than a tenth of a second for fit-view image display. A bit longer, say 1/8 second, for 1:1 image view.

                       

                      Lr also updates histogram, metadata, ... - those things take some time to fill in (way less than a second, but still noticeable lag) - but they don't hold up image viewing.

                       

                      PS - I don't use the Lr 'Info' display proper (accessed via the 'i' key, because I don't like how it overlaps the image), but having just tried it, it definitely lags - filled in after the image, like the metadata display... - fraction of a second, but noticeable lag... - maybe 1/5 to 1/4 second.

                       

                      win7/64 medium-powered system (4-core AMD, 3.4GHz, 8GB ram, mainboard graphics driving 2 1920x1200 displays): I do have catalog and previews on SSD, but I don't use dual monitor mode of Lr, nor full-screen mode. Main view and right panel on right monitor, oversized left panel on left monitor, filmstrip open most of the time.

                       

                      How about you?

                       

                      R

                      • 1,048. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                        bob frost Level 3

                        From: "davepinminn

                        When you walk through images in the library module, how fast does the

                        loupe info update?  'Cause on mine, the previews aren't instantaneous, but

                        the loupe info text is definitely BEHIND the image update.

                         

                        Presumably that is simply due to retrieval time from wherever you store your

                        previews and catalog. I assume the image info has to be got from the

                        catalog, after the correct preview has been selected from the previews

                        folder. Putting your catalog and previews on a SSD will speed retrieval up.

                         

                        Bob Frost

                        • 1,049. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                          rpavich1234 Level 1

                          Putting your catalog and previews on a SSD will speed retrieval up.

                          I'm sorry but I've been following this thread and the whole discussion is just comical.

                           

                          The ever-growing list of things to do to make LR4 even in the same performance neighborhood of LR3 is staggering.

                           

                          Imagine buying a new car and have it perform worse by such a large margin than last years model that you currently drive that you have to change almost every bit of that car (motor, suspension, tires, fuel system etc...) all in an effort to get it to even perform CLOSE to what last years model did.

                           

                          It's just lunacy...

                           

                          I'm not downing those who are trying to help the poor souls make LR4 work...they are just trying to help...I'm just commenting on the insane lengths one has to go to get a piece of software to run as well as a previous version...there is definitely something wrong in Adobe-land.

                           

                          I'd LOVE to drive this year's model but I can't afford to have my car stall out everytime I put my foot on the gas...I have places to go.

                          • 1,050. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                            bob frost Level 3

                            From: "rpavich1234

                            I'm sorry but I've been following this thread and the whole discussion is

                            just comical.

                             

                            The ever-growing list of things to do to make LR4 even in the same

                            performance neighborhood is staggering.

                             

                            Imagine buying a new car and have it perform worse by a large margin than

                            last years model that you currently drive. Then imagine changing the

                            motor, suspension, tires, fuel system etc...all in an effort to get it to

                            even perform CLOSE to what last years model did.

                             

                             

                            Sorry, but LR 4.1 runs fine for thousands (or millions?) of people,

                            including me. So we have to try and work out what is different about the

                            computers/images/catalogs/previews of those who find LR 4.1 doesn't run

                            fine. I used SSDs for my catalog and previews in LR3, not just for LR4. It

                            speeds everything up, since retrieval from disk is usually the slowest bit

                            of most computers. An SSD in my cheap Samsung laptop makes it fine for

                            demonstrating LR 4.1 in lectures - no slowdowns or hangups.

                             

                            I also did various of the things I have listed (export catalog to a new one,

                            create all new previews, etc) when upgrading from LR2 to LR3, so nothing new

                            there. A 'clean' setup usually runs faster than a dirty one, just as with

                            OSs.

                             

                            I doubt if LR 4 will ever be faster than LR3, because it does a lot more

                            things, and does them better.

                             

                            Might be a good idea if people stopped asking for new things to be added.

                            They all add 'weight to the car' and slow it down. 

                             

                            Bob Frost

                            • 1,051. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                              rpavich1234 Level 1

                              Bob,

                              Sorry but that answer is also comical.

                               

                              This isn't just isolated pockets of people who are having slight issues...this is big enough to cause discussions on many many forums and in the blog-o-sphere in general....

                               

                              You didn't really say anything new in your response...just repeated what you've already said...that this version is more bloated and less responsive in performance...yes...we know that....lol...

                               

                              As for the excuse that now because I have a new feature in my car (air conditioning in the back seat and lighted vanity mirrors) that I should accept that my car bogs down when I hit the gas?

                               

                              Or that the car works fine for a lot of people?

                               

                              that's also comical.

                              • 1,052. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                Keith_Reeder Level 5

                                rpavich1234 wrote:

                                 

                                Bob,

                                 

                                this is big enough to cause discussions on many many forums and in the blog-o-sphere in general....

                                 

                                Only because the internet is self-selecting for complaining - like it or not, there's simply no evidence that this is anything like as pervasive an issue as your (necessarily skewed) interpretation of the relevance of the "blogosphere" suggests.

                                 

                                You didn't really say anything new in your response...just repeated what you've already said..

                                 

                                Uuuumm... Pot calling the kettle black? You're hardly breaking new ground in your posts, are you? Actively choosing to ignore the inherent validity of Bob's comments doesn't make 'em any less valid.

                                 

                                I'll ask my usual question: if Lr is the problem, why aren't we all suffering? Until someone comes up with a convincing answer to that question, you're not going to win the argument.

                                • 1,053. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                  fliplip1 Level 2

                                  I agree, all these tips shouldn't be needed, and wont get LR4 working as it should.The fact that many peoepl dont have this issue, and have not made any major chages to how they work show this.

                                   

                                  There is obviously a problem with the program for some, all this talk of SSD's, 1:1 previews etc are just common sence tweaks, nowhere near fixes.

                                   

                                  None of the PC's i have access to have SSD's, more than 8GM ram, nothing over i5's yet all work fine. None have 1:1 previews on import turned on, and all use Len correction on import.

                                  Im sure all could run a tiny bit faster by Turing previews on and LC off but we find here at work that the time it takes to render the 1:1 previews could be spent actually working on the images, and sometimes LC can be forgotten to be enabled so we have it as default.

                                   

                                  Im not putting anyone down for tying to figure out what the problem is but i think taking a look at the machines that do run LR4 fine will show that the suggestions in here are not the ones that will fix this.

                                   

                                  Still, keep up the good work, its an interesting read.

                                  • 1,054. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                    Keith_Reeder Level 5

                                    fliplip1 wrote:

                                     

                                    There is obviously a problem with the program for some

                                     

                                    By definition, this must mean that the problem lies with the local environment on which the software is installed.

                                    • 1,055. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                      bob frost Level 3

                                      From: "rpavich1234

                                      Sorry but that answer is also comical............................. that's

                                      also comical.

                                       

                                       

                                      It is 'funny' that some computers have problems with LR 4.1, and that others

                                      don't, but not in the sense that you mean. 

                                       

                                      Some people are just waking up to the fact that processing D800 files (40MB

                                      compressed) takes a lot longer than processing D700 files (20MB compressed),

                                      and even longer than processing D100 files (10MB compressed), and that's

                                      without the extra processing that 2012 does. They take longer in 2010 as

                                      well.

                                       

                                      The latest cameras have faster processors in them to cope with this, they

                                      use faster cards to store the images on, and  ............................

                                      need faster computers to process them. It's just logic, not 'lunacy'.

                                       

                                      Sorry that nothing seems to solve your problems. It's 'funny'.

                                       

                                      Bob frost

                                      • 1,056. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                        rpavich1234 Level 1

                                        Uuuumm... Pot calling the kettle black?

                                        Yep....observing how lame LR4 is isn't a new complaint.

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                        You're hardly breaking new ground in your posts, are you?

                                        Nope...no new ground...we all know the problems LR4 has.

                                         

                                         

                                        Actively choosing to ignore the inherent validity of Bob's comments doesn't make 'em any less valid.

                                        I'm not actively choosing to ignore them....I only made the observation that he's repeating how we can "fix" LR4...which was what was so comical in the first place!...what hoops we discuss to jump through to get even acceptable performance out of a "better" piece of software!

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                        I'll ask my usual question: if Lr is the problem, why aren't we all suffering?

                                        Because whatever bugs are involved; aren't following certain patterns...that's all. It's not as simple as "all old machines will lag" or "all people who use SSD's will have acceptable performance"...it's more complicated.

                                         

                                        I've been in your shoes on other software releases...defending a buggy piece of software because I didn't happen to have the worst of the ill effects where others did....after MANY dicussions just like the one we're having,, the software company issued several bug fix releases and cleared up the performance issues. That's what I'm hoping happens here.

                                         

                                        I hope that one day we can all have your experience...without having to change the motor, suspension, undercarriage, AC, drive train, tires, fuel system...et al.

                                         

                                         

                                         

                                        Until someone comes up with a convincing answer to that question, you're not going to win the argument.

                                        There is no argument to win...there is definitely some remaining major bugs in this particular piece of software that need to be ironed out...that's not even a question.

                                        • 1,057. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                          rpavich1234 Level 1

                                          By definition, this must mean that the problem lies with the local environment on which the software is installed.

                                          Nope...not at all. It just means that there is a bug somewhere that's not readily apparent and simple to squash.

                                          • 1,058. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                            fliplip1 Level 2

                                            Well, i dont want to annoy the others but thats my thinking.

                                            It shouldn't be this way so i feel the blame lays at Adobes door, but i dont think anything in LR can be changed by the user to fix the issues. Its not goin got be that easy.

                                            As ive said before, i changed my hardware but not my HDD, so other than new drivers everything was the same, and this fixed my issues instantly.

                                            I also have PC's at work that have with been through the LR3 - LR4 upgrade (inc catalogue) or fresh installs and none have had any issues. All i5's or lower, no SSD's etc.

                                            • 1,059. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                              CSS Simon Level 3

                                              Keith_Reeder wrote:

                                               

                                              fliplip1 wrote:

                                               

                                              There is obviously a problem with the program for some

                                               

                                              By definition, this must mean that the problem lies with the local environment on which the software is installed.

                                              Or, perhaps, some camera's raw files are problematic, as Victoria suggested above?

                                               

                                              Whatever, I'm another of those that doesn't experience performance problems.  I have a two-year-old i7-930, and don't get anything like the delays some people are talking about.  I have a (slow-ish) SSD for the ACR cache, but the LR catalogue (58,000 images) and previews are on a normal hard drive.  It's weird!  I'm not doubting the posts here, but it's as though we not talking about the same software. 

                                              • 1,060. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                rpavich1234 Level 1

                                                It is 'funny' that some computers have problems with LR 4.1, and that others

                                                don't, but not in the sense that you mean. 

                                                 

                                                Some people are just waking up to the fact that processing D800 files (40MB

                                                compressed) takes a lot longer than processing D700 files (20MB compressed),

                                                and even longer than processing D100 files (10MB compressed), and that's

                                                without the extra processing that 2012 does. They take longer in 2010 as

                                                well.

                                                And some aren't.

                                                 

                                                This would be a good point if LR3 wasn't so lightning fast processing big files.

                                                 

                                                What LR3 does in milliseconds....LR4 (on my machine and others) is so slow as to be unusable....20 seconds or more. I'm not speaking of barely noticable issues.

                                                 

                                                 

                                                The latest cameras have faster processors in them to cope with this, they use faster cards to store the images on, and  ............................

                                                need faster computers to process them. It's just logic, not 'lunacy'.

                                                 

                                                Again...that would hold water if LR3 was choking but LR3 works great...so fast on the SAME FILES that I have to look twice to see if it actually processed!

                                                 

                                                PS: It's not just a "faster computer" issue and you know it. There are people posting these same issues who are using HUGE machines...it's across the board, not just on the slow / old machines.

                                                 

                                                 

                                                 

                                                 

                                                Sorry that nothing seems to solve your problems. It's 'funny'.

                                                That's not what I said was funny. You seem to have tunnel vision. I said that the amazing lengths some users have to go to to TRY and get usable performance is what's comical.

                                                 

                                                Like I said in another post; I've been right where you are now...rabidly defending a buggy software release because I wasn't experiencing the worst of the problems reported...and all of the usual responses were given (just like on this thread about how it's only a "small portion" of folks having the problems and how it's probably their "crappy machine")  been there...done that.

                                                 

                                                It turned out to be the software...

                                                • 1,061. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                  rpavich1234 Level 1

                                                  I'm not doubting the posts here, but it's as though we not talking about the same software.

                                                  Yes...exactly...

                                                  • 1,062. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                    bob frost Level 3

                                                    From: "fliplip1

                                                    I agree, all these tips shouldn't be needed, and wont get LR4 working as

                                                    it should.The fact that many peoepl dont have this issue, and have not

                                                    made any major chages to how they work show this.

                                                     

                                                    But they may have completely different software on their machines! Someone

                                                    recently found updating his Wacom drivers cured his LR problem, others have

                                                    found updating video drivers sorted their problems out, there may be

                                                    problems with Quicktime from what I read, and so on.

                                                     

                                                    If I had tried all the usual tweaks and none worked, I would backup my

                                                    system drive, install a fresh OS, and only install LR 4.1. That would

                                                    eliminate a lot of possible culprits. I know; I've done this many times over

                                                    the past 30 years or so that I've been using and trouble-shooting PCs.

                                                     

                                                    I'm NOT saying that LR 4.1 hasn't got bugs in it; it has. But they are not

                                                    creating a problem for me or many/most others. The next version of LR will

                                                    no doubt be better/faster than 4.1, but it may not cure software or hardware

                                                    problems in some computers. It might - if they could identify the problem in

                                                    your computer.

                                                     

                                                    Bob Frost

                                                    • 1,063. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                      rpavich1234 Level 1

                                                      Agreed Bob...

                                                      • 1,064. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                        fliplip1 Level 2

                                                        Bob.

                                                        Im not sure if you are agreeing with me or not, i certainly agree with your last post, and that does seem its more localized as Keith said.

                                                         

                                                        I was just reading another thread and it seemed the guy fixed his issue with a new graphics card. While im not suggesting the card is the fix im wondering if un installing the GPU and deleting the drives, then letting windows re boot and re install may help.

                                                        • 1,065. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                          DavePinMinn Level 1

                                                          I'm not against people voicing their frustration, and the inevitable response that "well, I'm not having a problem", and I'd love to join in, but I don't think it'll help.  This isn't new. 

                                                           

                                                          When V3 came out there was a massive amount of screaming about performance.  And the predictable response that "I'm not having a problem."  Yes, it was apparently a small-ish minority of users, and eventually it must have gotten fixed or people stopped complaining, or stopped using LR 'cause it finally died down.  That time, I was fortunate to be one of those users that DIDN'T have major performance problems.

                                                           

                                                          This time, I'm in the "hmph, this is distinctly, perceptibly slower than V3 was".  Which is why, when I'm listing symptoms I try to indicate what HASN'T changed...  As in, my D2X and D300 are the same, so the files haven't grown.  My primary catalog hasn't changed significantly in the last 3 months - maybe a thousand new images, but it's only got around 35,000 total, so that's no big deal.  My disk drives haven't changed...  I have a completely separate spindle for the O/S and programs (Seagate 7200 rpm).  A separate spindle for the catalog and several other partitions not related to image processing (Hitachi 7200 rpm).  A separate spindle for images (a 1TB HItachi 7200 rpm that has about 350GB available).  And, TWO spindles for scratch files (each a Hitachi 7200 rpm with at least 50% available - these are internal backup drives, so they're just sitting there except when backing up).

                                                          My monitors are a 24" Dell, and a 22" no-name that's used for palettes and such.  No changes.  My system is an i7 quad-core running at 3.85GHz with 12GB of 1600?MHz DDR3 RAM.  Video is an ATI 5770.  Compared to some boxes I'm average, compared to others I'm way over-spec'ed.

                                                           

                                                          All this is exactly the same as it was when I ran V3 and PS CS5.  They ran very well.  As does Office 2007 and 2010, Visio, Photomatix, nik HDR Efex Pro, Proshow Gold, Dreamweaver, and all the other applications that get used on a regular basis.

                                                           

                                                          So, given that it USED to work, and now it's not working as well, what changed?  The only thing I know of is the replacement of V3.6 with V4.1 and PS CS5 with PS CS6. 

                                                           

                                                          And, having rummaged around various forums, I notice that there's a minority of users, once AGAIN, that are having problems with the new version.  So, while I agree that these tweaks aren't a REAL solution - putting in an SSD for my images probably isn't feasible since I'd need at least 600GB just for my regular catalog, which would shortly be full, I figure SOMEBODY may have some idea that'll help.  Yes, I've updated the drivers for my Wacom tablet, and I have the most current drivers for the video card, and as far as I know I've got LR configured properly...

                                                           

                                                          I've even taken "regular" images and created a totally new catalog to see if that would help.  It doesn't APPEAR to, or if it is it's not enough to be perceptible.

                                                           

                                                          SO, yes, I'd love to come in here and scream and rant and call Adobe names and swear never to buy another of their products, and all that (which I've sort-of done on past occasions), but it just gets those who AREN'T having a problem wound up, and doesn't appear to make Adobe do anything useful, and (I fear) makes people like Victoria B and Rob Cole and the others that are helping as they can feel underappreciated...  So, having gotten old(er), rotund, and bald(er), I'm trying to be less obnoxious than in the past.

                                                           

                                                          I certainly agree with the frustrated minority that it would be REALLY nice to have someone from Adobe state SOMEWHERE (if they don't want to do it here) that they're AWARE some users are having issues and they're actually working on it, but I don't recall them doing that for other products that have been problematic.

                                                           

                                                          So, sorry for prattling on so long...  Anyhow, Rob, I could probably put in an SSD for the catalog (I believe I've got one SATA slot left), but I think my images are too big for a reasonably-priced SSD.

                                                          • 1,066. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                            A C G Level 1

                                                            "Or, perhaps, some camera's raw files are problematic, as Victoria suggested above?"

                                                             

                                                            I have only been using LR4.1 on Panasonic GH2 files and it has settled down to a useable system with no screen flashes.

                                                             

                                                            On Monday I imported five Panasonic G3 files from a friend's new camera.

                                                             

                                                            When I started to work on them the white rectangles I used to get on the screen started again. I had not seen them for weeks on my GH2 only catalogue.

                                                             

                                                            It would be great if one of the posters around here who tell us that LR4 runs without a glitch tried loading some RAWs from another camera and told us if there was any difference.

                                                             

                                                            Tony

                                                            • 1,067. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                              fliplip1 Level 2

                                                              Im happy to try any files from camera's other than Canon's 30/40/60D and S90/95, as these are what im using.

                                                              .

                                                               

                                                              I know my posts aren't helping anyone but one other thing just sprung to mind is when i was having loads of grief with LR4 i was having much better luck with the current ACR version ( i think it was v7.0RC1 or something like that, both LR and ACR had the same features).

                                                              I had PSCS6 loaded and while that took a bit longer than CS5 to open to a useable state, the sliders in ACR were pretty fluid.

                                                              The PC at the time was a 4GB dual core AMD+ so pretty old.

                                                              Come to think of it, when i was having issues it was the program starting up as well as being used that was very slow, and as i also process JPGs form my GF's Fuji finepix camera it wasnt always used for large raw files

                                                              • 1,068. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                bob frost Level 3

                                                                From: "A C G

                                                                It would be great if one of the posters around here who tell us that LR4

                                                                runs without a glitch tried loading some RAWs from another camera and told

                                                                us if there was any difference.

                                                                 

                                                                Well, I have nefs from my old D100, D70, D200, D300, D2x, D3, D700, D90,

                                                                D60, D40, and current D7000, D800, and V1, and jpgs from a P7000, P5000,

                                                                P5400, Canon S50, and S60 in my catalog. No problems, but most are Nikon

                                                                files. Some had previously been edited in Nikon Capture and Nikon Capture NX

                                                                before LR was invented.

                                                                 

                                                                Which just made me think - I wonder if some people have been editing their

                                                                raw files in other raw processors and LR doesn't like those edits?  Just an

                                                                idea!  I do keywording in PhotoMechanic but I always open them in Nikon

                                                                ViewNX afterwards to make sure that PM hasn't done anything that corrupts

                                                                them. I did once corrupt some nefs with an editor, but that was my fault and

                                                                not the programs.

                                                                 

                                                                Bob Frost

                                                                • 1,069. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                  A C G Level 1

                                                                  Ah well, Bob.

                                                                   

                                                                  That straw was not worth clutching at for long.

                                                                   

                                                                  Tony

                                                                  • 1,070. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                    DavePinMinn Level 1

                                                                    Actually, thinking about ACR, you've got an interesting point...  Because of things that are much easier for me to do in Bridge than LR, my initial processing is usually done there.  And when in Bridge, I can open a hundred images in ACR, and walk through them quite quickly.  In fact, I just opened a quick chunk of 90 images, some jpeg, some .nef, some .dng and shoved them into ACR.  Then I took the whole bunch and told them display at 100% and started walking through them.....

                                                                     

                                                                    It was perceptibly quicker to load any of them than I'm able to do in develop in LR4.  Even at 100% it was finishing loading a .dng or .nef in less than a second and was ready for me to shove the sliders around....

                                                                     

                                                                    BUT, I presume this is all because Bridge caches everything up front, and in ACR I presume when I grab all the images and tell them to display at 100% it's doing SOMETHING so they're "ready"?  In either case, yes, for ME, ACR doesn't show the same lag I get in LR.  I reckon I"d best go back to doing all my initial examination, evaluation, renaming, keywording, and all that in Bridge, which I only stopped doing 'cause everyone kept telling me I should import directly into LR and do it all there...

                                                                    • 1,071. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                      A C G Level 1

                                                                      Dave,

                                                                       

                                                                      Does that mean you are saying that when you open a RAW in ACR it opens almost immediately - but when it is in Develop mode in LR the 'loading' which I assume is done by ACR it takes several seconds?

                                                                       

                                                                      Maybe this is a clue for speeding the Develop loading part.

                                                                       

                                                                      Tony

                                                                      • 1,072. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                        Victoria Bampton LR Queen Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                        bob frost wrote:

                                                                         

                                                                        I do keywording in PhotoMechanic

                                                                         

                                                                        Oh oh oh!  Any of the rest of you using PM?  One of the slow 5DMk3s I mentioned earlier, I know the photographer uses PM before sending the files.  And he also said his date modified changes on the raw files when he uses PM.  It's a real long shot, but....

                                                                        • 1,073. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                          Victoria Bampton LR Queen Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                          davepinminn wrote:

                                                                           

                                                                          ACR doesn't show the same lag I get in LR.

                                                                           

                                                                          LR's also having to render extra bits - thumbnails, its own previews, secondary monitors, little preview in the Navigator, etc.

                                                                          • 1,074. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                            fliplip1 Level 2

                                                                            Tony.

                                                                             

                                                                            At that time anything i did in LR4 (any any version, i went through them all) would take between 5 sec and 20 secs. Moving between modules, moving sliders, zooming in etc. Almost anything would cause LR to become unresponsive until it had doen waht it was doing. I also couldnt export a JPG and use LR at the same time.

                                                                            If i was to open PSCS6 and go to file/open, and select a raw file ACR would open and i could move freely around the tabs/sliders etc, zoom in and out , with hardly any lag. Certainly as fast as LR3.6 was. Of course this was only with one file at a time.

                                                                             

                                                                            I dont use Bridge, at all, so not sure if that would have done the same.

                                                                             

                                                                            Victoria, no, never used PhotoMechanic.

                                                                            • 1,075. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                              DavePinMinn Level 1

                                                                              Victoria, no Photo Mechanic here.  Just Bridge and LR.

                                                                               

                                                                              I went to some source images, and loaded 237, D300, .nef files into Bridge.  Then opened them all in ACR.  Walked through them and it was not instantaneous, but it was subsecond to fully load each image.  I then took all of them and changed them to 100%.  I was SLIGHTLY longer to display, although that could also be because I think it SHOULD take slightly longer.  In either case, it's far faster than loading in develop in LR.  Sliders are immediate.  Spot healing is not instantaneous, but again, it's subsecond.  It's certainly usable.  Adjustment brush IS immediate.  As I move it, it makes the changes.  I don't see any lag...

                                                                               

                                                                              Did the same thing with the 150 .dng files created from the .nef files (the rest got tossed during the initial exam).  Again, loaded them into Bridge, which did the rendering and whatever, VERY quickly.  Then loaded them into ACR.  Again, moving from image to image was fast, although I think it MAY have bene slightly slower than the .nef files were.  Is this reasonable, and if so, how come?  I then change them all to 100% and again walked around.  Again, changing images SEEMED slightly slower than the .nef files.  Sliders were immediate, spot healing was quite fast, and adjustment brush was very fast.

                                                                               

                                                                              In GENERAL, it seems to me (purely anecdotally) that ACR is quite a bit more responsive than LR4.1.  But again, as Victoria said, LR may be doing a bunch of stuff ACR isn't when you're in the develop module...  In any case, I'd SAY, ACR in CS6 is about as fast as it was in CS5.  I don't think it's FASTER, but I don't think it's a lot SLOWER. 

                                                                               

                                                                              BTW:  I just checked my LR preferences and catalog preferences to try to make sure I haven't done something stupid - like pointing things to the C drive or whatever.  I don't SEE anything that's obviously wrong...  I have the cache set at 30GB, and could go larger if that would improve things.  I also have the video cache set to limit video cache and set at 10GB (I haven't seen this setting before, so I presume this is a V4 thing?)

                                                                              • 1,076. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                                bob frost Level 3

                                                                                From: "Victoria Bampton

                                                                                Oh oh oh!  Any of the rest of you using PM?  One of the slow 5DMk3s I

                                                                                mentioned earlier, I know the photographer uses PM before sending the

                                                                                files.  And he also said his date modified changes on the raw files when

                                                                                he uses PM.  It's a real long shot, but....

                                                                                 

                                                                                But my computer isn't slow! I use Photomechanic mainly because it stores my

                                                                                keywords in the nefs, not just in the catalog as LR does. So if and when the

                                                                                day comes that I have to use another program instead of LR, I won't have to

                                                                                re-keyword everything. It stores the keywords in the nef files same as Nikon

                                                                                CaptureNX does. No problem.  PhotoMechanic is also easier to use, imo, with

                                                                                its structured keywords panel on one monitor and the grid of images on the

                                                                                other, doing this is much easier than with LR.

                                                                                 

                                                                                Using PhotoMechanic or Exiftool to add keywords or GPS location data (from

                                                                                LR) to my nefs doesn't change the exif dates in the nefs. Lots of people

                                                                                seem to use PhotoMechanic without problems in LR. I was thinking though that

                                                                                there might be other editing programs, less widely used, that could upset

                                                                                LR.

                                                                                 

                                                                                Bob Frost

                                                                                • 1,077. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                                  areohbee Level 6

                                                                                  If Lr is a lot slower than ACR, then you're being bit by Lr bugs. As Victoria said, a little slower is normal, since Lr does a little more...

                                                                                  • 1,078. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                                    Victoria Bampton LR Queen Adobe Community Professional & MVP

                                                                                    bob frost wrote:

                                                                                     

                                                                                    But my computer isn't slow!

                                                                                     

                                                                                    Doh!  I was hoping we'd found a link.  Ok, back to the drawing board.

                                                                                    • 1,079. Re: Lightroom 4 is slow
                                                                                      BeerStalker

                                                                                      Keith_Reeder wrote:

                                                                                      I'll ask my usual question: if Lr is the problem, why aren't we all suffering? Until someone comes up with a convincing answer to that question, you're not going to win the argument.

                                                                                       

                                                                                      I have over 20 years of application, operating system and storage system support and engineering experience for some of the biggest names in the industry I can assure you all this "I'm not seeing it so it's your system at fault" talk is very wide of the mark.

                                                                                       

                                                                                      A simple bug that everyone saw would be caught before release. A complex problem often only shows up in a customer environment. Some customers will see it, some not. All sorts of things in the evironment can tickle bugs in applications but the fault is still in with the application not the environment.

                                                                                       

                                                                                      A simple counter to your argument is why only LR sees the problem. I have many other apps and the all work well except LR.

                                                                                       

                                                                                      Considering how this thread has degenerated I think the best thing people can do is produce a canned example, preferably with a screenshot video, that can be given to Adobe.

                                                                                      1 25 26 27 28 29 Previous Next