I’m extremely frustrated

Lightroom: LR 4 user interface, and Develop slider response very sluggish

Hi,

I updated from LR3 to LR4.0 yesterday and I observe a significant delay when I move sliders in the develop module. the delay exceeds often one second. It is not possible to use LR4 with this behavior. In LR3 no such delay happened.
I use WIN64 ultra a quad core @ 2.83GHz. 4MB RAM.
286 people have
this problem
+1
Reply
next » « previous
  • First impression of 4.2 RC1 is good. Previews seem to be faster. I even dare to use a second monitor now. Development sliders okay, NR still being a bit jerky.
    Will have to do some more testing, but I am pretty optmistic now.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • LR 4.2 RC: I would like to make a suggestion on playback of video files. Playback starts out fine then goes downhill with stuttering and jerky playback. I am convinced the main problem here is sync between video and audio. Yet they playback perfectly on my Win 7 PC using WMP, and other external players. Rather than reinventing the wheel for video timing (think reclock), wouldn't it be easier to provide an option to choose an external player to embed in LR? Relying on the users default system codecs is just asking for trouble. As it stands now, I have not found a solution to get smooth playback of my AVCHD videos within LR, trying multiple default codecs. Additionally with improper codecs, LR has the tendency to really bog down, or freeze up. I am also suspicious importing my AVCHD files are creating slow performance in develop module, even when I am working on jpegs. Folders without these AVCHD files seem to be more responsive to changes in develop.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I am hoping the tether 5d mark III addition will be in the "new" LR release, or I will discontinue use of LR.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m angry
    5D 3 tethering claims to be supported in 4.2 — in reality it doesnt work. Adobe not only failed to provide a tethering solution for the new 5D3, they also broke previous canon tethering as well. (not sure if other camera manufactures are affected or not)

    There is a bunch of posts with 5D3, 1DSMK3, 5D2 (personal account from a fellow professional) not working here.

    http://forums.adobe.com/message/47580...

    Adobe, you have some really bad software. LR4 produces great images, but it's useless to work with. It's bogged down with massive lag and performance issues, and missing critical support for tethering.

    Professional photographers need these things.
    This is unacceptable. Apple Aperture works perfectly, C1P while, it has some tethering issues as well right now with Canon, processes RAW files with cleaner white balance, and dramatically faster performance.

    LR 4 has been out for a long time now, I get the impression that this issue isnt being taken seriously, or the software is so failed, that it is in need a major rewrite. I and other professionals I'm sure, would appreciate more transparency.

    When we show up to jobs, and waste a lot of time trying to make your software work, while Art Directors ask us why they cant see the images on the screen, that makes us look very bad. This is our jobs, this is our responsibility, and we critically need to be able to rely on the tools we use. At this point, I don't trust this software, hate using it and am very disappointed in the company.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m frustrated and angry.
    Call me crazy, but processing images used to be a joy. With LR 4 it is tedious beyond tears.

    I am finishing a big job I just shot for one of my favorite clients, the Consumer Electronics Association. They pay me very well to produce exceptional images of their events. And yes I'm bragging. CEA is an amazing group of highly innovative, business people. I'm very fortunate to be privy to this world.

    And yes again, I will be attending CES come January. If you get a chance to go, grab it! You will be blown away by the vast amounts of new technology in so many areas of CE.

    So, I have these 1500 or so images I've got to deal with in a short period of time. I shoot with a D800. Yes, very big files. I shoot on 12 bit compressed raw and import as dngs to keep the file size as small as possible. They come in at around 30 mb. I render standard previews.

    What frustrates me to no end, is having to wait and wait and wait and wait. In the develop module, which is the one I use by far the most, opening a preview in LR 4 is slow. But make even the slightly adjustment, and I have to wait for it to rewrite the preview until I can make another adjustment. It's worse if I use the tools: crop, gradient, brush, etc..

    I have tried every idea from this forum feasible to help LR run faster. Among other ideas, I opened a new catalog and imported about 250 images into it. This helped marginally. I moved LR from my external monitor and tried to work only on my computer. Minimal improvement.

    The only thing that solved the problem was reverting back to Lightroom 3.6. Suddenly, everything worked smoothly, no waiting. All my changes wrote in real time. Had I not been so frustrated and pissed off after wasting way to much time in LR 4, it would've been a joy again.

    Face it, the shooting part of the job, at least shooting events, is hard work and long hours on your feet, striving to come up with the best possible raw file under usually, difficult, changing conditions. Almost every image I shoot requires some amount of tweaking. At home, I used to be able to leisurely take pride in processing my images to the max. Not with LR 4!

    People on the forums said 3.6 was an answer, but I was stubborn. I love the new process version and appreciate how the new controls work. Plus, LR 4 gives me more control and does help me create superior images. It's sad that it is so hopeless for big jobs.

    On my computer, the program uses all the resources at it's disposal to write the previews. Make a change and all four cores of my processor work at full bore until the preview renders the change. Curiously though, it's only using about a third of my ram.

    LR 3.6 has no delay writing previews. All the develop tools work smoothly with real time adjustment on my external monitor. Even on my 13" Macbook Pro, LR 3.6 works almost equally a fast. I travel a lot and my Macbook Pro is important road tool.

    What I recommend to Adobe is that, because Macbook Pros are so pervasive for imaging, they should make that their standard; if a version doesn't work properly on these, then it shouldn't be released. It's unconscionable to foist an imperfect product on the professional community. Yes, there are those without problems. I envy them. But there are far to many loyal, Adobe customers as unhappy as I.

    I don't expect that 4.3 will solve the problem. Perhaps 4.5 or .6. One thing for certain, I will be waiting well after 5.0 comes out before I risk squandering my time by purchasing it.

    Dennis Jones
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I realize that someone not reading my entire post could believe I am still working in the original LR 4 iteration, I emphasize that everything I wrote refers to LR 4.2. I have been through the updates including 4.2RC and find only marginal improvement in performance.

    The question remains; if LR why does the program require so much processing power to render what should only be a very small preview file?
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m deeply disappointed.
    I am also using 4.2 on an 8 core intel Mac, running Snow Leopard 10.8.6. Everything posted here about the speed issues, particularly on any kind of preview re-draw is true in my case too. It is exactly the same behaviour that corrupt files would cause on other software. Lightroom performance has not improved from the beginning of version 4. This is simply flawed software. I find that amazing, considering it is from a company with the resources and experience of Abobe.

    It is worth noting that I have absolutely no performance issues with Photoshop CS6 and that uses the same RAW processing software. Presumably the graphics engines are related too. Maybe the Lightroom development team should go cap-in-hand to the Photoshop guys for some desperately needed programming advice.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • This reply was removed on 2012-11-01.
    see the change log
  • This reply was removed on 2012-11-09.
    see the change log
  • Strange thing. I use LR 4.1 on a 8 core machine Win7 64 bit 8 GB RAM, and there are no significant performance problems, except a loading time of about 2-3 seconds for nef files of 45 MB from my Nikon D800 (36 Mpix). I had to switch from LR 3.6 because LR 3.6 had no raw converter for the large files, however it worked after transforming the nef ́s to tiff ́s (200 MB each), and loading time was identical with the tiff ́s in LR 3.6 as compared to the nef ́s/dng ́s in LR 4.1. After hesitating a few months because of the performance problems reported here, I decided that 45 MB are enough for storing my pictures.
    LR 4 is much better in management of light and shade in difficult situations. I nearly completely stopped doing HDR ́s with a few exceptions of extreme light conditions (dusk or dawn with sun in the picture).
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • Helmut, I completely agree about LR4 being much better at handling contrast range. I always try to meter and shoot for the final result I want (as Ansel Adams has taught us), without leaning on HDR. It is the sole reason I am not reverting to 3.6 to regain the speed loss. The sad fact is that some of us make our living out of producing a number of cleanly edited photographs for a given budget. Time is money, as they say, and twice the time is half the money is what I (sadly have to) say.

    Lightroom 4 has been slow for a long time now. LR3 was much faster. Maybe Adobe need to eat humble pie and evolve what was Lightroom 3.6. They may have taken a wrong turn.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m hopeful
    LR 4.3 rc 1 sure came out in a hurry. i've installed it and upon initial test, looks promising.

    i'll keep testing :)
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • LR 4.3 RC is a bit faster. Well done! You could have mentioned this in the release notes.
    • |> "You could have mentioned this in the release notes."

      And/or this forum. Many users just want to be kept in the loop - this isn't happening (they invest great energy in feedback and get scant little info in return...). Granted, some users will see any response from Adobe as an opportunity to bash some more, so I can kinda sympathize...

      Cheers,
      Rob
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • I added this to the other thread on this, but just thought I'd share here too:

    I have been evaluating each new dot release since Lightroom 4.0 on my mid-2010 Mac Pro (6-core, 16GB RAM & dual 24" displays).

    This was using Snow Leopard (10.6.8) and each time the results were so excruciating slow, that I was forced to go back to Lightroom 3.

    After installing Mountain Lion (10.8.2) on a separate hard drive and then a fresh install of Lightroom 4.2, it appears to now finally be usable for me.

    This was a small subset of my archive (200 photos) - I am now going to try this on the larger archive.

    In case this helps someone.
    Frez
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • I’m annoyed
    @Glenn Springer and Adobe:

    I love using LR and I liked LR3 better because it was quick. Maybe not as technologically advanced as LR4 but it wasn't a dreaded task to edit photos.

    People are "whining" about the SLOW LR4 issue because its infuriating. I have upgraded my hard drive, upgraded to a dedicated video card and everything else that has been suggested by Adobe support staff. There has been NO noticable speed increase when doing this..

    If there are this many people having issues you guys have an issue in developing the software. Im not a software writer so don't complain if I tell you you have a problem. Maybe you should actually admit there is a problem. If you admited there was a problem you might have less poeple talking about it. Even when LR 4.2 was released I didn't see anything that stated you guys were working to speed up a slow program.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • This reply was removed on 2012-12-05.
    see the change log
  • Pete Green (Customer Advocate) December 05, 2012 02:12
    Hi all,

    We have put together a technote containing several less traditional suggestions for optimizing Lightroom's performance that we hope will help.

    http://adobe.ly/LRPerformanceHints

    Let us know which of these suggestions are helpful to you. Thanks!
    • It basically says: Don't use Lightroom to much for image corrections. Hilarious. True pros at work...
    • It does not say that. It says using thousands of local or spot corrections can be slow. If you have an image in need of that many local or spot corrections, the destructive tools in PS are a much better choice anyway.

      I routinely use LR with dozens of local or spot corrections without issue. That's actually quite a lot of "fixing". I can't imagine needing "thousands".

      Also, the advice in that article is wrong in one area - 1:3. 1:3 will be just as slow as 1:2 or fit if fit is between 1:2 and 1:4. Try 1:4 for a 4x speedup compared with 1:2.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • I’m content
    After reviewing my problems with LR4, I discovered a few things to share to help some others. The first thing that helped improve performance was to re-initialize the preferences folder (Lightroom 4 Preferences.agprefs). Searching for this online, I found that this seems to be a common problem, and easily solved. You may need to reset some of your preferences if you aren't using all the default preferences, but it isn't very difficult to deal with.

    The bigger issue though was found to be the catalog file--it was growing astronomically every time I edited a photo (especially if I did local adjustments). When LR4 began grinding to a halt, my catalog of 5000 photos had grown to 1.25 GB! (And I had edited only about 200 photos in the catalog, and had optimized regularly.)

    I discovered a solution to this though--I went to each of the 200 edited photos in the develop module, took a snapshot of the edited file, and cleared the history. Doing this for 200 photos reduced the catalog size from 1.25 GB to 175 MB--the size was reduced by a factor of 7.

    The result was a dramatic increase in speed for LR4. Perhaps Adobe can consider a smart filter to identify those files with a history of many lines so that others can do the same thing. Even better, Adobe can automatically recommend a "snapshot & clear history" if the history size for an edited photo goes above a predetermined size. In the meantime I will always take a snapshot and clear the history whenever I feel that I've completely edited a photo.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • This reply was removed on 2013-01-14.
    see the change log
  • It's not better in LR5. It uses up even more memory.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

  • Quite silent on this topic. Can 5.0 users report any good news?
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly happy, confident, thankful, excited sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • No, while I am new user to Lightroom I can report that 5 and 5.2RC are ridiculously slow compared to Google's Picasa. At least as far as importing images are concerned.

    I have tried all of the performance tips I could find but to no avail.

    Contrary to the opinion from Glenn Spring above, this is not just "whining". it's a real problem and Adobe really doesn't care as they really don't have to.

    To them, it's a small minority of us who are experiencing performance issues but not enough of us for them to bother fixing it.

    I chatted with an Adobe tech and spoke to one on the phone about issues I was having getting images into my local catalog from a server. They both said that "images on servers were NOT supported and since images can be imported from my local drive then there was nothing wrong with their software"

    This is public face of Adobe. It shows their arrogance and refusal to acknowledge that they might be having issues.

    I stopped using Adobe products years ago because of this very attitude. I only tried Lightroom at the insistence of friend who was singing it's praises.

    He also had far fewer images than me and kept them all local. He also uses the software far less than me so performance is not a issue to him.

    It's also typical of the Adobe community. If you find their products to be clunky, slow, counter intuitive, overly complicated and poorly written then it must be YOUR fault as a user. I have been producing professional photographs, graphics and illustrations without ever touching Photoshop, Lightroom or Illustrator.

    Sorry, but there are other great tools out there that cost far less and can out perform Adobe software in ease of use, access to features and performance.

    Don't believe me? Then why is Adobe moving all of their software to the cloud? They think that they have enough customers locked into to their software that can essentially stop selling it just rent it costing their customers more in the long run with no tangible product to show for it.
  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated

  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. indifferent, undecided, unconcerned kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited

  • (some HTML allowed)
    How does this make you feel?
    Add Image
    I'm

    e.g. kidding, amused, unsure, silly sad, anxious, confused, frustrated happy, confident, thankful, excited indifferent, undecided, unconcerned

next » « previous