Light Room running very slow

[rayk60948421]

Hi I am having a lousy time with LR trying to develop my work. I have read through the tips section and made all the recommended settings changes to maximize performance. My PC has more than the required hardware specifications to run this product. I have lots of disc space. I have had Adobe remote assistance trouble shoot this matter at least 5 times now. I have had 2 repair people come to the house to try to come up with a solution, perhaps there's a bug in the PC or some other issue, and I have taken the PC into a computer repair shop but no body can find any problem with the PC. I had the graphics card replaced with a higher capacity card as was suggested by one of Adobes techs. Every time I have this worked on by Adobe remote, it works fine... for about 20mins, then it starts to slow down, the more I use it the slower it gets. ( not responding ) pops up every time I touch the mouse to make an adjustment. Very frustrating. The only Adobe tip that has me wondering is they say to make sure LR is running on 64bit. They say to start LR and look up at the title across the top of the screen and it should have X64 in the title, well mine dose not say X64. I don't know how to check that it is on 64bit, I asked the Adobe tech and he didn't know.

[Just Shoot Me]

Try disabling your anti virus program and test.

[rayk60948421]

Hi I shut off the windows anti virus but it didn't help.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[GoldingD]

To determine your LightRoom (LR) version and architecture, In LR click on Help (menu bar) then System Info, a screen will pop up.

Click on the Copy button.

Bring up Notepad, or some other text editor, and paste that info. Delete most of the info from this test file.I have pasted my example below. Providing this info on this forum is helpfull for diagnostics by other members

(you could just take a screen shot, but that might give info you do not want out like e-mail address)

You will see if you are running x64 app

For example (with emphasis added)

(not the O.P. data)

(Windows PC, apple I don't know)

Lightroom Classic version: 8.0 [ 1193777 ]

License: Creative Cloud

Language setting: en

Operating system: Windows 10 - Business Edition

Version: 10.0.17134

Application architecture: x64   (Yep x64)

System architecture: x64

Logical processor count: 8

Processor speed: 4.0 GHz

Built-in memory: 16317.1 MB

Real memory available to Lightroom: 16317.1 MB

Real memory used by Lightroom: 6438.2 MB (39.4%)

Virtual memory used by Lightroom: 10123.7 MB

GDI objects count: 1211

USER objects count: 3348

Process handles count: 3442

Memory cache size: 46.5MB

Internal Camera Raw revision: 61

Maximum thread count used by Camera Raw: 5

Camera Raw SIMD optimization: SSE2,AVX,AVX2

Camera Raw virtual memory: 1670MB / 8158MB (20%)

Camera Raw real memory: 1683MB / 16317MB (10%)

System DPI setting: 96 DPI

Desktop composition enabled: Yes

Displays: 1) 1920x1080

Input types: Multitouch: No, Integrated touch: No, Integrated pen: Yes, External touch: No, External pen: Yes, Keyboard: No

Graphics Processor Info:

DirectX: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980 Ti (23.21.13.8813)   (oh, what is your GPU? is it a problematic one, we would see here, mine works just fine)

Application folder: C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Lightroom Classic CC   (yep, again, x64 program folder)

Library Path: W:\Active Projects\Photography\3 Vacation October 2010\3 Vacation October 2010-2-2-2-2.lrcat

Settings Folder: C:\Users\goldi\AppData\Roaming\Adobe\Lightroom

[rayk60948421]

Thank you,  went to system info and it shows it as Application architecture x64System architecture x64.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[GoldingD]

Did the service Nerds (techs) consider if your computer, or some component in it is overheating? Does this PC have a temp sensor installed that is displaying CPU and cabinet temps?

OTHER MEMBERS, any recommendation for a app to monitor the O.P. PC temp?

I say this, because after some time goes by your app goes buggy, Overtempt reaction??

[rayk60948421]

Thanks , good point. The updated graphics card has a fan built in to it. I will supply some air flow around the PC to see if it makes a difference. Thank you.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[GoldingD]

many GPU's need additional power, more than the cards contacts plugged into the motherboard socket provides. They have a power connector (or two) on them. Might just run the fans. What was the card installed??

[rayk60948421]

Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[Woofy]

I had the same problem and I think (touch wood) that it might be solved.  I have an extremely high spec PC with 32gig of RAM but LR Classic had become unusable - literally.  I'm a pro photographer dependent on LR Classic and it was very worrying for me.

Based on davidg36166309's post, I compared my system to his (pasted system info into Notepad etc) and I noticed that my Lightroom Camera Raw Memory cache size was only 8.9MB whereas his is 45.5MB so I altered mine to 50MB which appears to have done the trick. (From Library module.... Edit / Preferences / Performance: Camera Raw Cache Settings.    I've kept the cache on my C drive which is a small 256GB but fast M.2 SSD.

Incidentally, my "Camera Raw virtual memory shows 1184MB / 16334MB (7%)" and "Camera Raw real memory: 1332MB / 32668MB (4%)", but I don't know how to increase these or if it is an automatic setting.

I have no idea why increasing the Camera Raw Memory cache seems to have worked because 50MB still seems like a very small amount compared to my 32 gig of RAM and dedicated Photoshop cache on a 3TB WD Black internal drive !!

Anyway, if it turns out that I've counted my chickens before they've hatched I'll post an update here on this thread.  Also, I'd be very interested to hear if it works for anyone else, so please post if it does.

[rayk60948421]

Thank you for the info, I'll look into those settings tonight it sounds promising. Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[Jao vdL]

Memory cache size was only 8.9MB whereas his is 45.5MB

The memory cache you see in the system report has nothing to do with camera raw. It is a dynamically determined number that has to do with internal memory management. You can't control that.

From Library module.... Edit / Preferences / Performance: Camera Raw Cache Settings.

This sets the size of the fast loading database on your hard disk. It has nothing to do with the memory cache you referred to earlier. The size of the camera raw cache should be in the gigabyte range. The default is 5Gigabytes. Typically this should be a few 10's go gigabytes and does indeed help performance a bit if you increase it. it especially helps switching between images in Develop if you are jumping between images that have been in Develop before. It won't help jumping between images in Library.

Incidentally, my "Camera Raw virtual memory shows 1184MB / 16334MB (7%)" and "Camera Raw real memory: 1332MB / 32668MB (4%)", but I don't know how to increase these or if it is an automatic setting.

You have no control over this indeed This is all automatic based on the available real memory and pressure on the memory by other apps and the OS.

[rayk60948421]

Great thank you for the info.Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[Woofy]

Thanks for the info folks.

I mistakenly typed MB instead of GB when I referred to Camera Raw Cache Settings.  That aside, since I increased the maximum cache size to 50GB, LR performance has been much better but not perfect. In particular, cloning/healing can occasionally take 30 seconds to complete an action & settle down.

Perhaps it might be worth noting that my typical usage could be different to most other's? I might have say 400 broadly similar RAW (DNG) images of dogs photographed in a mobile studio and I'll whittle it down to 15 - 20 of each individual animal & sorted into folders. Overall settings are then applied by syncing or pasting but I have a lot of cleaning up to do on each image - tonal tweaks, brush work, cloning out, healing, radial filter etc.

David... I'm going to have a look at those links now.  If I find anything that improves my LR setup/performance I'll report back

[Just Shoot Me]

Although LR has all those adjustment settings, clone, heal, spot removal, radial filter and the like, if you are doing extensive edits on an image it is my opinion that those should be done in Photoshop.

[Woofy]

On a single image, definitely, but after a dog show or country fair I will have at least 450 images (after culling).  I shoot in RAW and convert to DNG.  Photoshop returns each image in TIFF or PSD at approximately 3 times the size of the original DNG (or CR2).

THEN, I have to export as low res JPGs with watermark for my website shop.  Not easy to do in bulk from from Photoshop, which is why I thought Adobe developed Lightroom. (BTW, Bridge cannot be used because there is a network involved)

I have just watched the Kevin Mullins video from the links kindly provided by davidg36166309 and Kevin manages to work on 600+ images from a wedding shoot without a problem and he is doing all kinds of edits from within LR.

[Jao vdL]

If you da lot of cloning/healing brush stuff, this is the thing that

Lightroom really struggles with especially if you have lens corrections set

at the same time. Most of the cloning healing and brush stuff is not

accelerated by the GPU. That said 30 seconds wait is really long. My main

machine is from 2012 (a Mac book pro) and it rarely takes more than a

second to do a clone/heal stamp. I do a lot in landscape photography

getting rid of dust bunnies in skies. Sometimes 30 per image or so (I can’t

stand them)

[Woofy]

Yes, I think you're right about the lens corrections, I'd seen that suggested before somewhere but not acted on it.  I'll remove them from my presets and see if that makes a difference. It's easy to apply as one of the last actions so long as it doesn't alter a tight crop too much.

I often copy & paste settings from a previous image of a similar dog prior to actual adjustment, so I must remember to uncheck the lens corrections box.

[GoldingD]

Hmm,I see one workflow issue. perhaps? Perhaps I misunderstand or perhaps reading something in to this.

Apparently, when you leave LR to Edit in PS, you stop managing your files via LR and export to JPEG via PS?

My workflow (simplified, h=just for the LR to PS to LR part)

1. Use LR as DAM. Create catalog for my photoshoot (not a single monster catalog fan, look at all the members that have lost everything when their huge catalog went south)

2. Create a folder in catalog specifically for RAW, another for TIFF, and occasonaly oone for JPEG (to share to Facebook, or to send to printers)

3. Import RAW, work over Metadata, post process in LR. Work on the images as much as I can in LR.

4. Export to TIFF (in LR)

5. For those I need or want to work on in PS (typical content aware fill), I do so using the TIFF. I do whatever in PS, Oh, and I edit the original, and bring the edited original back into LR.

6. Might also do a bit of work on the TIFF using third party apps like NIK, Luminar, etc.

7. As for JPEG, I export the TIFF to JPEG, export as appropriate for wherever I will be publishing (Facebook, a Printer Service, some web page?)

8. And eventually, I use the Smugmug Publishing service in LR to export those TIFF files as JPEG to Smugmug (no I do not crete JPEGs for that)

[Woofy]

Looking at it now, I see that it was ambiguous how I described that part of my workflow.   No, I export from Lightroom, not Photoshop and I try to organise everything from within LR.

My workflow is extremely similar to your's - steps 1 - 7.
I create backup catalogues at least once every 7 days and to a different hard drive/location.  I'd love to backup to a cloud service in addition, but my upload speeds are rubbish despite being on "fibre to the cabinet" (2.5Mbps upload and have had extensive battles with BT Openreach).

To get back to the subject, my LR performance has improved having tried & implemented some of the suggestions in this thread.  Unfortunately, because I have to get an urgent job done right now, I haven't been able to isolate which settings have had the desired effect.

[rayk60948421]

Interesting,  why photoshop ?Sent from my Samsung Galaxy smartphone.

[Woofy]

Photoshop runs blazingly fast on a decent PC/MAC, and if you make a new layer, then Ctrl+Shift+A takes you into Camera Raw and then you have a very similar set of controls to LR.
When I open an image from Lightroom into Photoshop, cloning & healing are instantaneous in both the standard Photoshop interface and in the Camera Raw filter(on my PC anyway). I do all my more intricate edits in Photoshop.

[GoldingD]

Starting to get similar issues (reply's) mixed up. Might have shared this.

Three links that relate:

Lightroom Quick Tips - Episode 92: Optimize Lightroom Performance - YouTube

https://f16.click/tips/lightroom-performance-tips.html

https://digital-photography-school.com/10-tips-to-improve-lightrooms-speed-and-performance-without-a...

[Jao vdL]

Photoshop has a much simpler job to do than Lightroom. It just has a simple matrix of pixels to move around. Lightroom has to do the raw data demosaic and the lens corrections, cloning/healing, brushes etc in a nondestructive manner, so every change it has to recalculate the entire chain. In photoshop, your edits are 'baked-in" so it doesn't have to go through the entire chain of calculations every time.

[TheLandOfDustin]

The only thing you need to know is this - don't take advice from anyone on how to 'improve' performance. The simple fact is this - Adobe has no idea how to make their software work with hardware. period. It doesn't matter if you use the absolute latest and most advanced hardware, Lightroom Classic CC is and will forever be a horrendously performing application. Until Adobe master the BASICS, they will never get it. Years and years of using their software, performance has always been the big issue with their software. PC or Mac. If you've ever wondered why there is so many alternative applications like lightroom, it's because people are fed up with Adobe giving zero-craps about performance. I have no faith they will ever master these fundamental problems with their software.