Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 4.x

[BCormier]

Anyone else notice that lightroom 4 is slow? Ligtroom 3 always ran fast on my system but Lightroom 4 seemlingly lags quite a bit.

My system is:

2.10 ghz Intel Core i3 Sandy Bridge

8 GB Ram

640 GB Hard Drive

Windows 7 Home Premium 64 Bit

Message title was edited by: Brett N

[bob frost]

From: "rpavich1234

Of the users who complain, there is a huge cross section of machine

specs that doesn't point to any one hardware issue such as "low

performance machines won't work with LR4"...

Low-performance machines will just work slower than high-performance

machines. LR 4.1 works fine on my Samsung laptop and on my home-built

desktop. Everything just all happens faster on the desktop, but LR is quite

usable on both. I used the laptop to demonstrate LR 4.1 a week or two ago.

No-one complained at the speed of LR; they were all quite impressed. But I

obviously wasn't batch processing thousands of images.

Sorry we can't solve your problems, but keep trying. Instead of going back

to 3.6, can't you just use process 2010 in 4.1? That gives you all the other

benefits of 4.1 without the more intensive process 2012.

Bob Frost

[rpavich1234]

Drop the attitude, eh?

Attitude?

If you are adressing me then I don't see how you can see what "attitude" I have considering the mode of communication. I didn't call anyone names...I didn't use curse words...

I reiterated what I meant so the poster would hopefully not misunderstand for the 3rd time.

If you aren't addressing me then....sorry I butted in.

[rpavich1234]

Sorry we can't solve your problems, but keep trying. Instead of going back to 3.6, can't you just use process 2010 in 4.1? That gives you all the other benefits of 4.1 without the more intensive process 2012.

That helped SOME but not enough to cause me to keep going on LR4, though thanks for suggesting.

I wish I could explain how different the user experience is between the two...when I use the term "lightning" in reference to LR3 I mean it's FAST...a completely transparent user experience. When I reference LR4...I mean lock ups and slowdows that last 20-30 seconds....even more...and all along the process.

If I could even get them CLOSE I'd be happy.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Is everyone able to use PV2010 in LR4 at the same speeds as LR3? 

Are the speed issues confined to PV2012, or is it global?

And if you're seeing the speed issues in PV2010, is it exactly the same issues?

[fliplip1]

In my case it was the program itself. Everything from opening to moving sliders.

Once I had changed my hardware, without doing any of the workarounds everything was flying, just like 3.6.

[Guest]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

Is everyone able to use PV2010 in LR4 at the same speeds as LR3? 

I don't see the stutter with PV2010 but it's not quite as fast as LR3.6. PV2012 does seem to be the problem which makes it a LR issue not a system issue. The new process may be more resource intensive but a Core i7 should be good enough for a product that lists the min spec as a Pentium 4.

[areohbee]

rpavich1234 wrote:

Not sure why people trying to help bug you so much. SavagePhoto's suggestion may help some people, even if not you. Or, maybe it won't help anybody - but it seems clear to me, he is at least trying to be helpful.

It doesn't bug me at all that people are trying to help...what DOES bug me is someone suggesting that I buy motherboards and other hardware that works perfectly find with all the other software (and the previous version of THIS software) as some sort of fix...when clearly the issue lies with LR4.

I can see temp workarounds to help temporarily while Adobe fixes the problem but why should we have to revamp whole systems to accomodate LR4?

I'm perfectly happy running LIGHTING FAST LR3 until LR4 is servicable.

I wasn't suggesting that people who are happy waiting on Adobe, buy new hardware to run Lightroom, I was suggesting that people who are *not* happy waiting on Adobe, may want to engage in some trouble-shooting to potentially pass go, before Adobe comes around. Note the distinction.

I try not to get involved in what you should do, or shouldn't have to do...

Rob

[rpavich1234]

I wasn't suggesting that people who are happy waiting on Adobe, buy new hardware to run Lightroom, I was suggesting that people who are *not* happy waiting on Adobe, may want to engage in some trouble-shooting to potentially pass go, before Adobe comes around. Note the distinction.

I try not to get involved in what you should do, or shouldn't have to do...

Im sorry for snapping at you  Rob...I'm just frustrated...I'll take a break now.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Stephen_Carpenter wrote:

I don't see the stutter with PV2010 but it's not quite as fast as LR3.6. PV2012 does seem to be the problem which makes it a LR issue not a system issue. The new process may be more resource intensive but a Core i7 should be good enough for a product that lists the min spec as a Pentium 4.

Don't worry Stephen, I'm not questioning whether the machine's up to spec or anything like that.  I'm just trying to narrow down the things that are triggering the speed issues.

When you say that PV2010's not quite as fast as 3.6, can you identify what specifically is slower?  For example, it is moving from image to image?  Or the sliders don't move as smoothly?  Or what?  Does turning noise reduction off bring PV2010 back up to speed?

[areohbee]

rpavich1234 wrote:

Im sorry for snapping at you  Rob...I'm just frustrated...I'll take a break now.

I understand your frustration. I (and plenty of other folk) had major performance issues with Lightroom 3 when it first came out, which were mostly solved @Lr3.2, or Lr3.3, if I remember correctly. In my case, at first, I was having terribly abnormal performance - optimizing the catalog solved a surprisingly large amount of problems, but it was still abnormally poor (I'm "sure" it wasn't the optimization per-se that was responsible for the improvement, but some bug that was rendered toothless in the process). I was running it on 2GHz dual core, with 3.5GB usable RAM - 32-bit OS. Installing a new 4-core motherboard with 8GB, 3.2GHz, 64-bit OS made it about an order of magnitude faster. Note: this is *more* improvement than can be justified by sheer hardware speed (e.g. much more relative improvement than any other app), thus I assume something that shook out differently in the course of the upgrade was responsible for the remainder of the improvement.

I've been luckier so far with Lr4, knock on wood.

Rob

[Guest]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

When you say that PV2010's not quite as fast as 3.6, can you identify what specifically is slower?  For example, it is moving from image to image?  Or the sliders don't move as smoothly?  Or what?  Does turning noise reduction off bring PV2010 back up to speed?

Using spot removal on the same problem image each spot takes ~0.2s on LR3.6, ~0.5s on LR4.1 PV2010 and ~1s on LR4.1 PV2012.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

Stephen_Carpenter wrote:

Using spot removal on the same problem image each spot takes ~0.2s on LR3.6, ~0.5s on LR4.1 PV2010 and ~1s on LR4.1 PV2012.

Now THAT is a useful stat, thanks Stephen.  Is everyone else seeing the same slowdown at the same point?

[Bob_Peters]

I am limping along on a 5-year-old Mac Pro:

OS X 10.7.4

2x, 2.66GHz XEON (2 real cores, 2 virtual)

9 GB RAM

128GB SSD

2x 1TB Seagate

I chose a sample of 20, D800 NEFs and measured the time to generate the 1:1 previews after clearing the cache and discarding the existing 1:1 previews.

Lightroom 4.1 for both measurements.

PV2010    8.9 sec / NEF

PV2012  11.65 sec / NEF

The other strange thing (to me, at least) is that zooming to 1:1 in the Develop module in PV2012 is very fast while the same operation on the same image takes several seconds in the Library module.  And when zooming to 1:1 all 4 cores participate in the Develop module but only 1 core in the Library module.

[areohbee]

Bob_Peters wrote:

Lightroom 4.1 for both measurements.

PV2010    8.9 sec / NEF

PV2012  11.65 sec / NEF

This matches expectation for normal performance on a modest machine such as yours, in my experience.

PV2012 requires more CPU cycles...

Bob_Peters wrote:

The other strange thing (to me, at least) is that zooming to 1:1 in the Develop module in PV2012 is very fast while the same operation on the same image takes several seconds in the Library module.  And when zooming to 1:1 all 4 cores participate in the Develop module but only 1 core in the Library module.

That sounds abnormal to me. Zooming in library module is nearly instantaneous for me if requisite preview is available, and if not it takes about 3 seconds (for moderately edited image, 2 seconds with no adjustments) (until loading indicator extinquished), but *all* (4) cores are maxed out while it's doing it. win7/64, 3.2GHz, 8GB, AMD CPU.

Rob

[Bob_Peters]

Zooming to 1:1 in the Library is abnormal.  Unfortunately, I have yet to find anybody who can indicate how to find the source of the problem.

[SavagePhoto-lItHqa]

Does anyone want to guess why Lightroom is looking at these maybe its slow because its looking at s*** it has no buisness looking at.

Image	PID	Type	Handle Name
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\History\History.IE5\index.dat
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\index.dat
l
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Cookies\index.dat

[LRuser24]

SavagePhoto wrote:

...its looking at s*** it has no buisness looking at.

That's probably because the map module uses the operating system services (= internet explorer DLLs) to load the map tiles from google maps (just like geosetter does). Not sure whether or not that may be the cause of the performance problems.

[SavagePhoto-lItHqa]

cookies and history and temp files? seems strange that it would need these at all. I dont really believe that it has anything to do with the speed of LR but I also dont think it should be seeking access for these index files. I am trying to turn off virus protection for all the files LR uses but there is no way I am turning VP off for any internt files/folders.

[bob frost]

From: "Bob_Peters

Zooming to 1:1 in the Library is abnormal. Unfortunately, I have yet to

find anybody who can indicate how to find the source of the problem.

AFAIK,

Zooming to 1:1 in Library uses the 1:1 previews you have already created and

should therefore be quick. If you haven't created 1:1 previews, then they

have to be made on the spot and that will cause a delay.

Zooming to 1:1 in Develop, on the other hand, always re-renders the file, so

there will always be a delay. It doesn't use the previews, even if you have

them.

Bob Frost

[Jim Wilde]

Publish Services? Update checking? Online Help?

[bob frost]

From: "Stephen_Carpenter

Using spot removal on the same problem image each spot takes ~0.2s on

LR3.6, ~0.5s on LR4.1 PV2010 and ~1s on LR4.1 PV2012.

Doesn't the time depend on what you have done before the spot removal?

Bob frost

[bob frost]

Bob_Peters wrote:

I am limping along on a 5-year-old Mac Pro:

I chose a sample of 20, D800 NEFs and measured the time to generate the 1:1 previews after clearing the cache and discarding the existing 1:1 previews.

Lightroom 4.1 for both measurements.

PV2010    8.9 sec / NEF

PV2012  11.65 sec / NEF

But you are using D800 nefs! My nefs vary from 10MB (D100) to 40MB (D800 lossless compressed), so the D800s are going to take at least four times as long as the D100s. My D800 nefs take about 4 secs each to render on a fast new desktop in 4.1 using 2012.

Bob Frost

[bob frost]

SavagePhoto wrote:

Does anyone want to guess why Lightroom is looking at these maybe its slow because its looking at s*** it has no buisness looking at.

Image	PID	Type	Handle Name
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\History\History.IE5\inde x.dat
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Local\Microsoft\Windows\Temporary Internet Files\Content.IE5\index.dat
l
lightroom.exe	6096	File	C:\Users\xxxx\AppData\Roaming\Microsoft\Windows\Cookies\index.dat

What were you doing in LR when you saw this? I've never seen LR.exe looking at these files, but maybe I've missed it.

Bob Frost

[Guest]

bob frost wrote:

Zooming to 1:1 in Library uses the 1:1 previews you have already created and

should therefore be quick. If you haven't created 1:1 previews, then they

have to be made on the spot and that will cause a delay.

Zooming to 1:1 in Develop, on the other hand, always re-renders the file, so

there will always be a delay. It doesn't use the previews, even if you have

them.

Yes but if you make any changes in develop then in library mode it will have to re-render the 1:1 preview when you look at it at 100%. This operation takes almost twice as long as rendering a 100% view in develop. I believe this is what the other Bob was referring to.

[bob frost]

From: "Stephen_Carpenter

Yes but if you make any changes in develop then in library mode it will

have to re-render the 1:1 preview when you look at it at 100%. This

operation takes almost twice as long as rendering a 100% view in develop.

I believe this is what the other Bob was referring to.

Ah, I see what you/he means. On my machine I wouldn't describe this

difference as 'abnormal' because it is just under 3 secs in Develop and

about 4 secs back in Library (with D800 nefs). Not a significant difference,

but if his D800 nefs are taking 12 secs in Develop, then I can't see any way

round needing a faster computer to cope with those big nefs.

Bob Frost