Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family
martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

Tue, Jan 30, 2018 2:07 PM

Lightroom Classic CC: performance degradation

Ever since Lightroom 5.0 this application has been suffering from severe performance degradation after a certain time of normal use, involving simple browsing, rating, tagging, etc. Editing isn't even part of the equation - but it'll sure surface the problem sooner.
After a while of this totally normal use, Lightroom gets slower and slower, and starts demnanding more and more memory. It also uses incredible CPU loads for no good reason, draining my battery much faster than it ought to.
The Lightroom 6.14 update has come out recently. The problem IS STILL THERE, after several YEARS of updates.
I'd like to know why this problem isn't being fixed, while LR is being updated with other nonsense. How is it decided to keep severe performance bugs in the software, while adding features? Priority of issues seems really skewed here.
And before you make the suggestion: this problem persists with a new catalog.
I've used Windows 7, Windows 10 with al the major updates. I've used every single Lightroom update from 5.0 onwards. Makes no difference.

Problems

 • 

Updated 

2 years ago

1

5

Responses

RikkFlohr

Champion

 • 

1.4K Messages

 • 

24.5K Points

3 years ago

This is posted in the Lightroom CC Forum - moving it to Lightroom Classic CC forum. 

5

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

This problem is with Lightroom 6.14. There is no "classic" in the title anywhere. I don't know what Lightroom Classic is.

Like

3 years ago

0

RikkFlohr

Champion

 • 

1.4K Messages

 • 

24.5K Points

This is the forum for the Lightroom CC Product versions 1.0 and later first released in October 2017. 

All previous iterations of Lightroom (Versions 1-6) and Lightroom CC2015 are now found in the Lightroom Classic Forum. 

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

Sjeez, talk about confusion. Adobe is pretty good at that :(
Why can't we just have version 1.x-7.x? Why must old versions suddenly and arbitrarily be renamed? That's never happened in the past, for example when 6.0 came out, 5.x wasn't deemed "classic" either.
Either way, my product is called "Lightroom 6.14". So I will be posting in the Lightroom forum, not in the Lightroom Classic forum. I would consider that reserved for Lightroom 3 or something.

Like

3 years ago

0

Victoria_Bampton_Lightroom_Queen

Champion

 • 

5.9K Messages

 • 

104K Points

> Why can't we just have version 1.x-7.x?

Lightroom 1-6 are no longer being updated so any fixes will have to go into LR Classic. Therefore there's not a lot of point having a separate bug forum for older versions.

Victoria Bampton a.k.a. The Lightroom Queen

www.lightroomqueen.com

Author of Adobe Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ and Adobe Lightroom - Edit Like a Pro books.

Like

3 years ago

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

Older versions SHOULD get updated. Adobe is obligated to deliver a working product. A major upgrade requires purchasing a new product (or a goddamn subscription), while it is THEIR fault and THEIR bug to solve.

Just look at Microsoft, fixing bugs and whatnot TEN YEARS after release. They don't go "just upgrade to Windows whatever" because that's a paid upgrade. Requiring payment to have a bug fixed is just simply, not done.

Like

3 years ago

0

ralf_bruechmann_7040vsigszoaj

29 Messages

 • 

592 Points

3 years ago

I don't know if LR6 ever will profit from it, but LR Classic CC will get performance improvements witrh version 7.2 - so with next minor release:
https://www.dpreview.com/news/6947305878/adobe-is-preparing-a-major-lightroom-classic-performance-up...

13

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

Afaik, that's a paid upgrade. This bug has existed for as much as 22 updates including 1 major update (5.7->6.0). If we have to pay to get this problem fixed, that would be unacceptable.

Like

3 years ago

0

ralf_bruechmann_7040vsigszoaj

29 Messages

 • 

592 Points

Yes, it's not for free - more than that it's the switch from a buyed license to a monthly fee for a subscription license.
I don't think that there will be any corrections to LR6 as this is not the strategy of Adobe - it's the cloud now.

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

I don't need a subscription. I *always* work *completely* offline. I don't even want any of my stuff in the cloud. Why would I?

I'm sure Lightroom 7 will be available as a purchase. If not, then I'll be forced to install an illegal version, because a subscription is just simply not going to happen for me.

But that's not the point. The point is that Adobe fixes this problem. Whether they do that in 6.15 or 7.2 is up to them, but I'm going to require them to have it fixed for free, given how ridiculously long this problem has been haunting us. So if they refuse to fix it in 6.15, they going to have to give me an upgrade. If not I'll install it illegally. Either way, they loose. They made it this far without fixing the problem. Now they must eat the consequences.

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

Also "performance improvements" means nothing if this doesn't mean fixing the memory leak problem I described. I might be that it just takes longer before the problem surfaces.

Like

3 years ago

0

RikkFlohr

Champion

 • 

1.4K Messages

 • 

24.5K Points

@martijn - Lightroom 7 will not be available as a stand-alone purchase. Adobe has already publicly announced this last October.  All future versions of any type of Lightroom will be subscription. 

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

That is unfortunate. Also more expensive, no doubt.


/edit
Yep. One-time purchase was €125, and the subscription is €12/month. Since any major version lasts about two years at least, a two year subscription totals in at €288.

Like

3 years ago

0

john_beardsworth

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

You get Photoshop too.

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

I don't need Photoshop. And I can't give it away, since it's DRM-like subscription nonsense.

Like

3 years ago

0

john_beardsworth

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

Your cost comparison is still misleading.

I did some tests yesterday generating 1:1 previews for 100 24mp Fuji raw files and found LR is now 68% faster than 6.14. Anyone can run such simple tests for themselves - without even subscribing.

Like

3 years ago

0

anthony_stagge

42 Messages

 • 

954 Points

Which version is 68% faster than 6.14?? 

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

The point is not that one thing is faster in the newer version!The point is whether the new version still degrades in performance after have working on many pictures.

Like

3 years ago

0

john_beardsworth

1.3K Messages

 • 

22.5K Points

The point is that performance degradation only affects some users. While this needs to be addressed, Adobe can't be expected to hold back new features or performance improvements that we all benefit from.

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

And the point is that it WON'T be addressed. If 6.14 will be the last version, Lightroom 6 will have this issue for the rest of eternity. 7.x is a paid upgrade (a bloody subscription program as well, which is roughly twice as expensive over a span of 2 years!!) and paying for them to fix an issue that has been around for YEARS (and has been reported back when) is "not done" as we call it.

So no matter how you put it, Adobe has bollocksed up.

Like

3 years ago

0

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

3 years ago

If Adobe fixes this problem in Lightroom 7 (and not in 6.15), I say let's all install that one illegally. It's the only way to illustrate to Adobe what a mess they've made. They've had YEARS to fix this problem and they've done NOTHING about it.

If we have to pay for them fixing this bug by upgrading to 7, essentially, then there's something fundamentally wrong with how they treat their customers, and by extension, their products.

0

0

robert_frost

443 Messages

 • 

6.6K Points

3 years ago

Hi Martijn, You are 'flogging a dead horse' in your anti-subscription rant. Adobe is making much more money by selling subscriptions than from one-off payments, and it won't be long before your OS and other programs are sold in the same way. You may be unhappy, but millions are happy with the subscription to LR and Photoshop for far less than both one-off payments, assuming you update regularly.

Bob Frost

1

martijn_saly_5922019

223 Messages

 • 

3.5K Points

I don't get it. It is more expensive. How does that make people happy?!

Like

3 years ago

0

richard1_i9n32nfio6lfz

4 Messages

 • 

110 Points

2 years ago

After the lightroom was updated, I didn’t like many features, it seems to me that the simplicity and ease of use of this program has deteriorated and I even had to look for an alternative to this software. In my work, I often come across using photo filters, I found a solution for myself on one of the forums. The best option for me was skylum photo filters because it works just perfect!

0

0

Helpful Widget

Tags

No tags available