Locked

Experiencing performance related issues in Lightroom 3.x

New Here ,
Jun 09, 2010 Jun 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Hi

I just upgraded from lightroom 2.7 to lightroom 3. I then proceeded to import my old catalog. this all went fine but lightroom is so slow, the thumbnail previews take forever to load if I manage to have the patience to wait  for them.

is there a quick solution?? How can it be sped up?

thanks

Laurence

Message title was edited by: Brett N

Views

256.8K

Likes

translate

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

correct answers 1 Correct Answer

Adobe Employee , Dec 02, 2010 Dec 02, 2010
FYI, I need to lock this thread and start a new thread because I fear that customers will attempt to share valuable feedback in this discussion and it has become extremely difficult for the Lightroom team to follow the lengthy and increasingly chatty conversation.  Please use the following forum topic to discuss the specifics of your feedback on Lightroom 3.3.http://forums.adobe.com/thread/760245?tstart=0Regards,Tom HogartyLightroom Product Manager

Likes

translate

Translate

Translate
replies 1198 Replies 1198
Engaged ,
Jun 09, 2010 Jun 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

More information.  Slow loading thumbs when?  On what OS?  On what machine?  How many images in your catalog?  How many in your source?

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jun 09, 2010 Jun 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It is slow loading thumbnails in the grid view of the library.

I am running windows 7 home premium on an ASUS N61Vn with intel core 2 duo 2.53GHz, 4GB of ram and an nvidia geforce gt 220m 1GB graphics card.

there are 16661 images in my catalog.mainly JPEGs.

I open the program and see grey boxes ( some other colours where they have had a label in Lr 2.7) where the images should be in the grid view, I click one and a bunch appear, but when I go to click on some more blanks, the program does nothing but show me the images number in the catalog. This does change for a long time.

I attached an image so you can see what it looks like. (use a 16in monitor and a 14in)

Untitled-1.jpg

Hope this helps.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jun 09, 2010 Jun 09, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Okay, try this.  Open the application and just wait for all the thumbs to load and all hard drive activity to stop.  This could take a while in some cases (minutes).  Once that happens, exit the application and re-load it.  My guess is that it will be spectacularly faster on the second attempt.

If so, close all your folders using alt-click which will close the folder and all of its subfolders.  Select a source that doesn't have any images and exit.  Reboot and relaunch.  Once the app is open, try selecting a source with some images and let me know what happens.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Sep 13, 2010 Sep 13, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I would like to add a little to this:

What you say in your first paragraph works.  However a few points if someone has had as much difficluty with this as I have.  I moved from Lightroom 2 to 3.  I don't know what happened with my catalogs but when Lightroom 3 updated my Lightroom 2 catalog something changed.  I ended up with Lightroom 2 and 3 catalogs in my Finder.  Anyway catalog stuff can be anoying and problematic. I ended up with not only the tumbnails being slow to load but I also had  icons in the upper right hand corner of the thumbnail on.  Some with an arrow pointing up some with an exclamation mark.  So, I first had to take care of this metadata problem which I did by following the info in the Help in Lightroom on this subject.

After this problem was solved, when I went to load a picture folder what would happen is that first blank thumbnails would load. Next the pictures would load in the blank thumbnails with out any adjustments visible or the icons for adjustments. Three little white dots would appear in the upper right of the thumbnail indicating that the computer had not finished calculating what was needed in the thumbnails  (the tree dots are not always present in all Thumbnails even though there are thumbnailspresent that are not displaying adjustments made to them in the Development Module).  So, not only was I  uable to see all my thumbnails right away but when they came up the adjusments done in the Development Module didn't appear right away.  A very long process compared to what I was used to.  I thought I might not have enough RAM as I only have 2GB.

So, what you need to do is:

1. Load Lightroom

2. Open a folder with no more than 500 photos in it.  I really is easier this way as you can keep better track of your progress.

3. Close your side panels in Library and move the Thumbnail size slider to make the thumbails as small as possible.

4.  Start at the beginning of your pictures and display a full screen of thumbnails.  You can watch as the thumbnails one by one load the adjustment icons, and display the adjustments you made in the Development Module.  Making sure that all the thumbnails eventually have no white dots, have all the adjustment icons, and all the photos are displaying the adjustments made in the Develop Module.  This takes time, you can actually see the dots disappearing from each thumbnail and the photos changing one at a time to their full adjusment.

5. The only thumbnails that will change are the ones you can see on your monitor screen!!! So, once you have done the first set (approx 80 thumbnails on my monitor screen) scroll down carefully to the next set of 80 making sure you have not missed a row.

6. Once all your thumbnails have been done in this way, Quit Lightroom,

7. Now you can open Lightroom again and start on the next folder of photos.  In the one you just finished you will notice your thumbnails come up immediately whith the white dots, adjustment icons coming on breifly.  Your thumbnails will appear as the adjusments have been applied immediately.

8.  I didn't back up the catalog and opptomize it until most of my thumbnails were done.   I'm not quite finished yet but very pleased with the results. 

So, thanks for this post.  I couldn't have managed with out it.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jun 30, 2010 Jun 30, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

"I open the program and see grey boxes ( some other colours where they  have had a label in Lr 2.7) where the images should be in the grid view,  I click one and a bunch appear, but when I go to click on some more  blanks, the program does nothing but show me the images number in the  catalog. This does change for a long time."

I had similar issue when my Lightroom cache was located on SSD drive. The particular SSD drive I have is very fast in various tests, but apparently does not like if data are accessed simultaneously from several applications or application threads. Moving the cache to another drive helped a lot. If you don't use SSD drives but have more than one HD, check if your energy saving mode is not set to spin down hard drives that are not in use.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jun 30, 2010 Jun 30, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

LR3 seems to need to re-create the thumbnails from scratch after my PC has been off for an extended period of time such as overnight and this still happens only when they are on screen. The problem seems to be related to the program's slowness in populating the fields in both the left and right panels. This is my only real complaint about performance in either the Library or Develop modules.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

> I had similar issue when my Lightroom cache was located on SSD drive.

Where does one specify the location of the LR cache? Or do you mean the ACR cache?

Likes

translate

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
Advocate ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

phototrek wrote:

> I had similar issue when my Lightroom cache was located on SSD drive.

Where does one specify the location of the LR cache? Or do you mean the ACR cache?

It's the ACR cache, used by both LR and ACR. It holds partly-rendered versions of your images to save time in Develop mode. It is not used (AFAIK) in Library mode which uses the contents of the previews folders. It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

Bob Frost

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

It's the ACR cache, used by both LR and ACR. It holds partly-rendered versions of your images to save time in Develop mode. It is not used (AFAIK) in Library mode which uses the contents of the previews folders. It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

Bob Frost

Please help me understand something.  Why is Lightroom using the ACR cache when it doesn't use ACR?

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JimHess wrote:

It's the ACR cache, used by both LR and ACR. It holds partly-rendered versions of your images to save time in Develop mode. It is not used (AFAIK) in Library mode which uses the contents of the previews folders. It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

Bob Frost

Please help me understand something.  Why is Lightroom using the ACR cache when it doesn't use ACR?

It does use ACR.  It just doesn't use the PS plugin version, it uses a version that's compiled into the LR code.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

But Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) is the plug-in for Photoshop and Photoshop Elements.  If you don't have either of those programs, but do have Lightroom, you don't need ACR.  ACR is the designation for the plug-in, not for the technology that is part of Lightroom.  So that is why I ask, why does Lightroom use the ACR cache?

Additionally, I am still using Photoshop CS3 with Lightroom 3.0.  I'm not having a lot of the problems that some of you have been mentioning.  So if your theory is correct, how would Lightroom 3.0 use the cache for a completely out of date version of ACR?  Doesn't make sense to me.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JimHess wrote:

But Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) is the plug-in for Photoshop and Photoshop Elements.  If you don't have either of those programs, but do have Lightroom, you don't need ACR.  ACR is the designation for the plug-in, not for the technology that is part of Lightroom.  So that is why I ask, why does Lightroom use the ACR cache?

Okay, LR uses the ACR *code*.  Whether that code is implemented in the form of a PS plugin or as a portion of Lightroom, it's still the same code, and it still uses the same cache.

Likes

translate

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
Advocate ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JimHess wrote:

But Adobe Camera Raw (ACR) is the plug-in for Photoshop and Photoshop Elements.  If you don't have either of those programs, but do have Lightroom, you don't need ACR.  ACR is the designation for the plug-in, not for the technology that is part of Lightroom.  So that is why I ask, why does Lightroom use the ACR cache?

Additionally, I am still using Photoshop CS3 with Lightroom 3.0.  I'm not having a lot of the problems that some of you have been mentioning.  So if your theory is correct, how would Lightroom 3.0 use the cache for a completely out of date version of ACR?  Doesn't make sense to me.

While ACR is the plug-in used by PS ... it is also the engine that drives the Develop Module in LR ... it's the same code presented in a different UI.

The ACR cache, like any cache ... is nothing more than a repository for data that an application may be called upon frequently to render/display. Just like the cache for your web browser maintains elements for recently visited sites so frequently visited sites will load faster when you navigate back to them during a session. The fact that LR uses a cache that is named "ACR" is inconsequential.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

bob frost wrote:

It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

Just to keep the record straight: the cache is not something you'd want to turn off (or minimise) as using it it saves your memory (RAM) for other tasks in Develop. That's the advantage of having an image cached, and why Adobe recommend increasing its size.

Nor is processor speed a really significant factor, although hard disk access speed is, ie the bus route to the cache itself. Slow disk access = slow develop module rendering.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Mikkasa wrote:

bob frost wrote:

It can be set to a minimum of 1GB or up to 200GB. With a fast processor, I don't see much advantage in having the image in the cache or not in the cache. With slow processors, there can be a time-saving in waiting for the rendered image to appear on-screen. When the cache is full, it deletes the oldest files to make space for the new. Unfortunately IMO you can't turn it off, so it is something else that has to run in the background.

Just to keep the record straight: the cache is not something you'd want to turn off (or minimise) as using it it saves your memory (RAM) for other tasks in Develop. That's the advantage of having an image cached, and why Adobe recommend increasing its size.

Nor is processor speed a really significant factor, although hard disk access speed is, ie the bus route to the cache itself. Slow disk access = slow develop module rendering.

In my experience it is not hard disk speed that is limiting rendering speed. On my system LR3 reads only with a total I/O rate of 10-20 MB/sec (even while reading several files at once). This is about 5-10 times slower than a standard internal hard disk can deliver. You could even use an external USB 2 hard disk without noticing the difference. And it is also not CPU  that is limiting on my system, because most cores are idle and even those few working are only half busy.

And I would love it if Lightroom would make use of more RAM (if available) for speeding things up. Other programs demonstrate the dramatic speed improvement of this approach.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I have a question! I unsubscribe to email alerts on these forums but still get them. I know by now that LR3 is plagued with speed and performance issues and I am satisfied that;

A) I'm not the only one;

B) Adobe probably doesn't know how to fix the issue.

I don't need 20-25 emails a day of the same conversation. How can I unsubscribe??

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Your Stuff -> Profile -> Email Notifications


Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Rob Cole: Thank you....did that last week.....they are still coming through.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

Rob Cole: Thank you....did that last week.....they are still coming through.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 01, 2010 Jul 01, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

To stop the notifications,try:

Your Stuff / E-mail Notifications

Then place a check mark in the "Remove..." and apply. At least this is what I have just done and hoping that it will work.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 02, 2010 Jul 02, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

FulvioE wrote:

Rob Cole:  Thank you....did that last week.....they are still coming through.

For each thread you've replied to or started there is an "Actions" block near the top right of the thread.  Also, at the top of the whole "Discussion" there is a similar "no email" option.  I think that is the one that turns it off globally.

Hope that helps.

Jay S.

Likes

translate

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
New Here ,
Jul 02, 2010 Jul 02, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

JayS In CT wrote:

FulvioE wrote:

Rob Cole:  Thank you....did that last week.....they are still coming through.

For each thread you've replied to or started there is an "Actions" block near the top right of the thread.  I don't know if there is a global "turn off" but if you no longer want to get "Why is Lightroom 3 so slow" notifications, you turn it off for that thread in particular.

Hope that helps.

Jay S.

Thank you JayS ... I hadn't even noticed that.  I thought it was a "general" preferences option and did not note it was a thread by thread issue.

I have deactivated it within the thread itself and will watch to see if it works.  Thanks for the help.

Cheers

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 02, 2010 Jul 02, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

FulvioE wrote:

function(){return A.apply(null,[this].concat($A(arguments)))}

JayS In CT wrote:

FulvioE wrote:

Rob Cole:  Thank you....did that last week.....they are still coming through.

For each thread you've replied to or started there is an "Actions" block near the top right of the thread.  I don't know if there is a global "turn off" but if you no longer want to get "Why is Lightroom 3 so slow" notifications, you turn it off for that thread in particular.

Hope that helps.

Jay S.

Thank you JayS ... I hadn't even noticed that.  I thought it was a "general" preferences option and did not note it was a thread by thread issue.

I have deactivated it within the thread itself and will watch to see if it works.  Thanks for the help.

Cheers

You're welcome.

Jay S.

Likes

translate

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 ,
Jul 02, 2010 Jul 02, 2010

Copy link to clipboard

Copied

I have tried every cancellation option I can find, and the e-mail replies just keep on coming.  The only reason I'm answering this thread is because I have already done so.  Best solution, just don't get involved!  This is ridiculous.  I hadn't opened my e-mail at home for a couple of days and had more than 100 replies that I had to get rid of.

Likes

translate

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