P: LR4 extremely slow web module gallery building

[tonesshots_com]

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.

[David_Lingard]

Hi Gary, I think most are agreed that the time between LR4RC and release of v4 was so short that little could have been done and tested thoroughly. This release has been my greatest disappointment from Adobe and I hope they think long and hard before rushing things out of the door in the future.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Web gallery build process is not only slow, but has another bug. I asked this question elsewhere, but maybe related to above issue. I ask for a medium size images but large size also built, adding to the time burden to generate the gallery, the time burden to ftp, and the space consumed at my web host. I've tried various sequences to get LR4 to pay attention to my 'medium' selection, but nothing works.

[Gast]

I found that LR 4.1 RC2 has solved the time problem with building the gallery, at least in the TTG stuff. You should make certain that you have downloaded and installed the latest version.

[Douglas Fry]

The new version 4.1 is better in many ways but the web module is still clumsy. My previews which have many adjustments and now look great are 1440 pixels wide, the website larger image is 450 pixels wide, so why not just resize the jpg to fit? LR4.1 goes back to the RAW file to generate that 450pixels image which is so inefficient and takes FOREVER. Websites arent designed to be colour critical applications or used for print - they will be viewed on a wide range of quality of monitors for image selection and review only.

If you make all the previews and then rename the folder of RAWs, LR then is forced to use the previews to make a website and does so in about 5 seconds.....

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Douglas, I'm going to update this to fixed, because the bug itself is solved now.

Post it as a separate 'idea' though so that other people can vote on that feature being added too.

[Douglas Fry]

OK will do

[turbo-alf]

I still have this problem, using the newest release. 150 pictures to a simple html-galery takes over 40 minutes. How can I improve the software?
Lightroom 4.1, MacBook Pro 2.66 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo 4GB Memory, Lion.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Douglas, if you tell me how to do it, I'll be happy to add another voice to your suggestion.

[helen_gossweiler]

As a comparison, I just did a Web Gallery export:

• 
  
• Win7 64-Bit
  
• Intel i7-980x (6 cores @ 3.33GHz)
  
• 24GB Memory
  
• Fast disks
  
• HTML gallery with 369 images
  
• All CR2's from Canon 5D MkII (21 MP)
  
• Detail image settings: 70% quality, 1024 px
  

The export of 369 images took 29 minutes, whereby LR used about 50-60% of my CPU.

Beat

[turbo-alf]

Why can LR not work as fast as Bridge regarding webgallery building
(just local, no FPT) ?

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Choose to Export the web gallery rather than Upload the web gallery, and then it will be local, no FTP.

[turbo-alf]

same problem using the gallery-tool for a local gallery..

[julianj55407750]

I've only just got around to exporting Web content from LR4... The performance is not up to par, updating my galleries used to be measured in minutes in LR3.6. It's now taking hours in LR4.

[rwbarbee]

have you updated to LR 4.1? That has made generating galleries a lot faster than the initial LR 4 release

[julianj55407750]

Yes I am running 4.1, the gallery generation (I'm also using TTG) isn't too bad. It's the export that is painfully slow.

I used to be able to generate and export 2 or 3 galleries with a couple of hundred pics a piece in each within an hour. Now it takes all afternoon 😞

[Gast]

I don't think it is ever a good idea to export from LR, no matter what version. I always export locally to the HD and then use FileZilla to upload to the site. MUCH BETTER.

[julianj55407750]

I am exporting from LR4 to the HD, I don't use the Upload option which is something that wasn't great even in LR3.

[Gast]

Well, Julian, LR 3 did have the export to FTP.

[julianj55407750]

I don't know what you are getting at? LR3 also had the Export (to HD) and Upload (to FTP) options. Performance in LR3 was much better for the export to HD option that LR4 is. I also found the upload option slower than exporting to HD and using a FTP client to upload myself. I haven't used that option in LR4 as it wasn't great in LR3.

All I want is the export to HD to be as fast in LR4 as it was in LR3. At the moment it is painfully slow. I'm considering an install of LR3 which I'll export jpegs from LR4 to just so I can use the faster Web export.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Im on LR4. On a Mac. Its taken all day to make a web file from 375 images. What is wrong with LR? Im going to start using Capture One Pro for contact sheets. This stinks and I don't see any solution on this site.