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

[Dave Eagle]

Further update, increased my cache size from 1GB to 10GB seems to have cured the 'reloading' issue on tif files.

Thanks for all the positive help received.

[Guest]

For issues with slider performance in develop: http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_0_reacts_extremely_slow

[raincitydigitalarts]

LR 4 is UNUSEABLE (at least by me) in its current form because of the "slider lag" in the develop module. If it does not run properly on my computer it is not a matter of processing horsepower! LR 3 response time was essentially instantaneous with "write changes to XMP files" ON and 2048 previews. My RAW files sizes are 15Mb and larger. Using 2010 processing does not speed things up appreciably.

I have both LR 3 and LR 4 installed. LR 4 seemed OK at first until I started to use the Develop module. Could there be a conflict with LR 3?

Does anyone have just LR 4 installed that is not having theses performance problems?

Peter

Machine spec: 2x Xeon 3.33Mhz processors (16 cores), 24 Gb 1333Mhz RAM, 4x 256Gb SSD RAID running 64-bit Win7 OS and programs, ATI Radon 5900 running 2x 30"monitors @ 2560x1600.

[James Atwood]

Ok, thank you, I was thinking of overclocking to 4.0ghz or finding an SSD big enough for my catalog, but if you're still getting lag with those specs I won't bother.

I've gotten accustomed to the vastly superior camera raw options, so I hate to go back to LR3. Really irritating. Was this intended for computers of the future or what? It's caused a huge bump in the road for my work, thinking I could safely switch everything over to LR4, not to mention being unable to edit in Photoshop without a bunch of trouble. Premature release!

[A_C_G]

James,

Computers of the future? No, this is the spec stated on the Adobe download site:-

Windows

• Intel® Pentium® 4 or AMD Athlon® 64 processor
• Microsoft® Windows Vista® with Service Pack 2 or Windows® 7 with Service Pack 1
• 2GB of RAM
• 1GB of available hard-disk space
• 1024x768 display
• DVD-ROM drive
• Internet connection required for Internet-based services*

[Scooby007]

this is the spec stated on the Adobe download site

like a "two-person" tent.

2gb ram barely gets the OS running smoothly, much less any software

[James Atwood]

If I spent money on this believing that, I'd be pissed. I think they left off an additional bullet point: "2 megapixel cell phone camera jpgs only, or performance may vary."

[raincitydigitalarts]

I just removed LR4 from my machine (to keep using LR3 until LR4 is fixed.) The preview folder created by LR3 for my LR3 catalog had a size of ~500Mb. However, the size of the converted LR3 catalog preview folder (as preformed by LR4) was 17.5Gb! I am wondering if the catalog conversion process may be part of the problem.

[googull]

I experienced the same. I renamed the catalog and let LR4 reconstruct the preview.cache. The size fell to normal levels and performance went from unusable to tolerable.

[Renfe2012]

I didn't find out about that matter until right now. It's just the same for me. The LR4 previews consume 300 times the space of LR 3 folder.

Another fact that supports my opinion to cancel LR4 usage.

[Jim Wilde]

I think there's a certain amount of misunderstanding about what happens to the preview cache when you upgrade a catalog from LR3 to LR4. The basic process is that the existing LR3 catalog is left alone, and a new updated catalog is created (usually the same name but with the "-2" suffix"). Unless you specified differently, the LR4 catalog will be created in the same folder as the LR3 catalog. However, as part of the upgrade process, LR4 'steals' the preview cache that belonged to the LR3 catalog and renames it to reflect the new LR4 catalog name (there may be an update of some description, but this is minimal).

So the end result of a "normal" LR3 catalog upgrade to LR4 is two catalogs and ONE preview folder, which was the original LR3 cache re-assigned to LR4. So just to make this crystal clear, the 'huge' preview caches that many are associating with some LR4 problem are in fact the preview caches that were built up over time in LR3.

The 'small' LR3 preview cache that some are seeing is almost certainly the result of opening the old LR3 catalog in LR3....this will immediately cause a new LR3 preview cache to be created, and initially the only previews are likely to be those created automatically as and when images are brought into the grid or filmstrip. Thus the cache will seem 'very small' in relation to the LR4 preview cache.....but I suspect if you actually did a full rebuild of the LR3 cache you'd probably end up with a very similar size to the LR4 cache.

[andreas603]

I asked a few days ago but I dont think anyone answered...how does one know if any individual photo has a preview associated with it or not?  Aside from rebuilding my entire library, is there a way I can see if I have a preview already of a certain RAW file?

[bob frost]

From: "andreas603

Aside from rebuilding my entire library, is there a way I can see if I have

a preview already of a certain RAW file?

If you select the file(s) in library grid, and then go to the menu bar -

Library/Previews/RenderStandardPreviews and select 'build one' in the popup

dialog, it will scan for a preview and make one if none is present. If there

is one already, it will just do nothing. If you select 'build all' in the

dialog, it will scan the whole folder and make any that are missing.

Bob Frost

[Jao vdL]

If you can see it in library view, it has a preview

[steinflaten]

FAST !   As fast as  LR 3   for me ??

:

Maskinvareoversikt:

  Modellnavn:    MacBook Pro

  Modellidentifikator:    MacBookPro6,2

  Prosessornavn:    Intel Core i7

  Prosessorhastighet:    2,66 GHz

  Antall prosessorer:    1

  Antall kjerner totalt:    2

  Nivå 2-buffer (per kjerne):    256 kB

  Nivå 3-buffer:    4 MB

  Hukommelse:    8 GB

  Koblingshastighet for prosessor:    4.8 GT/s

Stein

[Guest]

Unless eliminated... the following always seem to be the problem. XD 

1. Uninstall ALL Virus / Spyware / Firewall software, reboot and compare retest. 'protection' programs auto update and are often overly agressive.  Keep kids off of work machines. buying them their own computer always saves money in the long run.
 

2. Are heatsinks and fans in good shape? (Even if they are spinning... make sure they are moving air adequately and don't stop too easily) Computers on Hardwood floors, around pets, smoke and computers in workshops and near kitchens need to be watched more closely.)

3. Notebooks suck in more crud than desktops... the fans are small and fail more frequently... not to mention the vents get blocked VERY easily (CPU / GPU throttle themselves to prevent thermal failure which helps keep the magic smoke from being released.)

---  Initially, my slow LR4 issue was handled with a few cf card cases to lift notebook off the table a bit... LR4 was simply heating up my GPU more than LR3.  A 5v fan powered from usb port keeps everything humming along now...

The preview render times are definately slower...  Does anyone know if previews pre render or if they run in the background automatically ofter imports?  I sense a post import lag...

Note: SSD should be mandatory for any production machine.
-=gb=-

[lancerogers]

Again, the performance issues being described are not related to Virus protection, heatsinks and fans or notebook issues.  I have an SSD, 16gb of memory, 1000watt power supply, i7-2600 running at 3.4ghz. Lightroom 3 screams on my computer as does processing/rendering of RAW files.  I have a very good graphics card and a gaming rig set up for optimum airflow.

LR4 has issues.  Moving sliders has a 1 second lag that gets worse the more you edit, I can only imagine how bad it must be for most folks that do not have a top of the line computer.  I have cache set at 50gb on the SSD and I still have an additional 50gb on the SSD for spare.  The catalog and previews are all on the SSD.  I have plenty of hard disk space in reserve and I'm using WD Caviar blacks at 7500rpms.

Those that keep posting to this thread that the issues are computer and software related are not adding value to the thread and this is not a reasonable answer from Adobe nor is the link above for optimizing.  It is a great link for general users and folks that have issues running LR of any version. For those of us that are used to high performance and responsiveness of LR3 to now suddenly be struggling with LR4, we're trying to say there is a problem that needs to be fixed.

[Kennedda]

I agree. And, we need a response from Adobe and a quick fix soon. When you create such an essential piece of software, you need to be very careful how you update it and test it thoroughly on real world image libraries.

[Jasonized-nfnCsn]

You don't seem to understand how Adobe tends to work on these sort of things..

They don't do "quick fixes".  They do "dot releases".    And they do them on a schedule, I think at least 3 or 4 months apart.  Not exactly sure of that, I'd have to go back and look at previous release dates.  But don't expect a fix before the next dot release.  Maybe then.  Took them at least 3 dot releases with LR3 before it was useable for me...

Cheers!

[Kennedda]

I fully understand the past history of releases. There have, though,been some .01 releases. This calls for quicker action than normal. Besides going back to 3.6, we do not have any choices.

Sent from my iPhone

[Jasonized-nfnCsn]

Yes, well, we had exactly the same problem going from 2.7 to 3.0.  Completely unuseable for some of us (I was one).  Going back was the only choice, and wasn't a good one.  I've gone back to 3.6 now, and will wait for 4.1, or even 4.3... 

They might have done a .01 release, but I can't seem to remember any in the 3.x family... hmm.. maybe one, where the jpg's were getting corrupted?  Maybe.

Anyway, Unlike when I tried 3.x, and was unable to revert to 2.x,  I learned.   I was able to rever to 3.6 with only one afternoons work, and it has saved me massive amounts of time just so far.  Ah well, mabye they'll fix it soon, maybe the won't.

Cheers!

[Lee_Jay]

Kennedda wrote:

I agree. And, we need a response from Adobe and a quick fix soon.

Since it was in the feedback forum, many may have missed it, but here's the official response:

" To everyone on this forum who has been providing system information and specifics about where you see performance slowdowns, I want to say thank you.  Using this information, we've been able to reproduce these two specific performance issues:

1. Using a dual-monitor system slows down Lightroom 4 performance.
2. In some circumstances, Develop sliders are showing lags.

The team is working on fixes for these.  We are going to escalate a release candidate of 4.1 to make a build available with these fixes as soon as possible. Actual timing will depend on when the fixes are completed and tested."  - Becky Sowada (Lightroom Team Member)

[hamish niven]

Where was this posted Lee Jay?

Lee Jay wrote:

Since it was in the feedback forum, many may have missed it, but here's the official response:

" To everyone on this forum who has been providing system information and specifics about where you see performance slowdowns, I want to say thank you.  Using this information, we've been able to reproduce these two specific performance issues:

1. Using a dual-monitor system slows down Lightroom 4 performance.
2. In some circumstances, Develop sliders are showing lags.

The team is working on fixes for these.  We are going to escalate a release candidate of 4.1 to make a build available with these fixes as soon as possible. Actual timing will depend on when the fixes are completed and tested."  - Becky Sowada (Lightroom Team Member)

I've been on these forums tracking this thread and many others, but I've not seen any comment from LR Team members on any of these threads where you'd hope for a reply.

Can you please share a link for everyone.

This info is kinda really helpful but where did you find it?

[A_C_G]

Hamish,

Pending a reply from L J.

It could have been somewhere here:-

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family/topics/lr4_0_reacts_extremely_slow

Tony

[hamish niven]

Thanks Tony

so it went to the right place, to where bugs were posted and not to the user to user forums, where people were talking about it, where people where asking about it and where the Adobe feedback would have been really appreciated.

Oh well.

shame that it was not shared here.

Lets hope the proper LR4.0 comes out soon, not the unofficial beta 2 that most people have paid for.