Tried the new LR 4.1 load and many improvements. I only went throught the library and development modules.
In Library, I imported 1100 raw photos which took 33 seconds. not bad.
Tried all the sliders and options in the developement module and they are back to where I can use them... EXCEPT under the "Detail" section. Applying any of these sliders and I see a 3-5 sec second lag for the effect to implement.
Setting clarity to zero had no effect on outcome.
The lag is not as bad now.. it still is not as smooth as the other sliders. I tried another test... I loaded another 900 photos. The sliders in this section performed slowly right after this import. I watched the cpu and disk drive after the import said it had completed. The CPU stayed pegged at 70-80 % for another 1-2 minutes... they were still writing previews, etc. I tried the sliders in the detail section after the CPU and disk calmed down and they performed better but still have a noticable lag but not the 3-5 sec I was getting after the larger import. Over all I would say this load is a big improvement over the initial release. I am not running dual montiors or have a cataloge that is huge.
I also noticed that lightroom 4.1 was accessing photos ( based on system monitor) which are not in the LR 4 catalog but were in the LR 3.6 . I had noticed this occuring in the LR 4.0 I have not activily brought those photos up for months. I did not convert the 3.6 catalogto 4.0... started fresh to test new program.
Just spent the day updating dozens of pics to the new 2012 process, including a few that really needed to be processed from scratch to get the same end result - does anyone know if 4.1's "point curve" retention will mean better preservation of curve-adjusted data?
Rhetorical really, I'm downloading 4.1 and will try it in a few minutes, but if anyone has similar experiences this could start a useful dialogue for curve-loving users who might be looking into the 2010-2012 upgrade path...
Yes, interested in the whole point curve retention problem in LR 4, I have a bunch of inverted b&w negative original with tone adjustments. Just tried opening a few with LR 4.1 and so far they have reverted to negatives, rather than the positives I imported with a negative inversion preset. Anybody else doing this or solve these issues? Early days yet, but I'm not seeing it hold tone adjustments yet, for those type images at least.
4.1 did the upgrade during the first time you ran it, and created a collection set with collections that contained images that have recovered curves. You can look at the history of those to see what was recovered. That's all assuming you upgraded a 3.x catalog with 4.0, which contained the bug that caused the loss of those point curves in the first place.
(Edit: I did upgrade 3.6>4.0, but I don't have that new collection set despite a 30+ second progress bar for point curve checking. It could have just taken that long to look - and nothing is improved for my curve-adjusted images upon upgrading to 2012 Process.)
I haven't had a problem with images *not* manually updated to 2012, but the lost saturation and shadow depth seen on other posts about this issue are all too familiar once I update things.
The only pic I have reworded to the (not quite) desired look took about 4x as long as the original edit (still not long but disheartening when looking at the number of other pics that don't update gracefully), with many adjustments to curves, clarity, saturation, contrast and exposure. I had to work away from curves for a lot of this, because the light regions had already been deliberately maxed out (*very* low light pet portrait to get wide pupils in eyes: sorry if this seems like self promotion, but https://secure.flickr.com/photos/cdeverett/6810107623/ was my PV2010 output.
So, you ask, why bother? I mean LR3.6 was good, so why reprocess? Partly to see what else Process 2012 can do (one superficial first impression - detail in shadows is better in 2012-converted images where the conversion doesn't break them!), partly to just feel, you know... tidier...
Also, having clicked "show before and after" in the "do you want to upgrade" box, then chosen "do not show this again", I expected all of my 2010-12 upgrades would have the before/after view. But they don't, and I can't get that dialog back. Slight annoyance, but when it's part of dealing with a bug as a paying end user it gets more frustrating.
Now I'm getting worried that any "fix" to PV2012 will suddenly bump any current tweaks out of where I think I have put them. Oh well, we'll have to wait and see...
I honestly don't know why there isn't just a third upgrade option besides "do" or "don't" - something like "Bake current appearance as new DNG file and continue with PV2012 engine?"
It could even sit in the history as a Bake entry, and be basically transparent to the user.
There's not even a need to make it a selectable 3rd option - just let LR detect anything that will break (either by checking for tone curves, or comparing the before and after pixel data), then seamlessly baking the data and swapping out the images when navigating the History. if a user asks why it is so slow to upgrade, tell them that some upgraded images require extra processing (which sounds better than "it's fast, and it changed your picture for the worse").
I feel like I should point out that I am in general really happy with LR, this is just a hiccup that is frustrating and seems like it should have been both avoidable and avoided. Overall though it's still a tool I will be using a lot, and recommending to anyone who'll listen!
Ok, so for me, it looks like it does hold my tonal adjustments and negative inversion on some of my images if I keep the images in 2010.... but not in 2012. I would like to have seen the improvements like noise suppression in 2012 applied, but at least I have my legacy files intact, so far.
Noise suppression in 2012 is the same as 2010.
I think the intended meaning was "I would like to have seen the improvements like [insert any new PV2012 feature here] applied, but at least I have my legacy files intact"
In other words - I wish I could use the new tools, but phew, at least my library wasn't ruined. It's a little frustrating which part of the sentence was seen as important.
Also, user might be interested in this part from the develop module video on http://tv.adobe.com/watch/whats-new-in-lightroom-4/lightroom-4-develop-module/
Julieanne Kost (VO):
Now, depending on how much processing you've done to your images in Lightroom 3 in, say, the panel, like the Basic panel, you can see much more dramatic changes then what we just saw right there.
Changes in, say, the basic panel...?
Not something I've relied on, but it's sad to think that LR4 is also breaking tweaks made by users who (perfect validly) bought a fancy camera and want to spend 20 seconds brightening their shots up, rather than obsessing over things both in-camera and in post.
I'll say it again - why not bake a new DNG and transition to it in History, placing new edits on top of that. If (as publicised - not guessing here) the algorithms are so different that there is no direct correlation between shadows & blacks, and each slider has a finer area of influence than before, this seems to be the best (only?) way to actually give users a new & improved set of tools and a new workflow, all of which builds upon and complements their existing work, whether they are professionals or holiday snappers. For people with huge libraries, is disk space even likely to be an issue?
It's good to see such an usually fast and unepxected coding response from Adobe.
Now, if they'd update VComm after 3 years of silence. No HD or W7 support!
LR4.1 Environment & Install:
Installed LR4.1RC over LR4.0 without error.
Re-converted a 3.6 catalog, replacing the 4.0 catalog created by LR4.
Thus, trying to re-create the same conversion we did from LR3.6 to LR4.0.
Catalog: 30,000 images. 97% JPG. 1% RAW. 2% Other.
System: i7 quadcore/8 threads, 8G RAM, 4TB DASD, ATI HD4600-1G.
1. LR4.1 Video functionality completely broken and inactive
Although LR4 was fatally injured with its terriblly speed and so many programming errors that it forced us back to 3.6, losing 1 week of work, it did, at least, have the rather great video functionality of being able to render and play videos thumbs, actively shuttle play the videos within the thumb area and allow you to play the video.
In this latest LR4.1RC, all video functionality is broken or inactive. You only see a small thumb of the video in the Browse view. I don't know if the thumb that I do see for videos is perhaps a remnant from previous version catalogs and LR4.1 can't do even that. It's hard to tell. So, for us, LR4.1RC will not: (1) render Standard or 1:1 video previews (if that even applies); (2) will not shuttle play the video within the thumb area and (3) will not allow you to play the video. Totally broken. It also gives places an exclamation poiont next to each video thumb that yields the obtuse and foreign sounding text of "There was an error with photo". They are video's, not photos and just what is the "error"?
This problem occurs with every video file in our library (only about 100) and includes the formats of MOV, MP4, MPG, and AVI. Again, all were fine in 4.0.
2. LR4.1 Browse Speed
Browsing seems a bit faster than 4.0 but I had to hide the bottom Slide Scroll View and the right Detail pane. LR has too much trouble updating those panes as you Browse about at professional spped. This is not acceptable because we need the detail pane at all timers. That is, after all, the info panel which we need 100% of the time. However, we'd be happy completely disabling the slider strip selector at the bottom. It's just too slow, complicated, and dangeorus in that things change if you click the wrong slide part. Perhaps get rid of the active areas of each slide entirely. One should NOT have to do these workarounds with proper asynchronous Windows programming. Those 2 panes need to be updated asynchronously so as not to slow down the all important Browse Thumb view.
3. Mouse Interrupt Routines Still Full of Holes
As I noted previously, the mouse interrupt service routines still seem to be incompletely programmed. They do not appear to queue the screen locus at the time of a mouse action invocation. That is, when you click the mouse, the mouse cursor location on the screen is not stored with the mouse action code. As a result, if you move the mouse faster than LR can process a mouse action request (like 80% of the time), the mouse action will be invoked for the location the mouse is at some time later. This causes all manner of devastion for a fast working professional. Like selecting the wrong images resulting in, amoung other things, inadvertant deletions. Or it generates the incorrect assumption by LR that you want to MOVE the image's sort position. Weird.
Perhaps we need an LR4.2 to fix what's now broken in LR4.1
I use LR4 on my mid-2010 MBP with external display most of the time.
I can see a nice improvement on the lag after a slider is move.
The before/after preview, however, is still unusable. On a photo with mid level retouches, I should wait 5-6 to change from before to after or viceversa. I also get the beach ball during the wait.
This is the same even with 0% processor speed taken by others and with a last generation SSD under the hood.
Thank you, cdeverett! I had spoken to Julieanne Kost directly last weekend at Photoshop World about point curve problems, before 4.1 was released, and she mentioned Adobe was surprised that no one in house or testing beta caught it before the LR4 release, and that they were working on it feverishly. I see they have indeed fixed the basic bug for that now, (thanks too to Lee Jay for clarifying and helping me realize I should not update my inverted negs to 2012, and for letting me know the noise suppression was same in LR3 and LR4...Although I could have sworn several folks from Adobe claimed further improvements to NR in LR4.... but I don't see it either... what has changed of course is now you can apply it locally.) I like that "bake the LR3 changes into the DNG and bring it in for further enhancement in 2012 LR4" idea, that would be nice.
Cheers Zzzzt! - one small point though, let's keep the wishlist as "bake into a *new* associate DNG", perhaps in the Pictures/Lightroom location, so we don't ever touch the originals
- it surely can't be the hardest thing to do
- approximately doubling the stored files size of a 25MB (approx) raw file is a small concession, considering the GBs dedicated to the library and Adobe RAW Cache
- the extra processing & storage requirements are only applicable to images where we want to continue editing previously-edited images with PV2012
- the develop history would not need to be purged
- it might even speed up some workflows (i.e. the first 200 tweaks could be baked, so that LR just needs to display the baked "interim" DNG rather than recalculate the whole thing after a cache purge, system crash, version upgrade etc.
There are probably more positives, I'd be genuinely keen to hear any negatives (not necessarily point by point, but I'm happy to get this post torn apart by those who know something I don't know!)
In this issue:
A. Validated All Video Functionality Missing in LR4.1RC
B. Validated Mouse Routine's Queuing Logic Code Is Still Incomplete
C. Memory and Handle Consumption Improvements?
A. All Video Functionality Missing in LR4.1RC:
I validated my previous report of all video rendering, thumbnail-ing, thumbnail shuttle viewing and video-play functionality being completely non-functional in LR4.1RC. I performed this validation as follows:
- Ensured that LR4.1RC was not running.
- Deleted-by-rename, the entire LR4 catalog previews folder
- Opened LR4.1RC then selected all 38,000 images, including 50 videos.
- Invoked Library > Preview > Render Standard-Sized Previews
- After 6 hours, it was roughly 50%. done Let it run overnight to completion.
- Rending Error Report was popped showing all 50 odd vidoes were not rendered.
- Main GUI pane showed the Collection, "Photos that failed to render a preview".
- All video thumbnails had the (exclamation point) error flag at top-right (see below):
Activating the error flag exhibits the following error:
Note that this error is an improvement from the 1st invocation of LR4.1RC which then showed a more cryptic "error with photo" even though the items were videos. It seems that blowing away the entire preview cache and re-rendering the entire catalog improved the video error message but not anything else. Nb. LR 4.0 rendered, thumbnail-ed, shuttle-played, and full-played all the same videos w/o error.
Also note, before re-rendering the entire catalog, whilst in Loupe mode, all videos showed the expected play control bar at the bottom but it was non-functional as one might expect with video problems. After re-rendering, the play control bar is no longer shown. That could also make sense since the videos are not working anyway. I just wanted to report this variance between before & after re-rending.
Bottom line: Video support is broken, bleeding, and crying!
B. Validated Mouse Service Routine Logic Issues
I also validated that the code of the mouse interrupt service routine seems to still have design issues though it is less noticeable with the modest 4.1 performance improvements. To wit: When the user initiates a mouse action, LR does NOT seem to execute the desired action on the location where the mouse was at the time the action was requested but, rather, on the location where the mouse is when the action is finally executed.
The effects of this problem can sometimes be seen when selecting one or more thumbnails then quickly flying to a new position. One way to duplicate this problem is to display the most thumbs possible on the center pane in Browse mode with a modest catalog of at least 10,000 items. Then click the last thumb shown and, without any pause, quickly flick the mouse to the top left thumb shown. It is a bit hard to do but a few tries will pop the error:
LR obviously thinks you were holding the mouse key down while moving the mouse in order to change the thumb's sort position. This result could also be caused by other types of delays in the mouse interrupt routines such as a tardy Mouse-Up handler. The effect is the same - untrustworthy mouse behaviour. Another manifestation of the mouse service problem can be seen when quickly selecting a wide range of non-contiguous thumbnails - especially when the CPU is busy - with the result being that unwanted thumbs, desired thumbs are not selected, and/or existing selections may be deselected. The same symptom might also be seen whilst selecting a large non-contiguous set of keywords in the Detail pane at professional user speed. Some unwanted keywords may be selected (bad), desired keywords might not be selected (very bad), and previously selected keywords might be unselected (very bad).
C. Memory and Handle Consumption Improvements?
It seems that the memory footprint of LR4.1 RC has significantly been reduced. Our installation of LR4.0 was locking up about 2+GB of memory and consuming 600+ handles while LR4.1RC seems to have reduced memory to about 1.1 GB even after re-rendering all 38,000 of our catalog items and handles have been reduced to about 300+.
We also have been noticing a pesky lazy handle problem. After some runs of LR4.x, we found many handles left open pointing to the LR binaries and the catalog folders. However, this seems to be intermittent and not easily reproducible. E.g., we just searched for LR handles after having closed LR. We found none this time but did find 80 handles left open after a previous run of Photoshop. I think some code review of the handle processing in CS support routines might be beneficial.
Hope that helps.
LR4.0 worked much better for me than does LR4.1RC. The latter disabled my Wacom keys. Softproofing does not work half of the time; when I switch between Perceptual and Relative, there is no change in the histogram; if I keep at it, it will work. Big time lags. I tried trashing LR4.1 RC and re-installing LR4.0. When I did it, it didn't work nearly as well as when I originally installed it. Plus, when I re-installed LR4.0, I lost my ability to go to PS CS6 Beta. In the menu, it says that it is going there, but it always now goes to CS5.1. It is a big mess. And a mess for which many of my problems do not now seem correctable. I tried going back and forth a few times, but nothing has worked as well as my originally installed LR4.0. I actually blame myself. I know to never, never try Beta or RC versions; I just don't seem to learn. In the past, I have gotten away with it.
I feel your frustration.
From my perspective, I can't believe I bought LR3 (got 3.2, downloaded 3.6 upgrade), was impressed enough to upgrade to 4.0 shortly after its release, then one day later saw the 4.1RC was up.
"What could go wrong" I thought!! I hadn't even given myself enough time to try 4.0 properly.
We (users) should stop balming ourselves for some of this though. Sure, testing beta tools is a risk, but RC1 is not "beta", and a lot of our problems stem from 4.0, not 4.1RC1.
It seems the software industry really has got us convinced that it's OK to ship broken/incomplete products, and for some reason it's OK if an upgrade doesn't add improvements and features (relatively) seamlessly to our user experience.
It's not even like a refund would make it OK. A lot of people on here have lost a lot more than me, so much that their lost time=money equates to more than LR4's price tag. Come on Adobe - at least send us info about a 4.2 alpha that magically fixes everything so we have something to look forward to...
It seems Adobe are getting away with shoddy practises - this will seriously damage their reputation. I am not technical enough to get into beta testing, and just want something that works.
I have decided to stay away from this forum for two months - if LR isn't working properly by then I will just go out and buy Aperture without further ado. If more people did this it might make Adobe realise that their customers are actually important to their business