Skip to main content
L
laurencec
Participant
June 9, 2010
Answered

Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 3.x

  • June 9, 2010
  • 102 replies
  • 324183 views

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

    This topic has been closed for replies.
    Correct answer Tom Hogarty

    Keith - that is part of the problem everyone is trying to figure out - why does LR3 work well for some and lousy for others. as MANY of us have posted - we have the SAME EXACT HARDWARE setup from 2.7 to 3.3 with VASTLY different results. If the only thing changing is the software then Lightroom IS the problem to be diagnosed...

    If it is so offending then unsubscribe from the forum.

    David - you clearly don't get the issue confronting those of us posting here.

    LR 2.7 did everything we needed it to. The Beta was wonderful, and the ads for 3.0 certainly made it appear it would continue to be a set in the right direction. Your solution is for us to now go but other software? Hardly a reasonable one when 2.7 was great and we had every expectation that the new version would be an improvement.

    If both of you are happy with the way it's running, then that is great but you are not at all helping discover why others are having legitimate issues.

    If it's like groundhog day then why are you bothering to come back?


    FYI, I need to lock this thread and start a new thread because I fear that customers will attempt to share valuable feedback in this discussion and it has become extremely difficult for the Lightroom team to follow the lengthy and increasingly chatty conversation.  Please use the following forum topic to discuss the specifics of your feedback on Lightroom 3.3.

    http://forums.adobe.com/thread/760245?tstart=0

    Regards,

    Tom Hogarty

    Lightroom Product Manager

    102 replies

    Show previous replies
    K
    kobajaszi777
    Participant
    June 9, 2010

    speed test:

    winxp 3,25gb    L2.7  raw --> jpg 85%   100 photos =time 5,30 min

    win7 x64 8gb    L3.0  raw --> jpg 85%   100 photos =       6,16 min

    hardware is the same phenom x4 9750 (100 the same photos)


    why slower... !!??

    L
    Lee_Jay-0I6no4
    Participating Frequently
    June 9, 2010

    kobajaszi777 wrote:

    speed test:

    winxp 3,25gb    L2.7  raw --> jpg 85%   100 photos =time 5,30 min

    win7 x64 8gb    L3.0  raw --> jpg 85%   100 photos =       6,16 min

    hardware is the same phenom x4 9750 (100 the same photos)


    why slower... !!??

    That's rendering.  Completely separate issue.  The new, improved rendering algorithms also require more processing cycles to complete.  It's the price you pay for improved image quality.

    L
    Lee_Jay-0I6no4
    Participating Frequently
    June 9, 2010

    More information.  Slow loading thumbs when?  On what OS?  On what machine?  How many images in your catalog?  How many in your source?

    L
    laurencecAuthor
    Participant
    June 9, 2010

    It is slow loading thumbnails in the grid view of the library.

    I am running windows 7 home premium on an ASUS N61Vn with intel core 2 duo 2.53GHz, 4GB of ram and an nvidia geforce gt 220m 1GB graphics card.

    there are 16661 images in my catalog.mainly JPEGs.

    I open the program and see grey boxes ( some other colours where they have had a label in Lr 2.7) where the images should be in the grid view, I click one and a bunch appear, but when I go to click on some more blanks, the program does nothing but show me the images number in the catalog. This does change for a long time.

    I attached an image so you can see what it looks like. (use a 16in monitor and a 14in)

    Hope this helps.

    M
    Mikkasa
    Participating Frequently
    July 1, 2010

    phototrek wrote:

    > I had similar issue when my Lightroom cache was located on SSD drive.

    Where does one specify the location of the LR cache? Or do you mean the ACR cache?

    It's the ACR cache, used by both LR and ACR. It holds partly-rendered versions of your images to save time in Develop mode. It is not used (AFAIK) in Library mode which uses the contents of the previews folders. It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

    Bob Frost


    bob frost wrote:

    It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

    Just to keep the record straight: the cache is not something you'd want to turn off (or minimise) as using it it saves your memory (RAM) for other tasks in Develop. That's the advantage of having an image cached, and why Adobe recommend increasing its size.

    Nor is processor speed a really significant factor, although hard disk access speed is, ie the bus route to the cache itself. Slow disk access = slow develop module rendering.

    Terms & ConditionsAccessibility statement
    Using the community Terms of use Privacy Cookie preferences Do not sell or share my personal information ad choicesAdChoices