Adobe Employee

Question

Lightroom 3.2 Release Candidate Available on Adobe Labs

Forum|Forum|15 years ago
August 10, 2010
32 replies
49284 views

This release includes camera support, bug fixes and new features. Details here:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2010/08/lightroom-3-2-and-camera-raw-6-2-available-on-adobe-labs.html

Regards,

Tom Hogarty

Lightroom, Camera Raw and DNG Product Manager

This topic has been closed for replies.

Show previous replies

areohbee

Legend

OK, you rendering/loading/preview/cache gurus - I've got a question for you.

Some timings:

Time to load image for develop: 1st time: 10 seconds, subsequent times: sometimes 3 seconds, sometimes 10 seconds. After exiting Lr and restarting, always 10 (these are approximate).

I assume the 10 seconds is for a full rendering, and 3 is to fetch it from the ACR cache. Is this correct? Begging the question that if the 3 seconds is for loading from the cache, why can Lightroom not reload the same images from cache after restarting, and why does it sometimes take 10 seconds even without restarting when the image hasn't changed?

Further testing - I purged the ACR cache, and now just switching back and forth between the same two images, Lr3.2RC is always taking the full 10 seconds, and always creates a new entry in the cache - just switching back and forth between the same two images. So, from this, I conclude that there is still a bug in ACR cache handling, on my system, its re-rendering and filling the cache when it should be reusing cached entries.

Now, I've moved the ACR cache to a 8character-no-spaces folder in the root of my system drive and its working properly again (3 seconds to load an image thats already been viewed in develop mode - and in that case no new cache entries).

I'm afraid to touch it now that its working the way it should... I'll make an official bug report though.

Lightroom version: 3.2 RC [689365]
Operating system: Windows 7 Ultimate Edition
Version: 6.1 [7600]
Application architecture: x64
System architecture: x64
Physical processor count: 2
Processor speed: 2.2 GHz
Built-in memory: 4095.5 MB
Real memory available to Lightroom: 4095.5 MB
Real memory used by Lightroom: 940.3 MB (22.9%)
Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 1005.6 MB
Memory cache size: 557.8 MB
System DPI setting: 96 DPI
Desktop composition enabled: Yes
Displays: 1) 1920x1200, 2) 1920x1200

Rob

areohbee

Legend

After a few more hours of use - Lr3.2RC is definitely working better than Lr3.0 did for me, examples:

- Now that Lightroom is using the ACR cache properly, develop rendering times are down (since its not re-rendering unnecessarily) - dunno if this is an Lr3.2RC thing or if I would have gotten the same improvement by moving my ACR cache when I was running 3.0 - but in any case its not a problem anymore (although there is still a bug in there! - it just isn't biting me at the moment).

- Develop hasn't gotten part way through rendering, then blinked and decided to start over again - like it used to sometimes.

- Develop is showing a reasonable preview whilst rendering a "better" one, instead of just being all blurry.

- Develop hasn't refused to display rendered changes - sometimes it used to not update the rendered image on the display so I'd end up cranking the sharpening up & up until I realized it wasn't showing me the sharpening increases.

- Paint brush hasn't shown the "several second" delays that it used to sometimes (not always).

- Before / After develop view switching is much faster.

- The program hasn't slowed to a crawl, generally accompanied by excessive RAM consumption, yet.

- Lr3.2RC has only crashed once so far.

Summary: Its too soon to tell whether any of the problems I think are better will "re-emerge", but definitely some things are better than they were.

PS - I know software engineers sometimes either don't know or can't remember what all they've fixed as they've worked on things for X months. You can be sure that the list of "fixed bugs", wherever that was posted, is far from complete. And, you can be sure they've induced a few new ones while fixing the others...

==================

2010-08-11 Update #1:

-----------------------------

Part1 - Lr3.2RC still using ACR cache when it should, but has slowed down in develop mode switching between photos - takes several seconds for cached photo to be loaded - accompanied by a freezy-pause thing and/or a spinning blue ring, and sometimes a stutter... before it finishes its business... Restarting Lr did not help, nor did restarting my machine - which are the only things I tried. I did backup/optimize my catalog between the time it was working good, and the now not-so-good behavior - dunno if there's a connection...

Part 2 - After further testing, I've discovered that switching photos in develop mode is much faster at 1:1 than at fit size. I would have thought there would be some preview loadable as quickly, or more quickly than at 1:1, but thats not how its working for me at the moment. Its like its willing to load the 1:1 preview from the cache for developing, but insists on recomputing the image anew for fit view each time.

Part 3 - I could have sworn it was loading fit-size photos quickly in develop mode there for a while, but now its back to slow ~ 15 seconds (when already cached), at 1:1 its more like 3-4 seconds. Yep, its faster again. i.e. fit-size load times are usually slow (~15) but sometimes fast (for the same photos) ~5-6 seconds. So, there is an intermittent bug here - I will report.

Summary: As long as ACR cache is being employed properly (and there is a bug that was keeping it from being), 1:1 switching in develop mode is fast (3-4 seconds). Fit-size switching has a bug whose symptoms are significant lag in switching speed (~15 seconds).

Fit-size viewing in library has been quite perky once previews are built - less than one second. And 1:1 viewing in library is fairly perky (5-6 seconds once 1:1 preview is available). All stats are for non-cropped 12MP images from D300. - My system specs were given in a previous nearby post.

-------------------------

2010-08-11 Update #2:

-----------------------------

Library switching at 1:1 is now going much faster than it was - less than one second. Previously it was 5-6 seconds. (I'm talking about re-visiting after the preview has been created). It just occurred to me that sub-second timing is probably because photo is in RAM and is not being loaded from disk at all. Still begs the question of why is the behavior so inconsistent, and why is it so much slower to load a 1:1 view in library than develop. I assume in the later case Lightroom has to compute all the library stuff that it doesn't have to compute for develop, but 2-3 more seconds to initialize library panel views for a single photo seems excessive.

Summary: Lightroom has the potential to display 1:1 library previews very quickly, but there is still a bug or two that slow it down. - will report now.

-------------------------

================

Rob

A

Anonymous

Still no AVCHD = FAIL

A

Anonymous

hpmoon wrote:
Still no AVCHD = FAIL

Not really, considering that video support is merely a convenience that the majority of Lr users can't use or don't care about.

A

Anonymous

clvrmnky wrote:
hpmoon wrote:
Still no AVCHD = FAIL
Not really, considering that video support is merely a convenience that the majority of Lr users can't use or don't care about.

Says you.

And anyway, if that's how Adobe feels too, then they can stop marketing the upgrade fee to Lightroom 3 for adding video support as a key reason to fork over more dollars.

S

Sharpshooter 007

Participating Frequently

I still seem to be having issues with a difference between the Develop standard preview and the Library standard preview. As I mentioned in a post several weeks ago, the sharpening applied in Develop is not accurately shown in the Library standard view. When zoomed to 1:1, the sharpening is apparent.

I did try rebuilding the preview.

Windows 7 64 bit - Lightroom 3.2 RC.

D

dennishh

Participating Frequently

Installed 3.2RC 64 on windows 7 machine.Everything is faster including the spotting brush and gradiant tool. Adobe is on the right track.

J

JayS_In_CT

Participating Frequently

Tom Hogarty wrote:
This release includes camera support, bug fixes and new features. Details here:
http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2010/08/lightroom-3-2-and-came ra-raw-6-2-available-on-adobe-labs.html
Regards,
Tom Hogarty
Lightroom, Camera Raw and DNG Product Manager

Tom,

Thanks.. at first blush it seems more responsive. The "rendering issue" as outlined in the "LR3 Slow Rendering"

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/659107?tstart=0

thread still exists unfortunately. I will report it on the bug form. It is very annoying to have to work in some form of compromised window size on hi-res monitors. Thanks for all the team's efforts.

Jay S.

J

JimHess-DIrcbP

Participating Frequently

Windows XP, Intel Pentium 4, 3 GHz processor, 3 GB RAM. There is still approximately a two second delay between changing a slider in the develop module and when the adjustment shows on the image. A little faster than before, but still pretty sluggish. Did not see this in the beta.

L

Lee_Jay-ZyZk56

Participating Frequently

JimHess wrote:
Windows XP, Intel Pentium 4, 3 GHz processor, 3 GB RAM. There is still approximately a two second delay between changing a slider in the develop module and when the adjustment shows on the image. A little faster than before, but still pretty sluggish. Did not see this in the beta.

So, that's a pretty slow system but I have a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 at home with 2GB of RAM running XP and it doesn't show this long of a delay on a 1920x1200 screen. Do you have any panels open in Develop? What size images? I'm using 5D raw files.

J

Jasonized

Participating Frequently

The viewing speed seems back to "normal" (what ever that is!), but I am still seeing rampant memory usage.

I've run lightroom for about an hour now (with breaks), and it's locked up about 4gig of ram as "inactive", when I start it up again, it claims the ram as it's own and uses the previews apparently stored there, but won't free it up when I exit. I also rapdly get into 9/10gig+ memory usage and start swapping. Activity monitor claims LR is using all the memory, most of it as "virtual"?

Should I set it back to 32bit to see if it's only 64bit that is the problem?

Cheers!

A

Anonymous

Jasonized wrote:
I've run lightroom for about an hour now (with breaks), and it's locked up about 4gig of ram as "inactive", when I start it up again, it claims the ram as it's own and uses the previews apparently stored there, but won't free it up when I exit. I also rapdly get into 9/10gig+ memory usage and start swapping. Activity monitor claims LR is using all the memory, most of it as "virtual"?

Platform? Assuming a Mac since you used the term "inactive" note that the OS will not necessarily free memory that was in use by another app in case that app is launched again (which is likely.) This memory represents a lot of stack and dynamic libs. The key here is that if something really needs that memory, it will get it, even if the OS suggests it is held by some particular app.

In a nutshell, if you do not see memory released from an active state upon exit, it does not necessarily mean there is a leak. This is how OS X works. There are apps you can download that will force the OS to inactivate that memory. If this works, then anything that needs that 4Gb will request it and get it from the OS.

A different case is if Lr remains running after exit, holding onto resources. That is, there is still a process in some funny state upon exit. This is a different case.

If you do see this, make sure you "sample" the process to get a snapshot of what it is doing.

J

Jasonized

Participating Frequently

Hmm.. Hey clvrmnky,

while I agree with you partially, I disagree a bit as well. The majority of the ram is not being used by libraries, etc, because if I reboot, start LR up, and then exit, only a couple of hundred meg get used (most likely said libraries). Which I expected. Apprarently the memory is being used by previews, as it decreases when I "revist" a previous image.

I just ran a couple of tests, and the "inactive" memory does in fact release when demanded by another program (at least when LR is not active). I had thought it didn't get released at all, and was only swapped out when more physical memory was needed. This doesn't appear to be the case however. So while I'm still a little surprised at how much memory LR3.2 absorbs without even trying, at least it gives it up when requested politely.

And, having said that, today I ordered another 8 gig to toss into my system. Let's see if LR eats 16gig slower than 8...

So far, 3.2RC has helped me a lot; adding more memory might help me further, and thus stop me whineing on developers shoulders.

So, Thanks LR Team!

Cheers!

Charlie Choc

Participating Frequently

Looks like the export to file size is fixed, but now - at least on a mac - there is no watermark on the exported image even though one is selected and shows up when 'edit watermarks' is selected prior to export. If export to file size is not selected the watermark works just fine.

D

Dave Rosser

Participating Frequently

Great! Now all three lenses I normally carry with me (Nikkor 16-35 f/4, 50 f/1.4G and 70-300) all have distortion correction data in Lightroom .

Dave

areohbee

Legend

+1 vote - thank you, Tom & Team.

For me 3.0 worked well some of the time, and at other times - not so good. So its a hard to assess improvement after such a short while, but so far performance and stability have been good!

I'll keep ya posted...

Rob

ianbutty

Known Participant

Good to see so many bugs stamped on with this release. I've now got 3.2RC installed and I'm starting to put it through it's paces.

So far the only definable and repeatable bug I'm aware of that isn't fixed in it is keyword filters are still not picking up on synonyms. (This one is a biggie for me at the moment so it was the first thing I checked). I think it might have been raised as bug report by someone else but I've created one today just in case.

I am still getting "An unknown error occurred" which I've seen a lot since the LR3 upgrade but this appears to be directly connected to memory usage on my PC. Typically seems to happen when the Commit Charge goes over 2000M - I still don't have enough data to be able to describe the cause properly.

A prompt release of this first 'point release' is good - keep up the good work (and get the keyword filtering bug fixed for next time.... please!)

Ian.