Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 3.x

[laurencec]

Hi

I just upgraded from lightroom 2.7 to lightroom 3. I then proceeded to import my old catalog. this all went fine but lightroom is so slow, the thumbnail previews take forever to load if I manage to have the patience to wait  for them.

is there a quick solution?? How can it be sped up?

thanks

Laurence

Message title was edited by: Brett N

[Gavin Farrington]

Thanks for the tip, Melissa.  In my case I've tried doing manual optimizations (File -> Optimize Catalog) and I have the box checked in the backup prompt at exit to optimize, which occurs daily.  Hope this works for others, but it hasn't made a difference for me.

[vinsolo-TR1ZPE]

Incredible thread. Long with many ideas but few solutions.

LR3 is SLOW. Makes me reconsider Capture NX2---NO, not really.

Still, I am going back to LR2.7 and hope and pray for an upgrade solution.

I use iMac 27" i7 (4 core), 8GB, 10.6.3 and LR2.7 was "lightning".

[vinsolo-TR1ZPE]

I should have added that the library I am using currently has fewer than 6000 images, jpg,tif,nef. Catalog optimized each day. New hard drive with 13% space used.

I agree with someone that 3.0 beta 2 was fast,fast bit 3.0 is slow, slow.

[Mikkasa]

vinsolo wrote:

I use iMac 27" i7 (4 core), 8GB, 10.6.3 and LR2.7 was "lightning".

That's a better specced iMac than mine & I've seen an overall performance increase. Have you upped your ACR cache?

[Guest]

vinsolo wrote:

Incredible thread. Long with many ideas but few solutions.

LR3 is SLOW. Makes me reconsider Capture NX2---NO, not really.

Still, I am going back to LR2.7 and hope and pray for an upgrade solution.

I use iMac 27" i7 (4 core), 8GB, 10.6.3 and LR2.7 was "lightning".

You may not like to hear that, your statement that LR3 is SLOW is wrong in that way, because simply it is not true. It is slow on *your* machine, but very quick and responsive on my current Desktop PC. I have a Dell work notebook, on which Lightroom is not a real quick runner just acceptable. However, I don't think that Adobe can do much about it, because I think that the slowness of the notebook is mainly rooted in the hardware components (and some bottlenecks herein) and possibly driver issues, at least thing where Adobe probably can't do so much about it. My old desktop surely had interior bottlenecks, which made LR 2 and 3 run rather slow. Despite an overall good specification (at time of purchase), the manufacturer opted for a rather cheap mainboard (which I did not notice when buying), which had a rather poor internal performance. Such hardware weaknesses, which aren't recognizable easily, may affect some software more than the other. Probably, Adobe will find possibilities to optimize the code for performance, but I would not expect a solution via this thread.

[frank0239]

It's great that Adobe are taking an interest in this.  May I add my observations, for what they are worth?

Dell XPS 420 Intel E8400 3G core duo 4G RAM

Vista 32 SP2

nVidia 8800GT latest drivers

HDD Seagate 500GB X3 non-RAID

Catalogue ca 3000 mixture of Canon CR2 (8M), DNG (18M) TIF (up to 100M)

Installed LR1.4, LR3b2 uninstalled and catalogue deleted, LR3 installed over LR1.4, importing catalogue. I optimised and backed up my catalogue immediately after installation.

Cache 5G on Drive K

I have no problem with RAM consumption.  My RAM rest usage is about 35% which rises to 50% when LR is opened.  Opening a file to edit increases this to 54% which then falls back when the file is closed.

Edits increase my CPU usage, during the edit, in both cores to almost 100% falling back immediately afterwards.

Some particular points:

1. Found LR3 slow to open collections/folders and slow to develop - discovered this was due primarily to creating previews.

2. Rendered all previews - opens collections quickly

3. Develop functions work fine with the exception of the lens correction module which remains slow compared with LR1.4.

3.1  Perspective adjustment was particularly slow, apparently due to LR background activities (I can't see what these are).  After rendering previews, these background activities were greatly reduced and perspective adjustment fine - if I wait for background activity to subside, if there is any.

3.2  Chromatic aberration sliders were dire, after sorting previews they are usable but I have to wait a second or two after each change (DNG 18M).  Does depend on file size, doesn't depend on preceding develop history.

Message was edited by: frank0239 for silly typos

[Accolon66]

Have also Performance Problems:

- like most others in dev. Module RAW Rendering

- Cropping Tool

- Compare Function when zoom to 100%

- and more

I'm working with:

- HP Z600 Workstation

- Intel Xeon 5560

- 6GB RAM

- 2 sep. Disks On 1. Program and RAW Cache - On 2. RAW's, DB and Previews

- Grafic NVidia Quadro FX1500 with dual DVI to 30" TFT

Hope the Problem will soon be located. Yesterday when I worked 100 Pics I had double Time then in LR 2.7 before.

Thanks and Greetings from rainy Switzerland

Markus

[mrphildogUK]

Here's some more specs:

Windows 7 64bit Home Premium

Intel Core 2 Quad @2.6GHz (Q9400)

Asus P5Q Delux MB

4 GB RAM

Nvidia 8800GT (257.21 drivers (latest ones))

Worked very well on beta 2 but slow performance on images with local edits in full release version.

Weird mouse lag when using spot tool as per this thread: http://forums.adobe.com/message/2905166#2905166 spot tool mouse cursor lags badly like system is struggling but CPU is nowhere near maxed out (50% tops) and RAM usage is at around 2Gb. Once I move mouse off the image cursor moves just fine.

Also, resizing or using the local adjustment brush can lag on images with lots of local adjustments. This slow behaviour continues even if I move to another image but rectifies itself after going to library module and back to develop to work on the new image.

Beta 2 performance was much better for me.

[davidnaylor83]

Well, the main difference between 3b2 and 3.0 is the lens correction.

People with problems: Are you using profile based lens corrections? What happens if you completely disable the lens correction panel for all your photos?

[takyhonza]

It seem like typical example of marketing trick. On Adobe website we can read:

"Accelerated performance! NEW

Get your digital photography tasks done fast and have more time to shoot and promote your work. Already quick performance has been dramatically accelerated in Lightroom 3, saving you time from first look to final image."

But the truth is opposite. New Lightroom 3 is aproximatly twice slower than older version. To be honest I must say the new output image quality is much better and the speed is possibly caused by this complicated processing. But it can't explain slowiness of scrolling in grid view, switching betwwen pictures in develop module or switching between modules... I don't know any program (including 3D CAD/CAM, FEM analysis, Photoshop atc.) with slow user interface like this.

[Guest]

takyhonza wrote:

It seem like typical example of marketing trick. On Adobe website we can read:

"Accelerated performance! NEW

Get your digital photography tasks done fast and have more time to shoot and promote your work. Already quick performance has been dramatically accelerated in Lightroom 3, saving you time from first look to final image."

But the truth is opposite. New Lightroom 3 is aproximatly twice slower than older version. To be honest I must say the new output image quality is much better and the speed is possibly caused by this complicated processing. But it can't explain slowiness of scrolling in grid view, switching betwwen pictures in develop module or switching between modules... I don't know any program (including 3D CAD/CAM, FEM analysis, Photoshop atc.) with slow user interface like this.

From what I can observe Adobe is very true with their advertisement. I can only agree that LR 3 performance has increased significantly (ok, may be not dramatically) on my machine! The only way to come to a solution is to see, if we can observe a certain configuration pattern (hardware, drivers, etc.), which cause bottlenecks in the execution of some of Lightrooms operations. You should not underestimate the influence of not properly selected, cheap hardware components with sloppy programmed drivers on top or improperly configured hardware shipped by manufacturers. Even if LR2 ran quickly on your machine, this does not guarantee that the performance problems you have with LR 3 now, aren't related to configuration issues on the very same machine.

What we see now is very normal in a software project: issues are flocking out, which could not be detected during the test phase, because you will come accross them only when the product is finally out.

Kind regards

Thomas

[borisZelsky]

I made a video that shows how slow LR3 basic interface is:

My system stats:

I made a new catalog and imported 16 images in it.

[Lou_Gonza]

I'm seeing the same thing as you and I have 8gb of RAM and dual 2.6ghz processors. With the same setup, 2.7 was WAY faster for me.

The other issue I now see is after I initiate the importing of RAW files, it imports the images, then creates previews. I apply a preset on import. Once it's done, I then attempt to browse throught images. As I scroll through the images, and my thumbs move to the left, I see the thumbs snap to my preset. In 2.7 it was already done when the import and previews were built. Now it seems to not apply the preset until it appears in the film strip at the bottom of the screen. So now it's worse because I can't scroll efficiently. Everytime a new thumb shows, my PC churns and runs slow becasue its working on the previews that are now showing in the filmstrip and applying the preset at that moment. Not at import like 2.7. So moving through a large set of images is horribly painful. And according to LR, there are no process running at top left of the screen. Hmmm.

[Guest]

I suspect it has something to do with the videocard drivers. I'm on a modest rig: Asus P5n7A-VM mobo, with nividia  geforce 9300 integrated graphics, intel E5200 duo core at 2,5ghz and 8gb ram,  but I see no lag at all, when scrolling through my images. There are 20446 .nef files ( some layered tiffs of about 200mb too ) in my catalog.

Its strange that LR seems to work very well on my modest machine, while on higher spec'd boxes, it seems to run so slow?

[Guest]

I have converted to 3.0 from 2.7 and have significant slowdown problems.

For the record, let me state what isn't the problem so we can get down to what may be:

1.   My system is not the problem - a core i7-975 12 GB with 4 TB of raid 0 HDD holding my database of pictures.

2.   My OS is not the problem - 64 Bit Windows 7 PRO

3.   My HDD does not require defragging.

4.   etc.

I say all this because LR 2.7 runs without problem on the same system, the same OS, and the same picture database.

The symptoms of the problem are:

1. LR 2.7 runs fine, LR 3.0 does not.

2. Some people experience the problem, some don't.

3. LR has a new preview engine.

4. My entire system runs slow when LR 3.0 is active.

5. LR 3.0 performance problems are widespread, does not matter what feature is being utilized it would seem.

I submit the following:

   I believe that Lightroom 3.0 is rendering previews in the background in order to convert to their new engine.  It slows down the entire system. My core i7-975 with four cores and hyperthreading shows constant heavy thread activity across all 8 threads.  I submit that when all this is finished, that 3.0 will be just fine.  Those with small databases (or none) are already at that point and happy.

   As I type this I am experiencing excrutiating responsiveness as I have LR 3.0 rendering my entire 27,000 previews at the same time on this system.

   If I am correct on this, then 3.0 should be fine when it finishes. We will see.

   By the way, if I am correct on this (a big if!) - shame on Adobe for not chiming in to this forum and helping us out!

Best Regards,

Sherlock

[Pascal_O]

Sad but you are probably not correct. I had 18000 or so pictures into my database and had no slowdown with LR3. LR3 was just fast and responsive after the first second I had it installed (and I have a computer lot slower than yours!)

Pascal.

[Butch_M]

sherlocc wrote:

I submit the following:

   I believe that Lightroom 3.0 is rendering previews in the background in order to convert to their new engine.

   By the way, if I am correct on this (a big if!) - shame on Adobe for not chiming in to this forum and helping us out!

Best Regards,

Sherlock

LR3 will only update to the new v2010 process if you ask it to ... or if you import any images that have no prior ACR/LR development metadata available ... and the LR team members have responded here ... but unfortunately they have not found the culprit to the problem as yet ... hopefully the data you have shared will help them to get closer to a resolution of the problem.

[Mikkasa]

sherlocc wrote:

I have converted to 3.0 from 2.7 and have significant slowdown problems.

I submit the following:

   I believe that Lightroom 3.0 is rendering previews in the background in order to convert to their new engine.

Of course it does, that's exactly what it's supposed to do. This is why I posted last week that hardware (specifically fast drive access) and cache size provision (specifically ACR cache, which basically runs the whole preview show) is THE big performance bottleneck.

I was speculating that the 'standardised' mac hardware made this easier to troubleshoot when the whole hideous 'mac vs PC' bandwagon rolled in all over it.

So let me say on the Mac at least, LR will respond very well to a large (ca.50Gb) ACR cache provision. You do this by going to Preferences>File Handling and typing in what you want. I believe LR3 will let you allocate up to 200gigs, though some have reported diminishing returns after 50gigs, which (I'd speculate) would be down to having sufficient 'clean' drive space.

Also, hardware and connectivity seems to be critically important. I just spoke with someone who hooked up a super-fast 100gb SSD drive to his MacBook specifically for ACR caching and it literally transformed LR performance in every respect.

There are lots and lots of posts on this thread from people saying RAM and CPU grunt are not the issue – fair enough, I think we got the message, but that's not the whole shooting match. Practically no-one is coming back with reports that ACR cache tweaks don't work and we need to know if this is true or not...

Maybe they're off catching up on their backlogged work... or maybe it's just a Mac thing; it's worked for at least four mac users I'm aware of. Maybe it doesnt work on all platforms, but it's got to be worth trying.

[Guest]

OSx 10.5.8

2.4 GHz

300 HDD

3G ram

changed chache to 50G - no difference; however I do have serious permissions problems and am re-installing 10.5.8, so that may make a difference.

I currently have to run in 32 bit as 64 bit crashes the computer.

LR3 so slow that it takes 5+ seconds to load an image (at least); some never load - all I get is the grey grid.

[camerahans]

One thing that came to my mind this morning was the fact that Windows 32bit does have problems with directories containing more than 10.000 files (something to do with available handles?). Also other programs have trouble accessing directories with that amount of files.  This is noticeable with my Avid media composer software. There, when a directory becomes filled up, a new directory is created automatically.

While I do not have a directory with more than 10.000 pics, the cache certainly has more than 10.000 files in it. I wonder how much impact that has on the slowing down of LR.

[camerahans]

another thing I noticed...

I am using a wacom Intuos3 tablet. When in grid mode en moving the pen over the thumbnails in the grid makes the processor activity jump to 100% and stay at that level because of slight movements of the pen. This doesn't happen in other programs as far I have seen up till now.

Other users seeing this too?

[hamish niven]

Question or thought

I tried the update database to LR3, then this forum suggested that it was probably better to start from scratch. So i did just that.

My LR2 prieviews was ±12 Gb, the current one is only ±1.6 Gb., that means many many non created previews AND thumbnails, so LR is making these up for me on the fly, and yup, tis slow. (Worth rendering 100s, and 1,000s of my 80k or so images with the the better noise and lens correction IMHO though)

Could the speed issues be in part to the new catalogue rendering the previews for the 1st time?

I have made the habit of selecting the folder I am about to work on and create all the standard size previews and go make a coffee when I start a new folder I've not used in  LR3.

I'm sure this will be an issue effecting some people. Others will have made all their standard and 1:1 previews and just bogged down with a system that is .... s l o w   on mondays and for tooo many variables for Adobe to have yet acertained - for some.

Just a thought for a few of the agrieved 7800 avid readers of  the above post and rising

[mei_-EPZwbs]

I think you're onto something here.

I deleted all my previews from the old version of lightroom and I'm going through my catalogue of approx 200,000 images recreating the standard previews.

So far I've done about half of them and it's taken roughly 20 hours of processing time. I think it will be worth it in the end, and it shows how much LR is having to do in the background if you try viewing directories of images the previews aren't already there for.

[frank0239]

Victoria Bampton advised users to render all previews very soon after LR3 was released.  I took her advice (yes, it took ages) but it produced a large reduction in background activities and a consequent vast improvement in performance.  I can't find the thread in which she offered this advice, but may I repeat it on her behalf?

Found it!

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/657806?tstart=330

That thread addresses many of the issues discussed in the current one

[Mikkasa]

frank0239 wrote:

Victoria Bampton advised users to render all previews very soon after LR3 was released.  I took her advice (yes, it took ages) but it produced a large reduction in background activities and a consequent vast improvement in performance.  I can't find the thread in which she offered this advice, but may I repeat it on her behalf?

That was her advice for LR2 too. I've linked this upthread but it's worth posting again. About half the posts since then are from people who clearly didn't read it first time round...

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/

The tips she lists cleared up many, many issues I had with v2.x and I'm certain they're the reason why LR3 is working well for me now.

Essential reading!