P: Quick Develop VERY slow on my system (6 sec vs 1 sec in LR 5.7)

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Lightroom CC
Quick Develop
When I make any changes to a file (D800 NEF) in Quick Develop in Loupe view, I get a message "Loading" for about 4-6 seconds (forever) before the change is rendered. In LR 5.7, the same thing takes less than a second.
Fresh install of LR CC.
System Preferences reset to default, just to be sure.
"Use Graphics Processor" enabled (no difference when it is disabled)
MacBookPro 2014 fully loaded (i7,16GB,1TBssd) OSX 10.9.5
No other software running.
This makes "Quick Develop" largely unusable!
Please fix, ASAP.
Thanks.

The new GPU assisted speed in Develop module seems to be working fine, is appreciated, and is getting closer to how it should be.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

What resolution monitor? And what size do you have set for previews in Catalog Settings?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

720p and 1080p. Changing monitor size has no effect.
Tried all 4 sizes (minimal, standard, smart, 1:1) of preview and no previews. No effect.

No matter what I do in CC, "Quick Develop" is VERY slow (4-8 sec to render).
No matter what I do in 5.7, "Quick Develop" is reasonable speed (<1 sec to render).

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Try disabling the GPU drawing in Lightroom, restarting and see if the speed has improved. (just to see if the cause might be the GPU driver or code)

[simonsaith]

GPU should not matter in the Quick Develop case. The screen and preview sizes matters. Do you have other tasks running in the background, like Lr mobile sync, face detection/indexing?

[simonsaith]

You can click the Identity Plate area on upper left and show the activity center to see if there are any current long running background tasks.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

OK. Now we're getting somewhere.
Is NOBODY else seeing this problem?

5.7 Is significantly outperforming CC in almost every situation.
No other activity. No Mobile sync. Face detection is turned off.

With my MBP retina display set to 1680x1050 (Intel Iris GPU), CC is extremely slow (6-8 sec) on even small (24MP) NEFs and DNGs. But it is reasonably responsive (1sec) on 24MP JPGs.

Same files in 5.7 at same resolution are less than 1 second.
So LR 5.7 works just fine in all situations, but LR CC is having real problems in some of the identical situations where 5.7 is working fine.

With my MBP retina display set to "Best for Retina" (about 1200x800), CC is much better at about 2 seconds on 24MP and 36MP NEFs and DNGs, and instant on a 600x600 JPG.

At "Best for Retina" (about 1200x800) display resolution, 5.7 is the same speed as CC.

[simonsaith]

At 1680x1050 retina, Lr would need to render about 6.9MP image per setting change, depending on the actual image size, it might just crossed the pyramid threshold to need to process the full resolution raw file. You can try to experiment with the zoom level (1:4 or 1:2) or window sizing to see which one works best for you.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

In both cases (1680x1050 and 1200x800) the rendered display image is miniscule, as I am only viewing a "Fit" preview image which is about 800x530 (.5MP) or 600x400. And why should CC be having such trouble when 5.7 is just fine?
I am talking about "Fit" with both side panels showing.
When I turn off the left side panel, so that the "Fit" preview image is now slightly larger (700x460), 5.7 is unphased, but CC starts to slow down already.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Simon,
Thanks for your help so far. And thank your team for working on improving Lightroom. You've made great progress since v1.
At this point, I'm going to drop out, as I don't get paid by Adobe to troubleshoot and develop your software.
I'll try it again at v6.1 or 6.2 or whenever it is ready for release.
Dave

[simonsaith]

Hi David,

In my testing, the standard preview size in the catalog settings definitely makes a difference to me in terms of the QD rendering performance. In Lr 6, the default standard preview size is Auto, which is the largest screen size (long edge) for your attached monitor(s). That would make a difference between 6.0 and 5.7. In 5.7, you can set to one of a few predefined standard sizes only. In Lr 6, if I set the standard preview size to 2048 on my MBP retina display, the QD change is almost instant.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Simon,
I really appreciate the extra effort and help you are giving here.
I'll take your info and try it.
Thanks
-Dave

[mmpro]

I was on LR 5.7 and also am having problems with Lightroom 6 being very slow after converting my image folder to LR6 the image loads much slower and if I delete an image it moves to the next thumbnail image but then wont allow any further motion back or forward. I have to then re-click on the thumbnail to move backwards or forward on the image thumbnails along the bottom of the screen.

LR5.7 if you delete an image it will then move to the next image and you can move backwards or forward along the thumbnails.

This is very frustrating and must certainly be a bug in LR6?

[simonsaith]

In develop or library?

[Shark69]

I have tha same problem in develop moule.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

i had to disable gpu and it got much better, but the import is very slow, and lightroom becomes unusable. well pretty much if any process is being done it the background i cant use lightroom.
didnt have this problem with previous version.

[Shark69]

https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1828580

[geonag92309069]

Go to lightroom preferences - performance and uncheck "use graphics Processor"

[psd photography]

I've now switched off my gpu support, and put the preview quality at its lowest and reduced the cache size to whatever LR suggested (40GB - would this make a difference to speed of LR in general?) Previously I had it up at 80GB.
I assumed that if my processor could handle it, then a bigger cache might speed up performance.
But still LR is sluggish, and only really since I installed the latest CC update last week. Another major delay is when exporting images, the delay before LR even starts doing anything (and the task bar comes on) can be up to 30 seconds, where it always used to be under 5 secs.
I'm using a imac, 2.7GHz Intel Core i5, 16GB RAM, and it's about 5yrs old. Has latest version of Yosemite on it - 10.10.3

[DCB42303]

I am having same SLOW issues with LR CC. Tried resolution changes, etc but LR 5.7 is 50 times faster. I have solid state hard drive, i7 prosessor, 8 GB Ram, etc No issues with LR 5.7 but CC is not working for me. It is so slow and if editing hundreds of photos, eventually crashes.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

I'm having the same slowness issue. My LR 5.7 was fine, but LR 6 is SLOW doing EVERYTHING. For example, when changing to the next picture in Loupe mode, the keywords take 5.-7 seconds to load.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Have you optimized the catalog lately? Do you see the same issues with a clean test catalog?

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Adobe now well knows of this slowness issue in LR 6. It is therefore up to Adobe (not the customers) to do the appropriate troubleshooting and development.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

There are some performance issues they're working on, but at this stage we have no way of knowing whether you're seeing the same issue or something different. Of course you're welcome to wait and see whether the fixes in the next dot release solve the problems you're having, but since there's not an easy downgrade option, it may be worth your time to try a couple of troubleshooting steps. Up to you.

[FeedbackCommunityMember]

Thanks, Victoria. Yes, for those who did not install v6 as a parallel trial "beta", that would be important.
Nevertheless, it seems to me that Adobe would test an unoptimized catalog vs a clean test catalog, and either respond that Adobe is working on fixing it, or that Richard should optimize his catalog because Adobe found in their testing that re-optimizing the catalog makes a big difference.
We have lots of feedback from customers, and almost none from Adobe. Not very equitable or forthright on Adobe's part.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Great to hear you were sensible David! Of course, they'll be busy trying to reproduce these problems, but lot of these issues will be specific to users systems and catalogs. There won't be a single wholesale fix, because that would have been found before release. There's lots of different elements involved here, so it's all about detective work at this stage. That's why specifics from users are so important at the moment.

For those who upgraded their working catalogs, optimizing the catalog, pausing sync, pausing face recognition, checking preview size in catalog settings, checking hard drive space especially on the boot driver, updating the graphics card driver and trying with and without the GPU preference are well worth a try.