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

[rpavich1234]

Even though this is better than 4.0 or RC-1 it's still bad.

I have a pretty good machine and 3.6 worked great so I know it's possible to have good performance but alas...not in RC-2 yet.

With Clarity set to 0, the filmstrip not showing, and the process at 2010 I have less "max CPU" issues and less "not responding" issues but the problem is far from solved.

[andreas603]

RC2 no diff for me...what P*SSES me off to no end is not being able to process my RAW images with 3.6...My fault for buying a new camera I guess (5D M III)  very very irritated...

[Geoff the kiwi]

You can if you convert them to DNG with the free DNG converter 6.7 at Adobe Labs.

andreas603 wrote:

RC2 no diff for me...what P*SSES me off to no end is not being able to process my RAW images with 3.6...My fault for buying a new camera I guess (5D M III)  very very irritated...

[SF_Brit]

I am definitely in the same boat as you andreas603. 5D MkIII and performance of LR is terrible!!!

[NadavHavakook]

LR4 RC2 is very slow!

Guys please, we know its beta, please do not force us buying new computers by putting code on code, fix the code. My camera didnt change, and LR3.6 was working fine with the same files.

There's is definitely a memory leak too.

Using Free Memory app on Mac and I see how it behaves different on my computer. I am on LR since version one.

[Geoff the kiwi]

While I do understand your frustration appreciate that we are all frustrated. Meanwhile it could help if you give us some details on your system, etc such as these:

Mac 10.7.3

MBP 2012

i7 8gb ram

750Gb 7200 internal

12Tb Promise Raid external

Catalogs and cache on internal

Image files - some internal, some external

Files mainly Nikon D7000 converted to DNG.

I haven't seen the slow down at all.

nadavee wrote:

LR4 RC2 is very slow!

Guys please, we know its beta, please do not force us buying new computers by putting code on code, fix the code. My camera didnt change, and LR3.6 was working fine with the same files.

There's is definitely a memory leak too.

Using Free Memory app on Mac and I see how it behaves different on my computer. I am on LR since version one.

[NadavHavakook]

I am on:

Mac OS X 10.6.8

MacBook Pro

Model Identifier:    MacBookPro4,1

Processor Name:    Intel Core 2 Duo

Processor Speed:    2.5 GHz

Number Of Processors:    1

Total Number Of Cores:    2

L2 Cache:    6 MB

Memory:    4 GB

Bus Speed:    800 MHz

My photos and catalog are all on external drive, I wish I could work internal, I know its faster but I cant, not enough space on my laptop drive.

My catalog is 4.3GB and has about 250000 images in it.

My previews are set to High and Quality of1680.

I thought it might be the xmp auto right, so I unchecked it from the catalog settings but did not see any difference, I then re-checked the auto write xmp but now every time I quit LR, I get the msg that it did not finish writing XMP changes.

P.S.

that computer, with the same setup worked just fine on LR 3 (I understand its limitations and realize I can get a faster one these days) but on 4.1 RC2 it is very slow, and takes a lot of memory to operate.

[rpavich1234]

There is no reason that L3 should work like greased lightening and L4 generate a "not responding" message at every mouse click....

[Robbie2006]

I have had enough, I am on RC2 and updated filmstrip to 2012 version and it comes up with the message Lightroom has encountered problems reading this photo!!! I shall now get CS6 trial when it launches this month and if it works alright I will buy the upgrade.

[SF_Brit]

I have a Dell XPS system with the following specs:

3.4 ghz Intel Core i7-2600 Sandy Bridge

16GB Ram

SSD HD for OS (180GB)

Windows 7 Ultimate - 64 bit

numerous USB2.0 and 3.0 HDD with all my photos

Lightroom 3 was magic. Great program fast and efficient. I got Ligthroom 4 and on the same day got the Canon 5D Mark III. Mark III wasnt supported so I went to LR4.1 RC1. The performance tanked. It is terrible. Sooo painful. Even on old catalogs with low res images. It is almost unusable with stalls ('not responding') of the program. Even just moving pic to pic is painstakingly slow. It seems many others have similar performance issues. I moved to RC2 and things have got better, but not to the point of the program being back to the old speeds I am used too and the stalls still occur now and again. I have upped the Caches to extremely large levels and monitoring my PC resources they never are more than 50-60% used. Any advice appreciated. I may try what terry275 is recommending

[piotrh01]

RC 2 - still slow response/lag.

Q9400

8GB RAM

64bit Windows 7 Professional

Ati Radeon HD 4800

[monstredeminuit]

Count me in with same slow/lag problems.

RC2 still slow response/lag in Develop Module.  It's "usable", but certainly not pleasant to use compared to LR3 was.

i7960

12GB RAM (rarelly goes over 50% when using LR)

64bit Win7 Pro

NVIDIA GTX 570

System Hard Drive: SSD OCZ-VERT 224GB

Photos Hard Drive: Western Digital Caviar 2TB 7200RPM

Working on Nikon D3 12MP RAW-Lossless Photos.

LAG EXPERIENCED IN LR4RC2:

Very noticable in Develop Module

(even after all photo previews were rendered 1:1)

- when switching from one photo to the other

- when typing on X to eliminate a photo, and switching to another (it takes seconds for the thumbnail to turn grey with the black flag)

- Copy/Paste Effects from one photo to the other (major lag for the Synchronize pannel to show up)

- etc.

I have the Nikon D800 36MP on order. I'm affraid LR4 might become unusable with that kind of resolution...

[viramati]

Hate to go aginst the grain but strangely for me it has speeded up with Lr4.1RC2 and I am using a 3 year old top spec macbookpro!!! (2.66ghz 8gb sdram, 7200rpm hard-drive)

[Susan S.]

I'm using LR RC2, and while it's not horrible, I'm finding that after a while using it the sliders get so laggy you can't fine tune accurately, and eventually it grinds to a halt almost completely.  A restart of LR fixes it, so I'm quitting LR every thirty minutes or so to avoid issues.

Model Name: iMac

      Model Identifier: iMac9,1

      Processor Name: Intel Core 2 Duo

      Processor Speed: 2.93 GHz

      Memory: 8 GB

System Version: Mac OS X 10.6.8

I don't remember the beta being this bad, but I haven't used LR 4.0 or RC1 to compare.

[Madscape]

Even RC2 is much slower than the ligtning fast LR3.6 ..Nothing is more frustrating than moving a slider and the result happens 3 seconds after you stop.  .. I think I'll be uninstalling Lr4 until I see that it's fixed. I'm sure it will happen.... but I'm not waiting and dealing with this .Toggling from Lightroom to photoshop has a 45 second load time  ...Really ???   .. I bought the upgrade and have a serial number for downloading it in the future.. untill then ..I'll go back to my 3.6 which I used on a daily basis and was VERY content with ..

System :

Windows 7 home premium

Intel Quad Core i7 2600  3.40 GHz

Nvidia 405

12 GB ram

[LR_Mowang]

Just a comment... this is a general forum for LR. All these comments

are great.. but I would suggest you post them to the bug and feed back

page. Not sure how much time ADOBE spend monitoring this public forum.

http://feedback.photoshop.com/photoshop_family

[NadavHavakook]

Oh, they should monitor this, the header says: Lightroom 4 is slow

[jameskachan]

LR4 is unacceptable, RC1 or 2 — doesnt matter.
 Clealry this product was rushed to support the new cameras (and thus forcing owners of those cameras to upgrade) because it is not ready for actual use whatsoever.

It's really questionable releasing software that is clearly not working as it should when a simple camera update of RAW support for the new Nikons and Canon for LR3 users would have sufficed. Clearly, Adobe saw the opertunity to get a large number of people to pay for the new version... in spite of it's failures.

I am a working professional so my interest in this is beyond passive, and while I can tell you I would happily upgrade (and have - though, not happily) to gain new features and enhancements, I dont enjoy being forced to do so when that comes at the price of a massive performance failure in professional workflow. Software that works great and is priced fairly (one thing I will commend LR4 for being...) sure thing! sign me up, take my money. no worries. — but only when it works correctly and speedily.

I'm quite disappointed, and negatively affected work wise.

[Geoff the kiwi]

Just so you all know, the Lightroom team are aware of these issues and are working to try and allevaite them.

[Guest]

"Just so you all know, the Lightroom team are aware of these issues and are working to try and allevaite them"

Yes, certainly.. Adobe couldn't let LR4 in such a bad situation ? LR4 RC2 is the worse thing I've seen from Adobe, curious distorsions on some images with Lens correction (from Adobe) and a very very slow process, with even a little database (less than 1000 images), particularly when you switch from one modul to another. It is soooooo looooong. I don't have these issues with LR3 nor ACR in CS5, with same images of course. So LR4 is now deinstalled and I will nomore use it until all things are corrected and this post concerning "LR4 slow" will be closed definitively.

I don't really understand why Adobe sale this kind of not finished software ? Why haven't they wait until this beta version is ok to bring it to the market ? I feel this LR4 RC2 is a BETA version and IT IS.

[Tashka]

Does the awareness of which you speak include the horrendous coding error of

not stacking/queuing the mouse pointer position along with the mouse action

request? It is unconscionable that such a mistake was in any versions, let

alone all versions to date. Being such a fundamental and basic programming

tenet, we'd fire the code PM w/o a 2nd thought. Programmers certainly are

not what they used to be.

Being so blatantly obvious, I wonder if that wasn't intentional so as to

cover up the very bad program design of the right panel update which

accounts for m of the reported slowdowns. To wit: When you quickly change

selected images, you cah see first hand, the manic gyrations of the panel

caret as the system tries, bit fails, to move to selected keywords. But

that doesn't work anyway so why try until yoi recode that logic.

Sent from my Verizon Wireless 4G LTE DROID

[Wanchese_West]

I shoot a lot and process a lot. Wish it was more, but I'm staying busy. At first LR4 was unacceptable. Now with LR4.1 RC, the performance issues are long forgotten. The only thing that reminds me of my previous issues are the pesky notificartions every time someone posts in this thread. If my 4.1Rc is slower than 3.x, I just don't notice anymore. The AMAZING color temp brush alone is worth a 20% hit to speed and performance for me.

Why don't ya'll quit bitching and start working.  Perhaps you too will find the enhancements worth the percieved diminished performance.

[rpavich1234]

Quote:
Why don't ya'll quit ******** and start working.  Perhaps you too will find the enhancements worth the percieved diminished performance.

Huh?

Why don't we what?

NOTHING is worth a 20 second freeze just because I chose another photo in the filmstrip....for me LR3 was light greased lighting...LR4 is (and I don't throw this word around easily) UNUSUABLE....period.

I can't afford to move a slider and have the screen go black and redraw, the CPU peg at 100% for 20 seconds only to find out that whatever amount of slider I changed wasn't correct.

I love the enhancements, but THOSE ISSUES clearly aren't even close to being worth it for me.

[Wanchese_West]

"Why don't ya'll quit 'female dogging' and start working." Apparently the robo-moderator removes most colorful language.

I guess if I had the problems yuo described, I'd be logging some complaints too. My system is your standard 8 core 12gig Windows pos. My catalog is 413,000 images strong, so I did not elect to convert to the new process. Maybe that is what is saving me.

[rpavich1234]

Yes...I've heard that going to the old 2010 process is much better and on my machine it is much improved...but not nearly like LR3...it's only "better" but not useable.