Welcome Dialog

Welcome to the Community!

We have a brand new look! Take a tour with us and explore the latest updates on Adobe Support Community.


Lightroom: LR4 extremely slow web module gallery building

52 Votes
Community Beginner ,
Mar 11, 2012 Mar 11, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lightroom V4 web module is extremely slow. I am using TTG CE2 components and compared with LR 3 which was not very swift, LR4 is painfully slow at building and exporting gallery and pages components.
Bug Fixed
TOPICS
Desktop

Views

25

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines

correct answers 1 Correct answer

Adobe Employee , Apr 26, 2012 Apr 26, 2012
We just released a second RC version of Lightroom 4.1, available at http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/li... . This issue is fixed in the new RC build.

Votes

Translate

Translate
95 Comments
Adobe Employee ,
Mar 11, 2012 Mar 11, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The team will probably want to know what OS/Version you're running.

Senior Product Manager - Customer Advocacy - Digital Imaging

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 12, 2012 Mar 12, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I am running Windows 7 64 bit with all the latest patches and upates to the OS. I am also using TTG CE2 pages 5.2.1

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 12, 2012 Mar 12, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I should also add that I am running it on a 64 bit I7 machine with 6Gbyte of DDR3 RAM. I have fast WDC 10,000 rpm drives and a modern motherboard. The slow part of the process seems to be when the image files are being exported, each one seems to take an age as can be seen from the progress bar, the processor usage is not high during this exporting of files only about 20% and neither is the memory usage high. The hardware and storage configurations are exactly the same as when running LR 3.6 but the process is much slower and unreasonably so considering the hardware that I have invested in to get the performance.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 13, 2012 Mar 13, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Just exported 89 images into a gallery with 89 thumbnails and various other folders etc as part of a Turning Gate Client Response gallery. The export time was 14 minutes, and I was also using LR4 in develop mode

OSX Lion 10.7.3, MacbookPro 8Gb 2.2 Ghz i7.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 13, 2012 Mar 13, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hamish do you happen to be able to compare that timing with the previous version of LR? I allowed my catalog to be updated and so can't easily do a like for like test.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 13, 2012 Mar 13, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I've just exported the 89 images into a separate directory, and opened L3.5.
time to start making the web gallery ( eeish my mac does not like working with 3 versions of LR at the same time)
The export will be done with LR4 not running on my computer - of course
time start 11:07 finish time.......11:11.

EEish, that is RUBBISH LR4. I've been using the beta for weeks to upload galleries and forgotten that it was not good.
Tony, there is your proof
same exact gallery 4 mins on LR3.5 and 14 mins on LR4.
That is 3.5 times S L O W E R

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Mar 13, 2012 Mar 13, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Similar results to those of Hamish, above. Using Vista 32 bit, but no TTG or other extras, this is just a standard LR Flash Gallery. Have gone back to 3,5 until 4.2 comes out...

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 13, 2012 Mar 13, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm seeing the same slowness here. Web galleries export quickly UNTIL LR gets to the images, then things really s l o w down.
I'm also using TTG CE2 components

Windows 7 64-bit
AMD Phenom II X6 1090T
16 Gbytes RAM

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Here are my timings on a Mac, using the EXACT same HTML Gallery preset in LR3 and LR4:

LR3 114 images to HTML 1000pixel web gallery: 4min 35 sec
LR4 114 images to HTML 1000pixel web gallery: 13 min 27 sec

Mac Pro 12 core 2.66 Ghz
20 GB RAM
ATI Radeon HD 5870
OS 10.6.8

Time to get this fixed Adobe! For me, it's not worth paying for an upgrade to software that takes NEARLY 4 times as long to do a job that I do EVERY DAY.

Colin Thomas

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

To all contributors to this thread. I note that at the top of the thread where I had started it the flag indicates that one person has this problem. It seems that contributors have the option to increment this count but I don't think anyone has. I reckon that this might be important in the process of getting attention and some resources allocated to the resolution. Shall we all click on this soon so that it represents the number of complainents more accurately?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm creating a web gallery in Lightroom 4, and cannot believe how slow it's running... it's taking literally at least four times as long to run in LR 4 as the same gallery created in LR3.6. Everything else seems slower to. I'm running MacOS 10.7.3 on a MacPro 8-core 2.8 with 8GB RAM.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I, too, am experiencing the same slowness issue on export.

iMac i5 with 16Gb RAM and 10.7.3, TTG Client Response Gallery.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Same, 2011 Macbook Pro, 10.7.3, i7-8gb RAM; TTG Impact WSPP

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
People's Champ ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I did run comparison tests between LR3.6 and LR4.0 on exporting a WebGallery:

  • Win7 64-Bit

  • Intel i7-980x

  • 24GB Memory

  • Fast disks

  • HTML gallery with 451 images

  • Vast majority is CR2's from Canon 5D MkII and 1Ds MkII (approx. 15-25MB each)

  • Detail image settings: 70% quality, 1024 px


Results:

  • LR3.6: 20 minuts (approx. 22.5 images/minute or 2.7" per image)

  • LR4.0: 87.5 minutes (approx. 5.2 images/minute or 11.5" per image)



Beat

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 14, 2012 Mar 14, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Ouch Beat,

over 4 times is worse than many have noted

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 15, 2012 Mar 15, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I' m using 3.6 and will not update untill the performance problem of the web module will be fixed.

Greetings from Germany

Rainer

OSX 10.6.8
LR 3.6
MacPro quad-Core Xeon 2,8

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Mar 17, 2012 Mar 17, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Yes, things are so slow that it defeats the very purpose of this software. Cropping takes three to four seconds for each change in the process. Sliders hesitate before moving. Exports take two birthdays to complete. Everything is slow, and, again, this defeats the very purpose of this software for professional photo processing in bulk.

Win7 64, 16 GB RAM, Core 2 Quad.

Let's not ignore the elephant in the room.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 18, 2012 Mar 18, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

And my two cents... Yes, much slower (in all modules) and therefore less of a practical tool than was LR 3. What a disappointment.

We are running the app on a mid-2010 MacBook Pro with OS X Lion, 4GB RAM, plenty of HD space, etc. The graphics card is the NVIDIA GeForce 320M 256 MB.

On this machine, LR 3 performed wonderfully. Not so for LR 4. Wish we had not made the upgrade.

(By the way, any way to get a refund?)

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
People's Champ ,
Mar 18, 2012 Mar 18, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

On this machine, LR 3 performed wonderfully.


Maybe we should take a minute and reflect on what was said about LR3's performance when it came out ....

Beat

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Mar 18, 2012 Mar 18, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Your logic is off. Whether we all are critical of new products at launch is not material in addressing the fact that this version is slow. The main point you are avoiding in order to wax philosophical is that LR4 seems to be slower than the last version. We gotta expect at least THAT to not be true. Rah-rah LR4 elsewhere while we with problems try to get something done about it.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 18, 2012 Mar 18, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Completely agree. It's a significant problem.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Adobe Employee ,
Mar 20, 2012 Mar 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thanks guys, Lightroom QE was able to reproduce this issue and we have a bug logged internally to fix this in an update.

Senior Product Manager - Customer Advocacy - Digital Imaging

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Mar 20, 2012 Mar 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

When will the fix be ready?

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 20, 2012 Mar 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Same issue, 4x slower. This needs to be fixed ASAFP. Unacceptable. I'm letting others on all forums know not to upgrade if they haven't already done so.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Mar 20, 2012 Mar 20, 2012

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would really like to know if this was a known issue before release? I find it impossible to believe this wasn't caught in QC. I'm livid as I sit and watch my progress bar inch along. This is beyond unacceptable. I need to figure out how to revert back to LR3 until a fix is made. Huge nose-thumb to Adobe on this one.

Votes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines