• Global community
    • Language:
      • Deutsch
      • English
      • Español
      • Français
      • Português
  • 日本語コミュニティ
    Dedicated community for Japanese speakers
  • 한국 커뮤니티
    Dedicated community for Korean speakers

Lightroom 3.2 Release Candidate Available on Adobe Labs

Adobe Employee ,
Aug 09, 2010 Aug 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

This release includes camera support, bug fixes and new features.  Details here:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2010/08/lightroom-3-2-and-camera-raw-6-2-available-on-adobe-...

Regards,

Tom Hogarty

Lightroom, Camera Raw and DNG Product Manager

Views

39.3K

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
replies 200 Replies 200
Guide ,
Aug 09, 2010 Aug 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Thank you, Tom!

I just want to quote a sentence from the blog post/release notes:

"The final releases of Lightroom 3.2 and Camera Raw 6.2 may have additional corrections or camera support."

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 09, 2010 Aug 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

That is a lot of bugs to track down!   I hope you all get a chance for a rest.

Rory

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Looks good - seems everyone has been busy - I'm downloading now!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

+1 vote - thank you, Tom & Team.

For me 3.0 worked well some of the time, and at other times - not so good. So its a hard to assess improvement after such a short while, but so far performance and stability have been good!

I'll keep ya posted...

Rob

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Participant ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Good to see so many bugs stamped on with this release.  I've now got 3.2RC installed and I'm starting to put it through it's paces.

So far the only definable and repeatable bug I'm aware of that isn't fixed in it is keyword filters are still not picking up on synonyms.  (This one is a biggie for me at the moment so it was the first thing I checked).  I think it might have been raised as bug report by someone else but I've created one today just in case.

I am still getting "An unknown error occurred" which I've seen a lot since the LR3 upgrade but this appears to be directly connected to memory usage on my PC.  Typically seems to happen when the Commit Charge goes over 2000M - I still don't have enough data to be able to describe the cause properly.

A prompt release of this first 'point release' is good - keep up the good work (and get the keyword filtering bug fixed for next time.... please!)

Ian.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
LEGEND ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

After using 3.2RC for a few minutes, it does seem faster in the Library Module and Develop Module!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Contributor ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Great! Now all three lenses I normally carry with me (Nikkor 16-35 f/4, 50 f/1.4G and 70-300) all have distortion correction data in Lightroom .

Dave

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Looks like the export to file size is fixed, but now - at least on a mac - there is no watermark on the exported image even though one is selected and shows up when 'edit watermarks' is selected prior to export. If export to file size is not selected the watermark works just fine.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

The viewing speed seems back to "normal" (what ever that is!), but I am still seeing rampant memory usage.

I've run lightroom for about an hour now (with breaks), and it's locked up about 4gig of ram as "inactive", when I start it up again, it claims the ram as it's own and uses the previews apparently stored there, but won't free it up when I exit.  I also rapdly get into 9/10gig+ memory usage and start swapping.  Activity monitor claims LR is using all the memory, most of it as "virtual"?


Should I set it back to 32bit to see if it's only 64bit that is the problem?


Cheers!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advisor ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Jasonized wrote:

I've run lightroom for about an hour now (with breaks), and it's locked up about 4gig of ram as "inactive", when I start it up again, it claims the ram as it's own and uses the previews apparently stored there, but won't free it up when I exit.  I also rapdly get into 9/10gig+ memory usage and start swapping.  Activity monitor claims LR is using all the memory, most of it as "virtual"?

Platform?  Assuming a Mac since you used the term "inactive" note that the OS will not necessarily free memory that was in use by another app in case that app is launched again (which is likely.) This memory represents a lot of stack and dynamic libs.  The key here is that if something really needs that memory, it will get it, even if the OS suggests it is held by some particular app.

In a nutshell, if you do not see memory released from an active state upon exit, it does not necessarily mean there is a leak.  This is how OS X works. There are apps you can download that will force the OS to inactivate that memory.  If this works, then anything that needs that 4Gb will request it and get it from the OS.

A different case is if Lr remains running after exit, holding onto resources.  That is, there is still a process in some funny state upon exit.  This is a different case.

If you do see this, make sure you "sample" the process to get a snapshot of what it is doing.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hmm..  Hey clvrmnky,

   while I agree with you partially, I disagree  a bit as well.  The majority of the ram is not being used by libraries, etc, because if I reboot, start LR up, and then exit, only a couple of hundred meg get used (most likely said libraries).  Which I expected.  Apprarently the memory is being used by previews, as it decreases when I "revist" a previous image.

I just ran a couple of tests, and the "inactive" memory does in fact release when demanded by another program (at least when LR is not active).  I had thought it didn't get released at all, and was only swapped out when more physical memory was needed.  This doesn't appear to be the case however.  So while I'm still a little surprised at how much memory LR3.2 absorbs without even trying, at least it gives it up when requested politely. 

And, having said that, today I ordered another 8 gig to toss into my system.  Let's see if LR eats 16gig slower than 8...

So far, 3.2RC has helped me a lot; adding more memory might help me further, and thus stop me whineing on developers shoulders.

So, Thanks LR Team!

Cheers!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Advisor ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Jasonized wrote:

Hmm..  Hey clvrmnky,

   while I agree with you partially, I disagree  a bit as well.  The majority of the ram is not being used by libraries, etc, because if I reboot, start LR up, and then exit, only a couple of hundred meg get used (most likely said libraries).  Which I expected.  Apprarently the memory is being used by previews, as it decreases when I "revist" a previous image.

I meant libraries and such associated with the application it has loaded.  If you start from scratch only sys libraries and kernel stuff is loaded, and only whatever stuff is loaded on login into user space (generally, things in your "Login Items.)  The system stuff is in the "Wired" memory.

When OS X loads an app, it pre-loads a lot of stuff it thinks you might also need, and it keeps that in active memory in case you run the app again. This is on top of the memory that the app asks for in order to do its job.  Lr like memory, yes, but it appears to ask for a chunk at the beginning and sit on that for a bit.  If an allocation fails it will revise the size and try again, unless this is at a critical point, in which case you might start to see swaps or even memory faults.

However, this keeping active memory active is subject to a huge range of ergonomics, and your short test is merely one way to exercise the memory allocation system. Modern operating systems don't just keep a list of free chunks that respond to alloc()/malloc() calls.  There is a whole lot more going on when you fire up an application than that, and even more depending on the profile of the application.

But what you have described so far is OS X behaving normally when running a relatively resource hungry application.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Enthusiast ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Well, like I said... I can pretty much agree with you.

I guess I'm just not used to having one application go from a well respected memory citizen (I had no problems running LR2.7, PS and other apps at the same time) to one that starts swapping all by it's lonesome after half an hour, as it eats my entire memory and demands more.  We'll see what happens when I toss in another 8 gig... if it eats THAT and wants more, there is a problem somewhere...

Reasonable?


Cheers!

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Explorer ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Tom Hogarty wrote:

This release includes camera support, bug fixes and new features.  Details here:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2010/08/lightroom-3-2-and-came ra-raw-6-2-available-on-adobe...

Regards,

Tom Hogarty

Lightroom, Camera Raw and DNG Product Manager

Tom,

Thanks..  at first blush it seems more responsive.  The "rendering issue" as outlined in the "LR3 Slow Rendering"

http://forums.adobe.com/thread/659107?tstart=0

thread still exists unfortunately.  I will report it on the bug form. It is very annoying to have to work in some form of compromised window size on hi-res monitors.  Thanks for all the team's efforts.

Jay S.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Windows XP, Intel Pentium 4, 3 GHz processor, 3 GB RAM.  There is still approximately a two second delay between changing a slider in the develop module and when the adjustment shows on the image.  A little faster than before, but still pretty sluggish.  Did not see this in the beta.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JimHess wrote:

Windows XP, Intel Pentium 4, 3 GHz processor, 3 GB RAM.  There is still approximately a two second delay between changing a slider in the develop module and when the adjustment shows on the image.  A little faster than before, but still pretty sluggish.  Did not see this in the beta.

So, that's a pretty slow system but I have a 2.8GHz Pentium 4 at home with 2GB of RAM running XP and it doesn't show this long of a delay on a 1920x1200 screen.  Do you have any panels open in Develop?  What size images?  I'm using 5D raw files.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I'm using dual 1280 x 960 19 inch monitors.  I know, not an ideal system.  But this is my work computer.  I experienced the same slowness when I only had a single monitor.  My computer at home has similar specs, 4 GB RAM, single monitor, and I haven't seen the slowness on that computer with Lightroom 3.0, I haven't installed the new one there yet.  I'm processing 12 MP raw images from a Nikon D90.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

So, if you have similar computers, one doing it and one not, the question is "what's different"?  Different video cards/drivers?  Is the Camera Raw cache located in a different spot?  Is that hard drive filled up?  Is the cache corrupt? Same catalogs?  Etc.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Video driver on the work computer is an ATI Radeon HD 4350, recently replaced to accommodate dual monitors, no change in performance from before.  I don't know about the Camera Raw cache, but the Lightroom cache is on an external drive that is about 25% full.  I tried moving it to the primary drive, no difference in performance.  Where do I find information about the Camera Raw cache in Lightroom?

I have one catalog on another external drive that I have run on both computers.  I experience the same performance differences on that catalog as I do the main catalogs on each computer.  I don't expect any solution here.  I was just reporting that I am still experiencing the slow down in the RC.  And it's not a real problem because I do most of my photo work on the computer at home.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JimHess wrote:

Where do I find information about the Camera Raw cache in Lightroom?

Edit-preferences-File Handling-Camera Raw Cache Settings

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

My bad.  That's the one I told you is on the external drive.  Total size, 149 GB, free space 111 GB.  Tried the cache on a different drive, no difference in performance.

The home computer, the cache is on a 1 TB internal drive, about 85% free disk space.  I know, this could be a difference.  But the beta version of Lightroom 3 did not have the slowness characteristic that I have on this computer now.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Guide ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Having the cache on a slow external drive could be a problem.  You said you tried it on another drive, was that one internal or external?

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Engaged ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Lee Jay wrote:

Having the cache on a slow external drive could be a problem.  You said you tried it on another drive, was that one internal or external?

It was an internal drive, the system drive, I know you should use a separate drive, don't have one available.  The only reason I made the comment in the first place is that when I was running the Lightroom 3 beta this computer did not have a problem running it.  There was no sluggishness.  That did not show up until Lightroom 3.0 was released.  The transition from the beta to 3.0 was done without any changes to my system, and I immediately noticed the sluggishness.  I don't know if the problem will ever get fixed.  If it requires more hard drive space, or different monitors, or what ever, that is not an option on this computer.  I'm not looking for a solution because I don't believe there is one on this end.  I will try the RC when I get home tonight.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines
Community Beginner ,
Aug 10, 2010 Aug 10, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Installed 3.2RC 64 on windows 7 machine.Everything is faster including the spotting brush and gradiant tool. Adobe is on the right track.

Likes

Translate

Translate

Report

Report
Community guidelines
Be kind and respectful, give credit to the original source of content, and search for duplicates before posting. Learn more
community guidelines