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

[Guest]

Victoria Bampton wrote:

uphotography wrote:

Now, Lightroom 3.6 works great on my system and so does the last ACR but the mix (LR 4.x) doesn't work. Are you still going to tell me that it is my fault that the "old scanner" or my toothpaste are upsetting LR 4.x?

[...]

I give you more examples. One of the suggestions (and solutions to some) is to unplug colour calibrators (especially if they do constant ambient light monitoring). But, hold on a second, we are talking about a software built and made for professional photographers that cannot work with basic and well known photographers hardware? What is next? Sorry, LR cannot read anything but DNG and PSD? I mean, I could understand maybe needing to unplug my phone, but my calibrator? my printer or scanner? Seriously?

No one's saying that you should have to unplug all those things to get LR to work.  But since Adobe are having a really tough time reproducing the leftover problems, and you'd like it fixed, perhaps it's worth the effect to do a few simple tests which could provide just the clue they need.  If a pattern can be established, they stand a much better chance of being able to reproduce and fix it.

Victoria, please read the whole thread as many of the "solutions" imply to unplug everything that is "not needed". Even as part of the "diagnosis" it is suggested to start killing processes until LR runs completely on its own... Like I've said, we almost need an Adobe OS +H/W to run it if it is so delicate that anything can disturb it.

uphotography wrote:

where Adobe's staff only show up once in a while to say things that are absolutely useless and even insulting.

I completely understand the frustration, and those of us who are trying to help are equally frustrated at not being able to solve it.  But I also understand why Adobe staff don't pop up here very often.  They don't know how to solve it either - if they did, it would be fixed - and when they do post, nothing they say will be 'right'.

It's undoubtedly a really difficult situation for those who are still affected, and we will all continue trying to track it down.

I don't agree with you on this one. When they pop-up to say stuff and nonsense yes, there is no way they will make it right. How about: "Guys, we are still working on it, we are sorry this is happening."

"We are requesting some help from you guys, could you please run this logger in the background while using LR so we can better understand what is happening?"

"We are deeply sorry, please complete a claim here..." (and then a 10% discount on the next product)

"Guys we are at this stage of... and we need ... so we can pinpoint what's going on"

It is true they cannot reproduce the problem at their Labs (at least that's what they say) but they haven't taken on ANY of the offers of sending a problematic computer to their Labs so they can take a look at it in situ. I don't think that will break anybody's budget, will it?

And like that there are many, many things they could have done/said, instead of staying silent all the time like nothing is happening and then showing on to talk about batman and deodorants... I mean... It is insulting.

And I do appreciate the genuine help other people try to give even when I think that sometimes it releases the pressure that we, as a group should have on Adobe to solve the problem.

Just my 2 cents.

[Victoria Bampton LR Queen]

uphotography wrote:

Victoria, please read the whole thread as many of the "solutions" imply to unplug everything that is "not needed". Even as part of the "diagnosis" it is suggested to start killing processes until LR runs completely on its own... Like I've said, we almost need an Adobe OS +H/W to run it if it is so delicate that anything can disturb it.

I've been following the thread from the start, along with all the other threads on this forum, and I've watched your video.  I can see how frustrating it is, and I can hear the frustration in your voice.

The unplug/disable everything 'solutions' aren't intended as a long term solutions or prerequisites for running LR, but as a way to narrow down which combination(s) of factors are causing the issue. 

If you prefer to use this thread to whinge at Adobe, carry on and I'll leave you to it.  I'd rather help if I can.  Those grey/black windows look like graphics driver issues, although I'm sure you've already ruled that out.  Do you see the same with only one monitor connected to the computer (ignoring whether you have a LR second window open or not)?

That "attempt to call upvalue" sounds a plug-in error.  Any plug-ins installed?

[quenton8]

The suggestions in this thread (e.g. unplug devices, kill processes) come from experience and a desire to help, not from an aim to support adobe, or make life difficult for those with problems.

LR is certainly not the only application I have worked with that had similar problems.

For example, my daughter insists on installing some rather shady apps on her PC, even after I clean it up for her.  So now FireFox won't work properly jumping to all kinds of strange websites -- she "hates" firefox -- has nothing to DO with firefox, some of thes other apps take over and mess with what firefox is doing.  This is a mozilla problem, its a "daughter" problem.

Computers over the last 10 years or so have moved to having many different applications installed, from many different (and often well hidden) suppliers.  These applications can and will cause problems.  The same goes for H/W (mostly the USB-connected things) which can masquerade as disk-drives or whatever they want (ran into a scanner that said it was a disk drive).   There is no way that a piece of S/W can do a 100% job of guarding against these kinds of things.

Thus -- the suggestions of how to try and figure out what may be causing the problem.

Here is another example if a mess that can occur between two reputable suppliers

- a DataColor monitor calibrator

- an Intel Video Card with some utilities

One intel utility tried to ensure that video card settings got copied from one logged-in user to another, by watching for

settings changes outside of its own settings module.  So the DataColor monitor installed ITS settings and intel shortly after undid them.

Result? working nicely the monitor brightness would change (dim).  Took weeks to track down.  To make it harder, I had two monitors, only one was affected.  Why? because on the other the natural brightness was the same as the DataColor set brightness.

Whose fault?

- only one monitor showed the problem -- Monitor's fault?

- only occurred when the DataColor profile was installed -- DataColor's fault?

- stopped when a particular intel utility was stopped -- Intel's fault?

- only occurred when running LR -- Adobe's fault?

How about none of the above -- just an unfortunate combination of things.

[areohbee]

Nicely put Dennis (and I could tell you stories too, but I'll spare y'all...).

R

[Guest]

If you prefer to use this thread to whinge at Adobe, carry on and I'll leave you to it.  I'd rather help if I can.  Those grey/black windows look like graphics driver issues, although I'm sure you've already ruled that out.  Do you see the same with only one monitor connected to the computer (ignoring whether you have a LR second window open or not)?

Victoria, again, what bothers me is that it's been around 8 months since Adobe released LR 4 and at least in my case it only gets worse with each update. For example, that error message, never appeared before. Not even with LR 4.2 RC.

I have worked with LR on only one monitor (and the other one turned off) but I haven't tried to unplug it completely. Video drivers are up to date. Maybe I need to get an old version of my video drivers to see if it works better that way.

That "attempt to call upvalue" sounds a plug-in error.  Any plug-ins installed?

After installing 4.2, all I got was software not-responding, software not opening at all and cryptic messages like those. By the way, I have got many of those but none repeated wich makes it even more difficult to figure out what could be happening. It's like LR 4.2 is moody and everyday will shock you with something different. I think I have some plugins, yes although I can't remember if I tried unistalling all of them. Maybe I should give that one more try for the sake of it.

[areohbee]

uphotography wrote:

...again, what bothers me...

You've made your point - really.

But this is a user to user forum. None of us has any control over Adobe (well, maybe Victoria does ).

I think it's time to drop the rock, and see about getting Lightroom working, for you too, or get you on to some other software...

Rob

[Guest]

Rob Cole wrote:

uphotography wrote:

...again, what bothers me...

You've made your point - really.

But this is a user to user forum. None of us has any control over Adobe (well, maybe Victoria does ).

I think it's time to drop the rock, and see about getting Lightroom working, for you too, or get you on to some other software...

Rob

Yes, you are right. It is time to do so.

[bob frost]

Before you go off to uncharted waters, you might like to try something I read about and have tried. I don't have any serious slowdown problems with LR 4.2, but even my fast desktop is running 4.2 faster after these changes. You MUST make sure you have backed up your catalog before trying this, or make a new catalog to try it on.

Basically you remove the modules you don't use from Lightroom, not by just turning them off in the Module bar (that doesn't unload them), but by moving the module files to a new folder you make in the Lightroom Program Files folder. It's all explained here

http://www.slrlounge.com/boost-lightroom-4-performance-by-hacking-the-lightroom-modules-lightroom-4-...

I just made an UnusedModules folder in the main Lightroom Program Files folder and dragged my unwanted module files into it. For good measure, I also dragged in the three Plugin folders and the three plugins for facebook, flickr and carousel.

So I was just left with the Import, Export, Library, Develop, and Print modules in the LR folder. They are the main ones I use and I thought this would be a good test of whether this works or not. To my surprise it does work, LR runs more snappily without these modules and plugins. So now I plan to put them back in one-by-one and see if I can pinpoint any one module/plugin that causes the slowdown.

Worth a last try! Doesn't take more than 5 minutes, and is completely reversible. It may just show up what is causing the slowdowns you are experiencing. That would be good news for Adobe and all of us.

Bob Frost

[Guest]

bob frost wrote:

Before you go off to uncharted waters, you might like to try something I read about and have tried. I don't have any serious slowdown problems with LR 4.2, but even my fast desktop is running 4.2 faster after these changes. You MUST make sure you have backed up your catalog before trying this, or make a new catalog to try it on.

Basically you remove the modules you don't use from Lightroom, not by just turning them off in the Module bar (that doesn't unload them), but by moving the module files to a new folder you make in the Lightroom Program Files folder. It's all explained here

http://www.slrlounge.com/boost-lightroom-4-performance-by-hacking-the- lightroom-modules-lightroom-4...

I just made an UnusedModules folder in the main Lightroom Program Files folder and dragged my unwanted module files into it. For good measure, I also dragged in the three Plugin folders and the three plugins for facebook, flickr and carousel.

So I was just left with the Import, Export, Library, Develop, and Print modules in the LR folder. They are the main ones I use and I thought this would be a good test of whether this works or not. To my surprise it does work, LR runs more snappily without these modules and plugins. So now I plan to put them back in one-by-one and see if I can pinpoint any one module/plugin that causes the slowdown.

Worth a last try! Doesn't take more than 5 minutes, and is completely reversible. It may just show up what is causing the slowdowns you are experiencing. That would be good news for Adobe and all of us.

Bob Frost

Bob, I think you posted this before right? there was a video on youtube on how to do it. I did the same and left basically the things that I need to use and it didn't help.

I was waiting for work to slow down a bit and try what I always said I wouldn't but it will be my last effort before giving up. I will format my system and install from scratch everything (and by everything, I mean system and Lightroom) and see what happens.

Like Dennis was mentioning before who knows what could be upsetting LR here but from the H/W point of view, I am not using any "shady" component... It is all Asus, Intel, Seagate, ATI, Nec, BenQ, Microsoft, etc... And softwarewise I try to keep it as clean as possible (Master Collection, LR, OpenOffice, Opera, etc...) But, we'll see.

If it works then, well, great, if it doesn't then it won't. Time to move on.

[areohbee]

My solution for (abnormal) Lr3 slowness was a new motherboard. The new motherboard wasn't much faster, but something happened in the course of the upgrade that really freed Lightroom up. My guess is system/hardware/chipset drivers, but now I'm really reaching out on a limb...

~R.

[Guest]

That could be, anything could be... but I would really prefer not to invest on anything HW wise. This system is not that old and when I built it I had in mind several years of work. Maybe upgrading the processor but that's about it. And if that is the solution, I might prefer to invest the money somewhere else.

Still, yes, that could be a possibility.

[areohbee]

Maybe you won't have to install a new motherboard, but you may have to do something you haven't tried yet... (or of course, maybe Lr4.3 will work better for you, if you haven't learned by then to catalog your files well enough in Bridge I mean... ).

[Brett N]

Thank you Rob, Victoria, Geoff, and Dennis for sound advice and explanations.

Yes, poor performance is extremely frustrating. And if we could have it our way, nobody would have a slow Lightroom. We are not of a mind that you have bought our product and now are left entirely to your own devices.

Each update includes performance enhancements. And the fixes we put into updates do solve performance issues for some but, unfortunately, not others. Some have reported on this forum: 4.1 improved over 4.0 and 4.2 increased speed from 4.1. We saw the same with LR3 and it's updates and we're likely to see this continue with future updates. However, everybody's computer is unique. There is a near infinite combination of hardware, driver, software, and settings out there that can lead one person using LR to be slow and another to be fast. Some of this slow down is the result of bugs in LR (no manufacture can claim their software is bug free). For the most part, each person may be experiencing similar behavior but for entirely different reasons. But we continue to look for solutions because there is no one solution to this umbrella issue. Knowing that a problem exists is not the same as having found or implemented a solution. We continue to work on it.

And yes, lots of testing is required. There are far fewer of us at Adobe than the number of our customers. We'd love to fix everyone's configuration on an individual basis, customizing a solution for their unique situation, but that just isn't possible. Instead we want folks to help us help them. Do some of the testing on your side, and the most basic of testing is to simply the situation as much as possible by removing plug-ins, software running in the background, and external devices.These steps are not offered as solutions, they are a test to what is source of the problem. If you find something that suddenly causes LR to work, post it so we can investigate it.

And I used Batman as an analogy only. He is, especially in the example I give, a troubleshooter, the World's Greatest Detective. I'm not trying to insult anyone or make light of the situation. But it is art imitating life and helps illustrate the issue at hand.

On that note, I am in the Portland, Oregon area and if you want me to come to you, drop me a line via private message.

[areohbee]

Brett N wrote:

And I used Batman as an analogy only.

I thought it was a very good analogy, since it highlighted the fact that it is *not* (necessarily) like finding a needle in a haystack, which, although time consuming, is actually very straight forward to do, but more like finding a needle in a haystack that has been made invisible by the use of mirrors (it can be a combination of things, not just one thing...). What do you do when you get to the end of the haystack  and there is no needle? - start looking for mirrors...

(I understand people are testy, and why using the analogy aggragated people who were after a different, "humbler" response - still, it was quite applicable...).

And, of course, there is more than one needle in the haystack...

In case the point still hasn't been made:

One of the purposes for all this analogizing, is to try and make it more understandable, why software can be released with such seemingly glaring bugs, and why they are not all fixed in the first dot rev... - having been on both sides of this issue, I have a certain amount of sympathy for both parties: people being bit by bugs just want them fixed, pronto, no excuses..., and people trying to fix them are having a hard time doing so...

Brett N wrote:

On that note, I am in the Portland, Oregon area and if you want me to come to you, drop me a line via private message.

I'll be very interested to know if anybody takes you up on that offer.

Rob

[DaleusAtUPEI]

Is it possible to get some of the troubleshooting info in this thread stickied in some way? If that has already been done, can that link be provided to Staff posts?

This thread has so much hypothetical stuff in it and being 39 pages long, it's difficult for a newbie like myself to find anything relevant to my performance problem.

Thank you.

[Geoff the kiwi]

Certainly not an endorsed method which I would strongly not recommend. Modules aren't loaded until used.

[bob frost]

But it works for me! Modules are 'loaded' to some extent because they appear in the LR menus when they are present, and don't appear in the menus when they are not present.

Many great discoveries in science have been made by doing 'daft' things! I once made a great discovery by accidentally leaving a lid off a Petri dish overnight. Not quite as major a discovery as Alexander Fleming made, but no-one would have thought of doing it.

So I'll continue venturing into 'unknow territory' and see what LR tells me.

Have you tried it? How can you strongly not recommend something that you haven't tried? It's not life-threatening; I've got everything backed up 'n' times.

Bob frost

[areohbee]

bob frost wrote:
Have you tried it?

Much to my surprise, Lr4 does start up significantly faster with unused modules removed (e.g. time to initial display, sans modules: less than 1 second; with modules: 3-4 seconds).

I haven't noticed any operational speed improvements though, yet.

If it *does* make an improvement in operational speed, that should be very meaningful to Adobe.

Those who try this and *do* experience performance improvements should provide the details (e.g. what, exactly, is faster, and by how much...).

UPDATE 2012-10-25 10:04 (GMT):

Lightroom absolutely does load some stuff from those modules, even if not fully initialized until first use - thus the reason it takes so much longer to start up...

For example, catalog_photo method of the view-factory object comes from the MultipleMonitor module, and it's absence will cause errors in some plugins, even if only using a single monitor.

Summary: Be aware that nix-ing modules in this fashion may cause unexpected errors in Lightroom. More specifically (so far):

* I do not recommend nix-ing the MultipleMonitor module, even if you only use one monitor.

~R.

[bob frost]

Well, it turned out that the speedup I got by removing some modules from the LR program folder was due to the removal of the multiplemonitors module, and the same effect can be achieved by simply turning off the secondary monitor in the Window menu of LR. No obvious effect of removing the other modules or plugins, but my computer is not suffering from severe slowdowns. Nevertheless, using the secondary monitor did have a significant effect on louping through images in Library.

bob Frost

[areohbee]

That makes sense.

And if you are having performance woes, which are caused, in *any* amount, by loading things that should have no impact, then it means there is an insidious bug in the loading and processing of said modules. (there should *not* be a performance improvement due to normal resource consumption resulting from loading them).

~R.

[SimDC]

Killing "dynamiclinkmediaserver.exe" (LR4.2 W7 74) has improved responsiveness.

BTW, do people having problems have QuickTime installed ?

[glugglug]

I have had Quicktime Pro installed alongside Lightroom since I started using LR. I have  just fired them up together, ran a video in QT and edited a RAW in LR, no problem at all.

Quicktime can be a bit highly strung even run on its own, even so.

[dwterry]

What does dynamiclinkmediaserver.exe do?

[SimDC]

To my knowledge "dynamiclinkmediaserver.exe" gets active when you start a video with LR.

It stays active after that.

Killing that process seems to reduce the "Loading ..." time when you browse your catalog.

[Brett N]

Those that work with After Effects and Premiere Pro should recognize Dynamic Link, its what lets you move assets back and forth between the two applications without having to render them. In Lightroom's case, it connects to video resources so that you can do the video editing that Lightroom 4 introduced. So, it is required to be running while working with video, but you can shut it off if you are not longer doing anything video related to save on system resources.