Stephen, swyost wrote: The Lightroom 3 beta was fully capable of runnning side by side with Lightroom 2.7 on Windows machines. This was not "a problem" for any Windows users I know (myself included).  Stephen We are trying to determine the origin of the performance problems for those who are hit by them. We are gathering facts. Nobody told that different versions of LR could not run side by side. The fact is that starting with the 3.2 upgrade some people (including me) started to have so severe problems with LR that it was no longer usable. Another fact is that - in my case - uninstalling, cleaning up and re-installing solved the problem. Which tends to demonstrate that - again, in my case - the problem is not a hardware or OS configuration issue because I didn't change anything to the system (beside the registry cleanup of LR entries) and because I even didn't reboot after uninstalling, cleaning up and re-installing. The cure was immediate. I continue investigating this issue because Since I have a developer background, I'd like to understand what happened and maybe I'm able to upload valuable information to the development team. It would be nice to find a way to help those who are still struggling with these performance issues. ... View more

Hi, Samoreen wrote: Well, I bit the bullet and Made a backup copy of my preference file and of my presets Uninstalled LR Thoroughly and manually cleaned up disk and registry by removing every visible trace of LR that I could find. Re-installed LR 3.3 Re-installed my preference file. Re-installed my presets Re-launched LR and selected my main catalog I didn't change anything to my system settings, to my Startup menu or to anything else. I didn't even rebooted the system. Something new to report, for what it's worth. I made a Norton Ghost image of my disk before making the above changes. So I'm able to compare the contents of the various Lightroom folders before and after the changes (I could also compare other folders but I don't know where to look). I'm trying to sort out what's really significant and I noticed the following... As mentioned above, I made a backup of my preference file before uninstalling/re-installing LR and I re-installed this backup after re-installing but before launching LR for the first time. So I started up with exactly the same preference file as before. When comparing the current contents of the this file with the pre-reinstall version, I can see a lot of differences that are due to what I did in LR since its re-installation. But I noticed that the following data have disappeared from the preference file:     Adobe_pendingBackupPaths = "pendingBackups = {\ }\ ",     Adobe_pendingVacuumPaths = "pendingVacuum = {\ }\ ",     Adobe_successfulUpgrades0200022 = "pickle = {\     [\"D:\\\\Images\\\\SharedLibrary\\\\SharedLibrary.lrcat\"] = {\         catalogType = \"lr\",\         id = \"82F39AC3-7A20-4AEE-BDC4-E38D8A0B4E6A\",\         upgraded = \"D:\\\\Images\\\\SharedLibrary\\\\SharedLibrary-2.lrcat\",\     },\ }\ ",     Adobe_successfulUpgrades0300025 = "pickle = {\     [\"D:\\\\Images\\\\SharedLibrary\\\\SharedLibrary-2.lrcat\"] = {\         catalogType = \"lr\",\         id = \"82F39AC3-7A20-4AEE-BDC4-E38D8A0B4E6A\",\         upgraded = \"D:\\\\Images\\\\SharedLibrary\\\\SharedLibrary-2-2.lrcat\",\     },\ }\ ", ... firstLaunchHasRun20 = true There are many other differences but this one doesn't seem to be related to any LR option that I could change since I have re-installed. I don't know whether it's important. If anyone at Adobe wants a copy of both versions of the preference file, just give me an email address. Beside this, there are differences in the application folder: In the current (re-installed) version, the Local Adjustment Presets subfolder contains the following templates which were not present before: Burn (Darken).lrtemplate, Dodge (Lighten).lrtemplate, Iris Enhance.lrtemplate, Teeth Whitening.lrtemplate. Soften Skin.lrtemplate is present in both versions. Similar difference in the Lightroom Presets subfolder for: Burn Full-Sized JPEGs.lrtemplate, Export to DNG.lrtemplate, For E-Mail.lrtemplate (not present before). Watermarks subfolder now present. Wasn't there before. Web Templates was present before (although empty) and no longer there. In the Keyword Sets subfolder I previously had Macro.lrtemplate. It's no longer there. At least, we can say that upgrading without re-installing doesn't give the same results as uninstalling, cleaning up and re-installing (although 3.3 was installed in a new folder, I insist). -- Patrick ... View more

Hi Stephen, swyost wrote: I am glad people think they have identified a specific issue.  At this point they should refer it to the engineers to confirm whether it is a software issue they can address or a hardware issue possibly beyond control. As far as I am concerned, I'm just reporting what I see, what problems I had, what I did and the results I obtained. I am not drawing any conclusion (beside the fact that I'm pretty sure it's a software problem because I didn't change anything to my hardware and to my OS and LR is now working correctly on this system). That's the job of the development team. This thread has been started by a member of this team so I guess it's not useful to upload the same reports to Adobe directly. ... View more

JW Stephenson wrote: Tells me any gains might be temporary.  Hope that is not the case with the two of you. Hi, Not for me. LR continues to work normally without any problem for the moment. Even the spot clone/heal tool is now working in real time. The target area is updated as soon as I move the source area. Before, I had to wait up to 10-15 seconds before the target area was updated. ... View more

Lee Jay wrote: I have had performance problems (some pretty dramatic), and I have always uninstalled the previous version. That's why I suggested to get some statistics about this. Also, it's interesting to know how the previous version was uninstalled. Just using the uninstaller is probably not enough in some cases. It's because I don't want to draw definitive conclusions from my case (or from your case) that it's interesting to collect more information. After all, if I had waited for help from Adobe, I would still be struggling with a non usable software. -- Patrick ... View more

Hi, Lee Jay wrote: That's for an entirely different reason and has nothing to do with the current situation. Maybe but the reason is irrelevant. The fact is important: this tester never had performance problems and has always uninstalled the previous version before testing a new one. -- Patrick ... View more

Hi, IMHO, the following question should be added to the Lightroom bug report form (or should be asked when users are reporting problems with LR): If you have upgraded from a previous version, did you uninstall the previous version before installing the new one? It would be interesting to see if there's a relationship between the way LR has been installed (upgraded) and the fact that a given user is hit by these performance problems. If there's an obvious correlation, we might have discovered something interesting. I recently got in touch with someone who has access to the test versions of LR and he told me that Adobe always recommend to uninstall the previous version before installing the new one. If I remember well, the installer doesn't make such a recommendation. If this is necessary the installer should proceed by itself with the full uninstallation of the previous version before installing the new one (at least, if it has the same major version number). My two cents... -- Patrick ... View more

PhilBurness wrote: My question at the end is more one of "should people wait for an official ADOBE fix, or plough ahead and hope they don't make a mistake somewhere?" Well, while there's no real risk deleting the folders and files I mentioned (provided the catalog is not touched and there's a backup somewhere), removing keys in the registry can be risky if this is done by beginners. In that case, they should either wait for a move from Adobe or request assistance from someone having more experience with Windows. Writing a cleanup script is clearly the responsibility of Adobe. The uninstaller doesn't do a clean job. It should ask which data the user wants to keep (because he's planning a re-installation) and eliminate the rest of the files and registry keys. However, there are not that much Lightroom related keys in the registry. One could try to follow the above instructions while skipping the registry cleanup. Maybe this would be enough. From all the Lightroom elements I removed from my system, there's probably only one that was causing trouble. So trying a disk-only cleanup operation can do no harm. The user would just lose time uninstalling and re-installing LR if the operation doesn't succeed. PS: It's already late in the night on this side of the Big Pond, so I will no longer answer until tomorrow. Good luck. ... View more

Hi Phil, PhilBurness wrote: A write up of how to implement the changes you have made would be fantastic for novice users, although a burden on your time I suspect. Is my answer to JW Stephenson not enough (msg #205 in this thread)? Novice users really needing even more accurate instructions should avoid editing the registry anyway. I'm not sure. -- Patrick ... View more

thewhitedog wrote: @ Patrick: It's not so much that Macs are more expensive as that Apple doesn't make inexpensive computers... Thanks very much for the advice. ... View more

Hi, DJ-G wrote: I also get the hovering access. I'm going to clean out the registry and see if I get the same results. Did you get rid of the hovering accesses completely? Yes, totally. Now I just get the 10 second poll which was fully explained by Dan and doesn't do any harm. ... View more

Hi, thewhitedog wrote: @ Patrick: Man am I glad OS X doesn't have a registry! I was considering switching to a Mac but they are a bit too expensive, IMHO. thewhitedog wrote: It remains to be seen how extensive these problems with the registry are, but they move the focus away from hardware once more and back to software issues. Yes, that's the key point. I think it's now a proven thing that these performance issues in LR have little to do with the hardware configuration or the OS of the system running it (provided it's a "decent" system meeting the minimum requirements specified by Adobe). There's no reason that a system able to run Photoshop CS5 and Camera Raw without a hitch could not run Lightroom the same way. After all, LR is just Camera Raw + a better user interface and a lightweight DBMS. ... View more

Hi, DJ-G wrote: Just being in the Library loupe doing absolutely nothing I get about 35 registry accesses every 10 seconds. This one is acknowledged. See above. Quoting Dan Tull: The first one (10 second poll) is probably a side effect (we do not poll  these directly) of LR asking for an enumeration of active volumes (it  uses this to update the volume header of the folders panel and update  offline status for photos. Explorer checks those keys on its own as part  of that operation apparently. LR would probably be better to subscribe  to events to keep this up to date instead, though the impact of polling  at a 10 second interval probably isn't huge, either. ... View more

Hi Jeff, JW Stephenson wrote: I am not a registry or OS expert, so would you mind elaborating on exactly what you did for the above step?  I have W7 but would consider doing exactly what you have done for the chance of solving the sluggish problem. Registry I just launched Regedit and did a search (Ctrl F) for "Lightroom" from the root key (My Computer). I deleted any key that had "Lightroom" in it (using F3 to find the next one). However, I did not delete HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Adobe\Lightroom\1.0 because it holds registration information and a serial number (I don't know if and how it is used by the subsequent versions of LR - probably not, I guess). Disk After uninstalling LR, I renamed Documents and Settings/[username]/Application Data/Adobe/Lightroom to Lightroom.old (see below). Under Windows 7 it's Users/[ username]/AppData/Roaming/Adobe/Lightroom. I deleted C:\Program Files\Adobe\Adobe Photoshop Lightroom 3.3. I did not remove C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Application Data\Adobe\Lightroom because it only holds registration data. I also didn't do anything to my LR catalog folder (which is not at the default location but on a different hard disk). NB: All these files and folders were left behind after "uninstallation". But in that case, this was useful because having renamed Documents and Settings/[username]/Application Data/Adobe/Lightroom allowed me, after re-installation, to compare the Lightroom.old and the new Lightroom folders (I use Beyond Compare from Scooter Software for comparisons - this is the best comparison utility ever). So I could easily restore some presets and my plugins (beware: Development presets cannot be restored this way - you must re-import them, which you can do from the Lightroom.old\Develop Presets folder). I also restored my preferences this way. Then I removed the Lightroom.old folder after re-importing my Develop Presets from LR. See this document if you need information about files and folder locations. Hope this helps. -- Patrick ... View more

TK2142 wrote: I checked on Windows XP (SP3). I only get 22 registry accesses once when I start creating a stroke using the brush and another 22 when I finish the stroke. Thanks  for testing. I'm also running XP Pro (SP3). I installed a trial on  another XP system (a laptop). No problem. No frantic registry accesses.  No performance problem. Well, I bit the bullet and Made a backup copy of my preference file and of my presets Uninstalled LR Thoroughly and manually cleaned up disk and registry by removing every visible trace of LR that I could find. Re-installed LR 3.3 Re-installed my preference file. Re-installed my presets Re-launched LR and selected my main catalog I didn't change anything to my system settings, to my Startup menu or to anything else. I didn't even rebooted the system. No more wild registry accesses to the Time Zone settings. No more performance problems when using the local adjustment brush.  There's no possible comparison between now and before. LR is running  much faster now. So I guess that this registry activity was the cause of  the massive slowdown of LR. Again, it would be interesting that those  having performance problems with the local adjustment tools have a look  at the registry activity when doing such adjustments. I hope that the users having the same performance issue as I had can fix it this way. Anyway, there's still something wrong to unhide in LR. I always made clean updates and never did anything fancy with it. These registry accesses were (indirectly) made from LR and only from LR. No problem with Camera Raw or with any other application. Maybe there's something going wrong with the upgrade/installation process, starting with 3.2. ... View more

Hi, George in Seattle wrote: It waits until you release the mouse button Not exactly the same for me here. No target update occurs until I stop moving the spot source for a while (clone mode or heal mode), not until I actually release the mouse button. Probably another symptom of the performance problem discussed elsewhere. ... View more

Samoreen wrote: The call comes from substrate.dll (LR) => ValidateLocale (kernel32) => SetClientTimeZoneInformation (kernel32) => ntoskrnl.exe (kernel) To be more accurate, there are 5 consecutive calls from substrate.dll before a call in kernel32 is made. First call is made from address 48A8E (from lua_yield ?) Next call from address 3F735 (from lua_call ?) Next call from address 48833 (from lua_getinfo ?) Next call from address 485FD (from lua_getinfo ?) Next call from address 2A3A0 (from AgURIUtils_load_L ?) These values are offsets from the loading address of substrate.dll which in my case is 602B0000. The function names are just guesses based on the address. Hope this helps. ... View more

Lee Jay wrote: In can you're curious, have a look at the seventh slide: http://www.troygaul.com/LrExposedC4.html Interesting. Thanks for the pointer. ... View more

Dan, DanTull wrote: The other one is potentially interesting. I'll have to look to see what call causes that to be hit. Again, LR is definitely not polling the registry itself, but obviously it is doing something which has a registry query as a side effect. The call comes from substrate.dll (LR) => ValidateLocale (kernel32) => SetClientTimeZoneInformation (kernel32) => ntoskrnl.exe (kernel) ... View more

Ian, Ian Lyons wrote: As a matter of interest - is Lr set up to write changes to automatically XMP sidecar? No. I save the XMP files manually when needed. ... View more

Samoreen wrote: LR accesses the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones registry key and some of its subkeys. It does that for every single [mouse] move. I made the same test in Camera Raw and I didn't observe the same behavior. Everything is running without a hitch. Now the problem is: what is the connection between a mouse move in Develop mode and the need for LR to get information about my Time Zone settings? For the moment, I can only imagine one answer: LR is reading the image's metadata all the time. When it reads the image capture date (or any other date/time related information), it needs to interpret these data against the system time zone. This appears to be a ridiculous idea but I can't see any other explanation about this need to access the Time Zone settings of my system. ... View more

Hi, Samoreen wrote: The above mentioned registry keys are read each time I'm moving the local adjustement brush cursor. If I stop moving the mouse, LR stops reading these keys. As soon as I start creating new brush strokes, the registry keys are read again. EDIT: It seems that the problem is not only related to the local adjustment brush. This happens systematically when I hover the image, even when not in local adjustment mode. Please consider that this represents thousands of registry reads within a few seconds. To make things simpler for those who are less technically oriented : each time you move the mouse over the currently edited image, LR accesses the HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones registry key and some of its subkeys. It does that for every single move (in developer parlance, for each WM_MOUSEMOVE message), which means that in a few seconds, tens of thousands of registry accesses to these keys are generated. This loads the CPU(s) at 100% even if you are not applying brush strokes. Just hovering the image is enough. Hovering other parts of the LR main window does not generate these registry accesses. If the CPU is already overloaded when you are merely hovering the image, you can imagine what's happening when it has to additionally process the brush strokes. ... View more

but it would be useful if others on the Windows platform could check for similar behaviour on their system. Those who don't have Regmon can use Process Monitor. It has replaced the former. ... View more

Hi, Samoreen wrote: Even more astonishing As soon as I start using the local adjustment brush, lightroom.exe is continuously accessing the following registry keys More about this... The above mentioned registry keys are read each time I'm moving the local adjustement brush cursor. If I stop moving the mouse, LR stops reading these keys. As soon as I start creating new brush strokes, the registry keys are read again. EDIT: It seems that the problem is not only related to the local adjustment brush. This happens systematically when I hover the image, even when not in local adjustment mode. Please consider that this represents thousands of registry reads within a few seconds. I also noticed that this also happens when LR doesn't have the focus. If I put LR in the background and Registry Monitor in the foreground, hovering the edited image in LR still generates the registry reads. ... View more

Hi, JW Stephenson wrote: After some internet searching I found out about a program called the Windows Event Viewer (type Event Viewer in the start menu).  From this lead, I found the Windows Event Viewer was recording massive"information" entries... This post gave me the idea to monitor what lightroom.exe is doing with the system when editing. I used the well known sysinternals tools for Windows (File Monitor and Registry Monitor). I disabled all plugins. I noticed the following: Even when doing nothing (LR window minimized), lightroom.exe accesses the registry every 10 seconds and reads the following keys: QueryKey    HKCU\Software\Classes    SUCCESS    Name: \REGISTRY\USER\S-1-5-21-1875880806-976815447-3821793529-1143_CLASSES    OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    NOT FOUND        OpenKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    SUCCESS    Access: 0x8     QueryKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    SUCCESS    Name: \REGISTRY\MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    08148193    OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    NOT FOUND        EnumerateKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    SUCCESS    Name: {fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    QueryKey    HKCU\Software\Classes    SUCCESS    Name: \REGISTRY\USER\S-1-5-21-1875880806-976815447-3821793529-1143_CLASSES    OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    NOT FOUND        OpenKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    SUCCESS    Access: 0x1     QueryKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    SUCCESS    Name: \REGISTRY\MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Classes\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    NOT FOUND        QueryValue    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}\DriveMask    SUCCESS    0x20    CloseKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions\{fbeb8a05-beee-4442-804e-409d6c4515e9}    SUCCESS        EnumerateKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    NO MORE ENTRIES        CloseKey    HKCR\Drive\shellex\FolderExtensions    SUCCESS        OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume    SUCCESS    Access: 0x2000000     OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS    Access: 0x2000000     CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume    SUCCESS        QueryValue    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\Generation    SUCCESS    0x1    CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS        OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS    Access: 0x2000000     QueryValue    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\_LabelFromReg    SUCCESS    "NTFS-2"    CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS        OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume    SUCCESS    Access: 0x2000000     OpenKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS    Access: 0x2000000     CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume    SUCCESS        QueryValue    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\Generation    SUCCESS    0x1    CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Explorer\MountPoints2\CPC\Volume\{2c18e6e0-787e-11db-ad7d-0015f2553462}\    SUCCESS    Since this information is static, I wonder why it must read it again every 10 seconds. Even more astonishing As soon as I start using the local adjustment brush, lightroom.exe is continuously accessing the following keys OpenKey    HKCU    SUCCESS    Access: 0xF003F     CreateKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones    SUCCESS    Access: 0xF003F     CloseKey    HKCU    SUCCESS        QueryValue    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones\TimeZoneKeyName    SUCCESS    "Romance Standard Time"    OpenKey    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time    SUCCESS    Access: 0x20019     QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Std    SUCCESS    "Romance Standard Time"    QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Dlt    SUCCESS    "Romance Daylight Time"    QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Tzi    SUCCESS    C4 FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 ...    CloseKey    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time    SUCCESS        CloseKey    HKCU\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones    SUCCESS        OpenKey    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time    SUCCESS    Access: 0x20019     QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Std    SUCCESS    "Romance Standard Time"    QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Dlt    SUCCESS    "Romance Daylight Time"    QueryValue    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Tzi    SUCCESS    C4 FF FF FF 00 00 00 00 ...    CloseKey    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\currentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time    SUCCESS        OpenKey    HKLM\Software\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\Time Zones\Romance Standard Time\Dynamic DST    NOT FOUND When I say continuously, this really does mean it doesn't stop accessing the same keys. As soon as it is done with the last line of the above block, it starts again. This madness stops as soon as I stop using the local adjustment brush. Now tell me what this tool has to do with the Time Zone settings of my system. Here again, this is static information, so there's no need to read it again and again. It won't change during a Windows session. Performance problems you said? No wonder that LR becomes slow if it spends time doing useless things with the registry. ... View more

Hi, areohbee wrote: Some people assume if you say its a hardware problem that you mean: bad card or incompatible hardware/driver..., but the hardware could be fine, and even the driver could be fine, and yet the problem could still be solved by replacing the hardware - because it stirs things up a bit, and maybe changes the order certain things get loaded in... Based on my experience as a developer, I absolutely agree with this. This is just common sense. Unfortunately some customer support dpts and even some developers have difficulties understanding this (not specific to Adobe, though). A bug may or may not occur on a given hardware configuration depending on how the software is loaded in memory. For example, a dangling pointer problem may or may not cause an application to crash depending on the (wrong) address it is erroneously pointing to. And this address depends itself on where the program is sitting in memory which in turn depends on how other programs, drivers and services are loaded at startup. That's why the non-occurence of a bug on a given configuration is not a proof of the non-existence of the bug. An existing bug is not necessarily visible and will not necessarily cause any trouble. Just a matter of luck. ... View more

Hi, Tom Hogarty wrote: Please use this discussion topic for your feedback on Lightroom 3.3 RC and the final Lightroom 3.3 release when it becomes available.  The Lightroom team has tried very hard to extract useful feedback from the following discussion topic but due to the length and amount of chatter we need to start a new, more focused thread.  Please post specifics about your experience and be sure to include information about your hardware configuration. So I'm moving to this thread excerpts of reports that I have made in other threads. I have no performance problems in the Library module. I only have problems when using the local adjustment tools. I'm running LR 3.3 under XP Pro SP3 32-bit (3GB - fast hard disks with a lot of free space). Dual monitor. Processor: AMB Athlon 64 X2 Dual 2.21 Ghz. NVidia GeForce 9500 GT. Lastest driver installed. NView disabled. Thanks in advance for your efforts. Hi, After  installing LR 3.2, the first thing I noticed is that it is much slower than the previous version... But the most terrible novelty of this version is that the Adjustment Brush is going berserk after a while: It first slows down to a crawl, so slow that it's almost impossible to work with. While  working with it after a while, it starts to show random rectangular areas that are copies of other areas of the image that have nothing to do with the area I'm working on. This happens after a brush stroke. The Undo command makes these rectangular "patches" disappear. From time to time, the whole image is flipped upside down (You can't believe it? Neither could I). Eventually, just after a brush stroke, the sandclock mouse cursor is displayed and the program freezes (at this time it can be using over 1,5 GB of memory although I'm working on a single, standard EOS 5D image). The only way to stop this madness is to kill the process. The Heal/Clone tool also shows a similar misbehavior. I didn't have these problems with the previous version. I can now confirm that all these problems are still there in LR 3.3 final. [Edit] New in 3.3 final: Sometimes during editing (Development module), the LR display becomes totally blank (I'm using the software in a maximized window). Things go back to normal after about 10-15 seconds. Actually, I'm about to abandon LR3 as my main production tool. The performances are acceptable in the rest of the application but using the  adjustment brush has become a nightmare in 3.2 and 3.3. I have read as many forum threads and articles as I could about these performance issues and tried all suggested solutions (be they related to LR itself or to the display driver). No way. I have absolutely no problem in Photoshop CS5, Bibble 5 or DxO. So I doubt that my system is the  culprit. I'm a software professional since PCs exist. I have enough experience to identify software problems when they appear. At least, I'm able to  determine whether I have a hardware problem or if the software I'm using (or writing) is buggy. I have read many reports, many threads, many advice about these performance issues. I'm pretty sure that the problem is LR. I repeat: I do not have any performance issue when editing images in Bibble 5, Photoshop  or DxO Optics Pro. BB5 is at least an order of magnitude faster than LR  when editing images.When I use the Adjustment Brush in Camera Raw, there's absolutely no problem. My hardware is powerful enough and my installation is pretty clean (could it be powerful enough for Camera Raw and not for LR?). My OS is  very stable. I have not seen a BSOD since years and all my applications are running flawlessly on this system (which includes image editing  applications, software development tools, and many others...). Users having various and very powerful systems (PC or Mac - 64-bit or 32-bit) are reporting the very same problems. Like Bruce, I'm convinced that this is not a hardware resource problem. We didn't have these problems with LR2 and LR3 was supposed to enhance performances. Version after version, it has now become unusable for me. Drawing the conclusion that since many users don't have any performance issues, the problem must be on the user's side [that is, their system] would be erroneous. The bug is in LR and may or may not appear depending on the circumstances. Any developer knows that a bug may or may not hit a given user depending on how she uses the software. I admit that these bugs are hard to fix. But LR has to be fixed, no doubt. ... View more