Skip to main content
Participating Frequently
March 6, 2012
Answered

Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 4.x

  • March 6, 2012
  • 188 replies
  • 629812 views

Anyone else notice that lightroom 4 is slow? Ligtroom 3 always ran fast on my system but Lightroom 4 seemlingly lags quite a bit.

My system is:

2.10 ghz Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge

8 GB Ram

640 GB Hard Drive

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit

Message title was edited by: Brett N

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer Victoria Bampton LR Queen

    It's now impossible to see the wood for the trees in this whopping 43-page long thread.  Many of the original 4.0-4.2 performance issues have since been resolved, and it's impossible to figure out who is still having problems, and what they can try.

    I've started a nice clean thread to continue this discussion for 4.3 and later. http://forums.adobe.com/thread/1117506  Thanks to Bob_Peters for the suggestion.  I'm locking this one, otherwise it'll continue to get increasingly unweidly, but please feel free to continue existing discussions on the new thread.

    188 replies

    Participant
    March 26, 2012

    Same here. Rubbish performance on my system. LR3 was very fast but LR4 is just slow and often crashes without a reason.

    The overall system performance is also rubbish when i export pictures. In LR3 it was possible to run two export batches at one time without issues working in windows or surfin the web. With LR4 everything slows down. Even my cursor ist struggelin.

    Dell Precision T3500, Intel Xeon 2,4 GHz, 12 GB RAM, All Data on an OCZ Vertex 2.

    I´ll switch back to LR3 until Adobe will release a real final. LR4 looks for me just like a pay-beta.

    tfitz100
    Participant
    March 25, 2012

    While I haven't been *as* troubled by the slowness issues reported, I did see them a lot in the beta where the system would just slow down to a crawl when trying to make simple Develop Module adjustments.

    That being said, I DO notice a delay when making some changes with some adjustment brushes. Up to a second or more sometimes. When I use the Tint brush and change the Tint on the slider, I have to wait about a second for the changes to propogate up into the image. This is not tolerable.

    I currently have an i7-2600K with 8GB of memory, a SSD drive for the LR4 cache and a seperate drive for the actual catalog and RAW files being used, so it's certainly NOT a harware issue as so many have pointed out.

    Adobe needs to investigate this problem now. This should be the TOP priority for the development team, nothing else. I've seen the list of issues they have on their developers forum and they are all issues that need to be solved, but not nearly as serious as this one. Adobe engineers should be working AROUND the CLOCK on this one, period. Everything else should be on the backburner until then.

    Another issue is that Adobe has NOT SAID ANYTHING about this problem to this community. That, in and of itself, is a problem--almost worse than the actual problem. A simple report of their progress thus far would suffice. I'm a senior software engineer, and if my team let a problem like this go for so long without any acknowledgement whatsoever, our heads would be on a platter with our company.

    Participant
    March 25, 2012

    There is no doubt - Lightroom 4 IS slow on any hardware configuration, much slower when comparing to Lightroom 3.x.  I doesn't matter how beefy the machine is (my is i7 with 8 CPUs and 16GB of RAM) which made the previous version fligh.  I descovered another bug: syncing of keywords does NOT work.  (and I did not test the rest of the fields). I believe that the product was rush to the market, and was not tested sufficiently. Not impressed with Adobe on this

    Blind Monk
    Participating Frequently
    March 25, 2012

    I was successful importing keywords in a Text file -tab separated values (TSV) format -into LR4. No problems using a TSV file at all.

    A decent explanation of how this type of file should look can be found below (just forget that they use MS Excel as the example software):

    http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/TSV.html

    Export lightroom 3 keywords into Save the resulting file as a .txt file, and import.

    March 24, 2012

    I'm replying to say that I'm experiencing much of the same slowdown that everyone else is experiencing. I've noticed a few things:

    1. If I pull up the Windows task manager to see my CPU usage, I can see that just moving the mouse over Lightroom causes my CPU to spike between 50% and 80%.  This could be causing a lot of the problems with the sliders, since I'm trying to use the mouse to adjust the sliders at the same time that Lightroom is trying to calculate the changes.

    2. I use a mouse/keyboard sharing program called "Mouse Without Borders" from Microsoft labs. It lets me use a single keyboard/mouse for two computers. With this program running my CPU spike is higher than without it running.

    3. Deleting my preferences file helped bring down the maximum CPU usage a bit.

    4. Opening a new catalog rather than my converted Lightroom 1 --> 2 --> 3 --> 4 catalog helped bring down the maximum CPU usage a bit. I am still hoping to be able to use my existing Lightroom catalog.

    5. I have an NVidia graphic card. I used the following NVidia control panel 3D settings, which helped bring down the maximum CPU usage a bit. These same settings made Lightroom 3 brushes work. Without these settings I could barely brush on any effect:

         Anisotropic filtering: OFF

         Antialiasing - Gamma correction: OFF

         Antialiasing - Mode: Override any application setting

         Antialiasing - Setting:  2x (2xMS)

         Antialiasing - Transparency: Off

         Buffer-flipping mode:     Use block transfer

         CUDA - GPUs: All

         Enable overlay: Off

         Exported pixel types: Color indexed overlays

         Maximum pre-rendered frames:  3

         Multi-display/mixed-GPU acceleration: Compatibility performance mode

         OpenGL Rendering GPU: Quadro FX 2700M

         Power management mode: Prefer maximum performance

         Threaded optimization: Auto

         Triple buffering: Off

         Texture filtering - Anisotropic filter optimize: Off

         Texture filtering - Anisotropic sample op: Off

         Texture filtering - Negative LOD bias: Allow

         Vertical sync: Force on

    That said, I have returned some performance to my machine, but Lightroom is still highly unusable. Where I used to be able to process a few hundred photos in an hour, it now takes hours to process 30 or 40, just because the response in the program is so unbearably slow.

    My machine

    Lenovo W700DS, with the second laptop screen turned off.

    6GB RAM

    512GB SSD primary disk, Lightroom catalog, previews, and imported images on this disk.

    1TB secondary disk, unused by Lightroom.

    Intel Core2 Extreme processor (processor is a bit slower, which does affect my import/export times, but I render 1:1 previews on import and wait for the CPU to settle down before attempting to work)

    1920x1080 primary display

    Standard previews set to 2048.

    Windows 7 64-bit Professional edition

    I routinely work with full-resolution RAW images from my Canon 5D Mark II (very large).

    I hope this information helps shed some light on the problems. Can anyone else confirm that their CPU spikes just moving the mouse across the application? Not even pressing buttons or trying to do anything. Just move.

    Thanks,

    Geoff

    kwdaves
    Inspiring
    March 25, 2012

    For those with slider problems, widening the right panel by clicking on its left edge and dragging it to the left may help a bit by lengthening the slider lines (whatever their proper names are).

    For those who have sluggish behavior overall, for example taking 10+ secs to generate a preview in the Library module, deleting and then regenerating your standard previews may work wonders. Please, please. Someone be the guinea pig and try it.

    March 25, 2012

    I deleted all my previews. It didn't make a difference for me. I still have

    problems with CPU when moving the sliders and moving my mouse.

    Sent from my iPhone

    Participating Frequently
    March 24, 2012

    Well, Jeff Van de Walker's reply back on March 14, post 229 page 5 of this thread stated that Adobe was looking into the problem and  "that development may go dark on the forums while trying to research this problem". That was 10 days ago now, must be a pretty big problem.

    March 24, 2012

    Unless eliminated... the following always seem to be the problem. XD 

    1. Uninstall ALL Virus / Spyware / Firewall software, reboot and compare retest. 'protection' programs auto update and are often overly agressive.  Keep kids off of work machines. buying them their own computer always saves money in the long run.
     

    2. Are heatsinks and fans in good shape? (Even if they are spinning... make sure they are moving air adequately and don't stop too easily) Computers on Hardwood floors, around pets, smoke and computers in workshops and near kitchens need to be watched more closely.)

    3. Notebooks suck in more crud than desktops... the fans are small and fail more frequently... not to mention the vents get blocked VERY easily (CPU / GPU throttle themselves to prevent thermal failure which helps keep the magic smoke from being released.)


    ---  Initially, my slow LR4 issue was handled with a few cf card cases to lift notebook off the table a bit... LR4 was simply heating up my GPU more than LR3.  A 5v fan powered from usb port keeps everything humming along now...

    The preview render times are definately slower...  Does anyone know if previews pre render or if they run in the background automatically ofter imports?  I sense a post import lag...


    Note: SSD should be mandatory for any production machine.
    -=gb=-

    Participating Frequently
    March 24, 2012

    Again, the performance issues being described are not related to Virus protection, heatsinks and fans or notebook issues.  I have an SSD, 16gb of memory, 1000watt power supply, i7-2600 running at 3.4ghz. Lightroom 3 screams on my computer as does processing/rendering of RAW files.  I have a very good graphics card and a gaming rig set up for optimum airflow.

    LR4 has issues.  Moving sliders has a 1 second lag that gets worse the more you edit, I can only imagine how bad it must be for most folks that do not have a top of the line computer.  I have cache set at 50gb on the SSD and I still have an additional 50gb on the SSD for spare.  The catalog and previews are all on the SSD.  I have plenty of hard disk space in reserve and I'm using WD Caviar blacks at 7500rpms.

    Those that keep posting to this thread that the issues are computer and software related are not adding value to the thread and this is not a reasonable answer from Adobe nor is the link above for optimizing.  It is a great link for general users and folks that have issues running LR of any version. For those of us that are used to high performance and responsiveness of LR3 to now suddenly be struggling with LR4, we're trying to say there is a problem that needs to be fixed.

    Known Participant
    March 24, 2012

    I agree. And, we need a response from Adobe and a quick fix soon. When you create such an essential piece of software, you need to be very careful how you update it and test it thoroughly on real world image libraries.

    steinflaten
    Participating Frequently
    March 23, 2012

    FAST !   As fast as  LR 3   for me ??

    :

    Maskinvareoversikt:

      Modellnavn:    MacBook Pro

      Modellidentifikator:    MacBookPro6,2

      Prosessornavn:    Intel Core i7

      Prosessorhastighet:    2,66 GHz

      Antall prosessorer:    1

      Antall kjerner totalt:    2

      Nivå 2-buffer (per kjerne):    256 kB

      Nivå 3-buffer:    4 MB

      Hukommelse:    8 GB

      Koblingshastighet for prosessor:    4.8 GT/s

    Stein

    Stein Flaten
    Participant
    March 23, 2012

    I just removed LR4 from my machine (to keep using LR3 until LR4 is fixed.) The preview folder created by LR3 for my LR3 catalog had a size of ~500Mb. However, the size of the converted LR3 catalog preview folder (as preformed by LR4) was 17.5Gb! I am wondering if the catalog conversion process may be part of the problem.

    Inspiring
    March 23, 2012

    I experienced the same. I renamed the catalog and let LR4 reconstruct the preview.cache. The size fell to normal levels and performance went from unusable to tolerable.

    Participant
    March 23, 2012

    I didn't find out about that matter until right now. It's just the same for me. The LR4 previews consume 300 times the space of LR 3 folder.

    Another fact that supports my opinion to cancel LR4 usage.

    Participant
    March 22, 2012

    LR 4 is UNUSEABLE (at least by me) in its current form because of the "slider lag" in the develop module. If it does not run properly on my computer it is not a matter of processing horsepower! LR 3 response time was essentially instantaneous with "write changes to XMP files" ON and 2048 previews. My RAW files sizes are 15Mb and larger. Using 2010 processing does not speed things up appreciably.

    I have both LR 3 and LR 4 installed. LR 4 seemed OK at first until I started to use the Develop module. Could there be a conflict with LR 3?

    Does anyone have just LR 4 installed that is not having theses performance problems?

    Peter

    Machine spec: 2x Xeon 3.33Mhz processors (16 cores), 24 Gb 1333Mhz RAM, 4x 256Gb SSD RAID running 64-bit Win7 OS and programs, ATI Radon 5900 running 2x 30"monitors @ 2560x1600.

    Participating Frequently
    March 22, 2012

    Ok, thank you, I was thinking of overclocking to 4.0ghz or finding an SSD big enough for my catalog, but if you're still getting lag with those specs I won't bother.

    I've gotten accustomed to the vastly superior camera raw options, so I hate to go back to LR3. Really irritating. Was this intended for computers of the future or what? It's caused a huge bump in the road for my work, thinking I could safely switch everything over to LR4, not to mention being unable to edit in Photoshop without a bunch of trouble. Premature release!

    Participating Frequently
    March 22, 2012

    James,

    Computers of the future? No, this is the spec stated on the Adobe download site:-

    Windows

    • Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® 64 processor
    • Microsoft® Windows Vista® with Service Pack 2 or Windows® 7 with Service Pack 1
    • 2GB of RAM
    • 1GB of available hard-disk space
    • 1024x768 display
    • DVD-ROM drive
    • Internet connection required for Internet-based services*
    Inspiring
    March 22, 2012

    Update to my original post. I have been using LR4 on CR2/Nefs in Lightroom, seems OK after having been 'slow' initially, but export a CR2 file to CS5 rendered by LR4 and editing the resulting TIF in LR4 is once agin slow in responding to the sliders, but then the screen blanks out while it redraws the image after every adjustment which is where it gets to be unusable.

    There is no AV running, its an iMac 2.8  i5, 4g memory, Running 10.6, Cache is set to 1G, changes are written to XMP files, Catalogue size is 209.5meg.

    Unlike other posts, this is single monitor. Detailf for which are: Chipset is ATI Radeon HD5750, 1g VRAM, Driver 01.00.417

    I am not about to install SSDs for cache (or similar) but all help appreciated.

    Participating Frequently
    March 22, 2012

    I think that it is pretty definite that having your changes being written to xmp automatically can cause a pretty fair performance hit. You may try turning that off and seeing how much of a difference it may make. You can always run a folder update when you are done working on that set. How big are the TIFs you are working with? I'm not quite sure how xmp writing works with TIFs. Might it be changing the internal metadata?

    Community Expert
    March 22, 2012

    xmp metadata is written inside the tiff file. It's generally a bad idea to

    have automatic xmp turned on, especially while working with non-raw files.

    This has always been slow. Better to do a command-S when you really need it.