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

[bmphotography1]

Interesting, thanks.

Vanilla = fresh, untainted, plain. New everything for LR, completely from scratch.

I am concentrating on win7 for the sake of this exercise.

Take a look at this thread, The poster has addressed my specific issue at the end. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1165920

That only 3-4% are experiencing problems is encouraging but I do agree with another poster, I think thats relatively high.

B

[Todd Shaner]

bmphotography wrote:

Interesting, thanks.

Take a look at this thread, The poster has addressed my specific issue at the end. http://www.fredmiranda.com/forum/topic/1165920

So the consensus is a six-core processor is beyond the point of diminishing return concerning core utilization, and an overclocked quad-core probably will provide better performance. Concerning hyper-threading my i7-860 quad-core system tests show only a small decrease in Export performance with hyper-threading enabled. With hyper-threading disabled slider operation becomes sluggish in the Develop module during both Imports and Exports, but otherwise fairly normal when not doing Import/Exports. From my experience and LR usage I have to disagree concerning the value of hyper-threading.

If you don't need to do any work inside LR during Import/Export, then hyper-threading is probably not needed. Of course there's no guarantee that a future LR update may run better on systems with hyper-threading.

Message was edited by: trshaner Added hyper-threading caveat.

[bmphotography1]

trshner: Not quite, unfortunately you are seeing this outside the context of the other conversations we were having which was based on a ‘guess’ as to whether or not a new 2011 hexacore would be any use. The thread in question was relating to the purchase of a new 2011 basex six core. The only other person who has contributed to that forum that has a 6 core is reporting no problems and it’s a gulftown chip (980X), not SB-E/2011.

15bit is really looking at his own, current tech and extrapolating from that, I believe that in there somewhere he did say that he couldnt be sure about HT perormance. Certainly on my box, I see no real improvement with HT on or off. The bit at the end of that post was stuff I added that deonstrated that with greater load (i.e. shadow/highlight <>0) then less threads appear to being used.

His experiment showed little value in a stock 6 core over a an OC 4 core BUT he didnt address HT. He was addressing new tech, I have no doubt that your 860 based platform executes and threads better. So its not quite as simple as saying 6>4. Whats clear from your post and from the other guy in FM is that newer, hot of the press platforms appear to be less capable with LR4.

As to wether or not a 6-core SB-E set up will fix the very specific problem I have set out (i.e. 2 second noise slider lag with shadow/highlight or clarity <> 0 on a large MP file), no one i know can answer that because no one has the nerve to gamble 1k on it, especially when the odds are not looking so favourable. I know 2011 is a different platform but you can see how threads like that are going to make people cautious.

What we are getting at here, which goes back to my original post and is underlined by your observations, is just how platform specific this is.

My particular crusade is to find out which new platforms, if any, do not behave like this.

[bob frost]

From: "bmphotography

As to wether or not a 6-core SB-E set up will fix the very specific

problem I have set out (i.e. 2 second noise slider lag with

shadow/highlight or clarity <> 0 on a large MP file), no one i know can

answer that because no one has the nerve to gamble 1k on it, especially

when the odds are not looking so favourable. I know 2011 is a different

platform but you can see how threads like that are going to make people

cautious.

Well, I have the SandyBridge 6 core i73930K, which is not very different

from the new 3970x, and it works fine on LR4. I usually run with HT off,

since I've found no obvious advantage in having it on, and it saves a lot of

power and lowers the temp by several degrees, when it's OFF.

All 6 cores are used and all 6 reach 100% during part of each rendering

cycle. Average use is about 47% during rendering of D800 files.

No slider problems.

Rendering 100 D800 nefs can take between 7 and 20 minutes, depending on what

editing I have done. Applying the three worst edits (luminance noise, lens

profiles, and chromatic aberration) on top of normal edits, exposure etc,

clarity, a gradient and some spots, to all the 100 files, pushes it to the

20 minutes.

Bob Frost

[bmphotography1]

Bob, thanks. I was going to hit you up about your machine.

Would you please be so kind to confirm or deny wether my specific scenario plays out on your machine or not? Just take a big RAW, with no other adjustments except +1 on shadow or highlight or both, can you please describe your experience with the lag on the Noise sliders (Detail and Luminance), <0.5 seconds? instantaneous? near-instantaneous etc. You may need to move them to extremes to clearly see a difference.

Rendering is much less of an issue for me than fluid slider functionality.

Thanks very much in advance...

Ben

[bob frost]

From: "bmphotography

Would you please be so kind to confirm or deny wether my specific scenario

plays out on your machine or not? Just take a big RAW, with no other

adjustments except +1 on shadow or highlight or both, can you please

describe your experience with the lag on the Noise sliders (Detail and

Luminance), <0.5 seconds? instantaneous? near-instantaneous etc. You may

need to move them to extremes to clearly see a difference.

Since you asked so nicely

Using 4.3RC, I can see a difference in luminance slider results depending on

whether highlights is +1 (or any other value than 0), but not as extreme as

yours. What I see is that with Highlights at 0, the image changes

continuously as I move the luminance slider without stopping from one end to

the other. With Highlights at +1 or above, the image doesn't seem to change

continously, but only when I stop moving the slider, but it is then pretty

near instantaneous - I'd be hard put to time the lag.

I suspect that what is happening here, is that the background recalculation

of edits has been suspended while the slider is being moved so that the

movement of the slider is not impeded. Recalculation happens after the

slider has been moved, causing the lag in image appearance. I seem to

remember someone saying that this had been done in response to many

complaints that sliders were not moving properly.

I don't think this is just a problem with Highlights; I can see the same

effect with exposure, but I suspect the magnitude of the effect depends on

the amount of recalculation that has to be done. Highlights may need much

more than exposure - just guessing.

The amount of the lag will presumably depend on the quantity of edit

recalculation and the speed of your computer. Mine is quite fast, but even

with this machine I did notice yesterday during some testing that, after

piling on a load of different edits - all the worst, when I tried spotting,

the movement of the spot on the screen was becoming jerky.

Bob Frost

[bmphotography1]

Having a recalculation done on release may work if it was instant. Basically the way I used to work on 3.6 was based on the instructions for Noise Ninja:

I locate an area that is out of focus, zoom in to 100-200% depending on how close you are, put both Luminance and detail to 100%, the image should be full of artefact depending on the noise content. I then reduce the detail slider until all of the artefact has just disappeared. Then I move to a detail rich, infocus area. I drop the Luminance slider to zero (i.e. max noise again) and I gradually increase it until I get a good balance between noise and detail. This basically smooths out the noise and reduces the 'clumpiness' of it making it much more tolerant to sharpening and other heavy PS work.

The key is in finding that balance point, I would kind of go forwards and backwards over it a few times until I was happy, obviously laggy 2 second recalcs make it impossible to make meaningful visual comparisons. Immediate relalculation when the slider is released might work if I got close and used the arrow buttons to get to the balance point.

Do you think thats tenable?

Thanks heaps!

Ben

[bob frost]

From: "bmphotography

I did just discover something interesting. I tried the noise sliders with

all the others adjustments off and the noise sliders were pretty much

immediate. OK but operationally of little use. I then tried other sliders

and the effect on the noise sliders was not too bad until I adjusted

highlight or shadow. Adding as much as +/-1 to the shadow or highlight

sliders caused immediate slowdown on the noise sliders and rendered them

very hard to use.

Adobe know about this but haven't come up with a complete solution yet. I

find there are three types of edits that slow things down a lot, enable lens

profile, chromatic aberration, and worst of all, luminance noise. These

three are best avoided when you can; DON'T just put them in preset for all

images whether they need them or not. If you can, save them until you have

done all your other editing.

I just did some testing; rendering 100 D800s to 1:1s, took 6 minutes with

default edits, 7 minutes with Autotone, 12 minutes with Autotone and just

luminance noise (20), and nearly 20 minutes with autotone, clarity,

vibrance, , lens corrections (including chromatic aberration), noise, a

gradient, 6 spots. All edits cumulatively slow things down, but some more

than others.

Solution - take better pictures!!

Bob Frost

[bmphotography1]

Bob,

Thanks but thats not quite what I was saying, I was saying that its the higlight/shadow adjustment that causes slowdown. Final conversion speeds dont worry me as I can leave on overnight but I honestly havent noticed speed issues on that front. As soon as I start work I disable noise and sharpening, I learned that one. Lens correction I rarely touch, retouch stuff I do in PS anyway and I am not sure I would ever use autotone. I use brushes on ~15% of images. My use of LR is mainly colour, tone and noise.

My complaint is simply this: adjusting show or highlight sliders by +/-1 is what causes the noise sliders to become very difficult to use, everything fine until this point, even brushes. Brushes + noise again, no problem. Add a touch of shadow or highlight (and clairty too) from the 'Basic' panel and then splat.

Are you saying that Adobe are aware of this bug and are you saying that this is prevalent on ALL computers or it is exacerbated by random hardware combinations, more specifically newer multicore boxes.

I am happy to get a new MB + CPU for this but not if I know it wont work. In some of the individuals I have spoken to it has become apparent that they are using 8-10mp files and dont have much to do with noise anyway due to not routinely shootng in high ISO situations.

Im glad you put a smiley wink thingy after your comment about better photos, for a second there I thought you were suggesting that this my fault!

Thanks

Ben

(edited to sound less grumpy!)

[bob frost]

Sorry if I didn't quite get your meaning. What I meant is that Adobe know about the fact that using luminance noise is the biggest slowdown in editing.

If you use the shadow or highlight slider first, does that then slow down the noise slider, or is it only the other way round?

Bob Frost

[bmphotography1]

Hey Bob.

Basically thats correct, with highlight, shadow or clarity adjusted by only 1pt, my noise sliders become too laggy to use. IF however I do the noise first the sliders are not as bad (~.5 second delay) but thats not very good practice anyway, I do my noise work as the very last adjustment, only then can I assess its full impact on the image, especially in any pushed shadows.

Cameras used = 5D3, 1D4 and 5Dc, 22, 16 and 13 mp respectively. Noise slider gets progressivley worse per camera. LR 3.6 exhibits instantaneous results.

[Todd Shaner]

bmphotography wrote:

Hey Bob.

Basically thats correct, with highlight, shadow or clarity adjusted by only 1pt, my noise sliders become too laggy to use. IF however I do the noise first the sliders are not as bad (~.5 second delay) but thats not very good practice anyway, I do my noise work as the very last adjustment, only then can I assess its full impact on the image, especially in any pushed shadows.

Cameras used = 5D3, 1D4 and 5Dc, 22, 16 and 13 mp respectively. Noise slider gets progressivley worse per camera. LR 3.6 exhibits instantaneous results.

I try to shoot at ISO 100 to 400 maximum, and have my LR NR defaults set for these types of images. I rarely need to change these Detail panel settings with my 5D MKII and 600D bodies. For shots that are underexposed (i.e. require more than +1 EV Exposure) or shot at high ISO I have created Develop presets with specific Sharpening and NR settings. The time delay I'm seeing is about 2 sec. from moving the NR slider to seeing the image update. By using a Develop preset ALL of the Detail panel settings are updated in 2 sec. I have three-levels (Low, Med High), for each ISO range that I shoot so if the Low setting is insufficient I choose the next. It generally takes me no more than 4 sec. to "tweak" the Detail panel using these Develop presets, which is one of the last steps in my LR editing.

It would be nice if the NR sliders were more responsive, but I don't see that as a huge impediment or performance issue. Maybe some people are doing too much 1:1 pixel peeping. I'd have to do a 30" x 40" enlargement with my 5D MKII images and stick my nose up to the print to actually see "small tweaks" made in the Detail panel. I am a pixel peeper, but keep in perspective what my actual LR output requires.

[bmphotography1]

I rarely have the opportunty to shoot at 400 except for outdoor weddings in daylight. I usually deal with fast moving situations in dark churches/houses.

I have to assume that every image I has a chance of making it to at least 11x14 and will nearly always be viewed on a 50" plasma.

Noise management -not eradication- is a critical aspect to my workflow. I have been rellying on the very smooth transitions of the LR3 noise reduction engine to find the perfect balance between noise and detail to facilitate sharpening and a lot of the quite extreme post work that is essentially my brand. Presets would be ideal but unfortunately they dont work out for me, I do each one to taste.

[andreas603]

So here is something I just discovered on Mac anyway-regarding performance..not sure if this is normal or abnormal behavior...Would appreciate feedback....  In short, I import images at 1:1 preview and once rendered as is, they actually re-draw very quickly when I am reviewing them in Lib Mod to delete unwanted shots - in fact, its instantly. (using one display) ....This is usually my first step in my workflow...my very next step in Lib is to do some very broad adjustments..usually exposure on all remaining images (eg 400-1000 from a sports shoot) at once in grid view...here is where the problem starts... once done, I remain in Lib (or switch to Dev occasionally) to do further refinement in loupe view.. each an every shot I've just adjusted the exposure on now has to re-draw...no longer instant...its about 2 seconds/image.  I've test this with many diff types of adjustments... If I regenerate previews, I'm back to instant re-draw...soon as I make *any* adjustment and come back to that same shot later, back to 2 second redraw.... This happens in both Lib and Dev modules. 

Is this normal behavior?  I logically undertstand that because I'm modifying the RAW image that the preview has changed as well and thus it needs to update the preview file...but I would have expected that to happen in the background automatically..not require me to constantly maulally re-do previews....This becomes un-workable on a large sports shoot of 1000+ photos....

PS Have not yet moved to 4.3RC...still have other performance issues related to multiple displays, re-draw, etc that I've had since day one...Just that I 'discovered' this particular issues yesterday....

thx

[bmphotography1]

Hi Andreas.

What have you tried? 4.3rc has apparently fixed a multitude of sins for a multitude of people. Usual things to try other than that are to rename your preferences file and start a fresh catalogue. Renaming the prefernces file fixed a lot of my dramas.

Ben

[andreas603]

Ben- before trying 4.3RC, I'd like to know if my experience is considered normal or not....does one have to re-gen previews after you make edits to the image to get the snappiness back or should it be the same redraw speed as before the edits without user intervention?

[CSS_Simon]

My understanding is that whenever any edits are done on an image, the corresponding preview is marked as out-of-date, and will be recreated when the image is next viewed in Library view. 

[andreas603]

thx Simon..if true, then that really sucks...my entire workflow requires me to bounce around, compare, copy/paste settings, etc...  This sounds more like a design issue than a bug per se..... Is anyone elses workflow being slowed down by this?  this sucks.

[CSS_Simon]

I might be wrong about this, but I can't think how it could be otherwise. 

I mean: the point of previews is that in Library view LR doesn't have to recreate all the edits on an image, but simply render an existing jpeg preview.  Obviously the preview has to reflect the current state of the image (or it's a bit pointless).  If the image has been changed, then it's next to certain that the appearance will have changed, and so the previously-created preview will no longer reflect the current state of the image, so it has to be recreated. 

[dwterry]

To try to speed my workflow, one thing I will do if I copy/sync settings across a lot of images, I will jump back to Library mode click the option to generate the previews (all of the images that were just synced are still selected, so it will update previews on all of those images).  LR gets around to it on its own, eventually, but this way I can sort of "batch" the change and the preview update together and it has less impact on me as I return back to develop mode to continue my work.

One request for the LR developers:  Make this option (of rebuilding the previews) available on the right-click pop-up menu even while in Develop mode. That would save me from having to switch back and forth from Develop to Library and back.

[andreas603]

dwterry- thanks...thats essentially what I do but I like the idea of switching back while still highlighted... of course now I'll have a re-draw task running for a long time slowing down the rest of my workflow even more..... It certainly does seem logical that a change to the RAW image requres a refresh of the currently cached JPEG preview.

Doing some more testing, I'm noticing that in fact my jpeg preview redraw in Lib takes more like 7-8 seconds..whereas the redraw of the RAW file in Dev Mod takes 1-2 seconds after I modify it.

If anyone has time, would be curious to know what your times are in both Lib and Dev to re-draw/re-fresh a modifed image.

[bmphotography1]

@andreas. No its not normal. Not sure what you have to lose by trying RC3. Just install in a different directory. Also have you tried purging your cache and increasing its size say to about 20 - 50 GB?

[andreas603]

Ill  have some time over weekend to give it a try...but if this is not normal, when should a re-cache occur after an adjustment?  Should it happen in real time or does LR decide to refresh the preview image on a certain interval?

I'll go ahead and purge preview..but a question....prob should know this already but can't remember....the only preview cache I'm aware of is the RAW cache..is there a Lib preview cache too?  where?

Really would like to know if anyone else is having this issue....thx

[Jao vdL]

Unfortunately the behavior you describe is normal and unavoidable as some others already noted.

Ill  have some time over weekend to give it a try...but if this is not normal, when should a re-cache occur after an adjustment?  Should it happen in real time or does LR decide to refresh the preview image on a certain interval?

It will create a standard preview after the adjustment for display in Library even if you had a 1:1 preview before. It won't automatrically make another 1:1 preview except if you specifically ask for it by hitting the menu item or by zooming 1:1 in the Library preview. Another situation that sometimes occurs is when the standard preview is not large enough for your display even zoomed out. Then it will make another 1:1 preview. Unfortunately the largest standard preview size is still quite small compared to the gigantic screens and retina displays a lot of people work with so that creates a major feeling of slowness if you work on a large display because just stepping through images will trigger preview generation. I'd wish the maximum size for standard previews were much larger so this would be less of an issue.

I rarely make 1:1 previews for this reason as to me it is a waste of time as the way I work, I go into Develop all the time when going through images from a shoot. The only real use case for 1:1 previews is if you have a very linear workflow. Basically you import, create 1:1 previews, go through the images and cull them with flags (pick/discard) based on critical sharpness (zoom 1:1 and back, which will be fast because of the 1:1 previews), then do another round based on aesthetics  and finally end up with a new collection of keepers that is only a fraction of what you started with. Only then do you start going into develop for improving the images. This workflow is what Lightroom appears to be designed around. Doesn't work for me but I know people that do it this way and are very happy with it.

I'll go ahead and purge preview..but a question....prob should know this already but can't remember....the only preview cache I'm aware of is the RAW cache..is there a Lib preview cache too?  where?

The raw cache has nothing to do with the previews used in Library. The preview jpegs are stored in a file that lives alongside your catalog file and will have a name that ends in "Previews.lrdata". This is a folder full of jpeg previews and a database file that stores the location of the previews.

[Kato75]

LR 4 crash all the time adding photos to collection, LR 3 does not.

Win 7 64bit and 16GB ram and intel i7 4ghz.