Skip to main content
Adobe Photoshop Family
AC

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

Thu, Oct 22, 2020 5:05 PM

Acknowledged

Lightroom Classic: Slow UI when using Mac and Custom Display Profile

Hello,

Since upgrading to Lightroom Classic v10.0, all UI-related functionality is painfully slow. All editing functions are working correctly and quickly but scrolling through the catalogue or even scrolling a side panel is taking many long seconds to refresh. Unreasonably long.

Disabling GPU Accellaration has no affect on my Lightroom's performance.

macOS Mojave 10.14.6

Mac Pro (Late 2013)

3 GHz 8-Core Intel Xeon E5

32 GB 1866 MHz DDR3

AMD FirePro D700 6 GB

Responses

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

2 months ago

For what it's worth, I just created a new profile with i1Profiller v3.3.0 on an iMac Pro.

Unfortunately it's still the same sluggish behaviour.

The sRGB profile is the most responsive 

4 Messages

 • 

108 Points

the same for me. No change.

3 Messages

 • 

124 Points

2 months ago

First off, I am very happy with Lightroom. It is my starting point for maintaining and publishing my image assets.

I have about 65000 images in my catalog. 

After this last update, to Lightroom 10.0 scrolling a folder or collection in grid view by mouse wheel has become unacceptably laggy. 

I hope you have plans to address this as it's taking away a lot of the fun and it's just incredibly uncomfortable not knowing where I'm going to end up once I start scrolling.

I'm on a Mac, have plenty of memory and CPU. running OSX Catalina and pretty much all the default preferences, including using the GPU automatically.

Anyone else out there having issues with scrolling in grid view?

Thanks and regards,

Steve Starer

 

Note: This comment was created from a merged conversation originally titled grid view scrolling lags

Adobe Administrator

 • 

9.1K Messages

 • 

126.8K Points

This thread is being merged into an authoritative thread for better tracking and response. 

Adobe Photography Products

Quality Engineering - Customer Advocacy

1 Message

 • 

66 Points

When will there be a solution? I have the same problem.

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

It doesn't appear that Adobe is doing anything about this, so might be a good time to look at alternatives. 

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

It doesn't appear that Adobe is doing anything about this, so might be a good time to look at alternatives. 

It doesn't appear to you yes but indeed they are and testing is ongoing. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

120 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

@DYP Are you watching Adobe employees on a hidden camera? ;-)

29 Messages

 • 

360 Points

There is work going on an update, but, I stay with 9 for now...

1 Message

 • 

64 Points

If you haven't done so you should click on "Follow" below the original post.

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

Sorry guys, maybe Adobe is "doing something", but what I can say after being more than 30 years a software developer/architect is that all this is not very serious neither professional.

As in any professional software development, they should know exactly what was modified between V10 and V9, they should be able to reproduce the issue on their own computer.

If the problem comes from very deep modifications:
- their non regression method and their testing is poor either inexistant
- they could downgrade these modifications to make a V10.1 for ALL their CUSTOMERS and take time to make a deep analysis of their previous modifications and consequences.


What it looks like, is a development team leader who is a pure geek and have no idea of what is a PAYING CUSTOMER.

A serious software company should never let a so bugged professionnal software on the market.

Regards

(edited)

124 Messages

 • 

1.9K Points

@photostudiotnk it is an absolute embarrassment for Adobe.

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

What serious software company did  you work for that provides bug free software?

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

Be serious 5 seconds, all softwares are bugged, but bugs are not equal.

But maybe you did not read the rest of my post.

(edited)

120 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

@Alexander Absolutely no one disagrees with you about that Alexander!

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

What I didn't read: what serious software company did you work for?

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

Right on Andrew. Anybody who has worked in an organization with hundreds to thousands of developers understands what is happening.

Adobe is porting its whole software suite to the new Apple hardware and software, they simply don't have the headroom to support old software/hardware that will soon be obsolete. 

Message to the Mac community: suffer for a year or two and then get out your credit cards for new Apple products. 

 

Reality ain't fun but it is real. 

  

124 Messages

 • 

1.9K Points

@andrew_rodney no software is bug free of course.

With this particular problem, it either means that QA for LrC is not done in a color managed environment, or someone said "this performance (on the Mac) is fine".

To me, that implies a greater problem in the quality of software QA for LrC.

(edited)

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

With this particular problem, it either means that QA for LrC is not done in a color managed environment, or someone said "this performance is fine".

No, that isn't what it means. My environment is totally color managed and no beta was problematic for me or I would have reported it. This is a very odd and difficult bug to find and fix and does not affect all users and in fact, most if not all beta testers.

Or you believe Adobe deliberately released a known bug? Is so, prove it.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

124 Messages

 • 

1.9K Points

@andrew_rodney what we do have here are dozens of Mac users who have this problem... and that's only those few of them who are willing to sign on to this forum and dive in here, so even that is probably one a small fraction of actually affected users.

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

a month ago

The Mac side of the development team is focused on the new Apple hardware and software, we are seeing what we should expect. For the current LRC software on the Mac, they are using 2nd tier developers and contractors who know nothing about Lightroom, they are trainees. 

 

Regardless of what we'd like to see, Mac users have a couple choices: 

  1. revert to V9.4 
  2. or switch their monitors to sRGB and use the Apple default monitor profiles

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

The Mac side of the development team is focused on the new Apple hardware and software, we are seeing what we should expect. For the current LRC software on the Mac, they are using 2nd tier developers and contractors who know nothing about Lightroom, they are trainees. 

Official public information?

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

So why even release version 10 at this point. 

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

The Mac side of the development team is focused on the new Apple hardware and software, we are seeing what we should expect. For the current LRC software on the Mac, they are using 2nd tier developers and contractors who know nothing about Lightroom, they are trainees. 

And you know what the team is doing based on what experience with the Adobe team?

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

So why even release version 10 at this point. 

Well many of us have no problems. So there are those users of v10.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

120 Messages

 • 

1.2K Points

a month ago

Mac users: please ignore the usual Apple-bashing from some Windows owners. Yes, they often don't know what they are talking about, but it's not worthwhile arguing with them. End of line.

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

If it wasn't for you Carlos, this would be a boring site. 

7 Messages

 • 

72 Points

Then why do you engage here, billwithlotsofnumbers?

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

a month ago

@andrew_rodney 

CEO of https://www.opencascade.com

Freelancer for Airbus and Ariane Espace. Part of the Commission to analyse Ariane 5 crash that was due to.... a piece of software not updated from Ariane 4 to Ariane 5

Is that OK for you? DO you need proofs? My name? Birth date? 

It is really the place to discuss this kind of things?

Adobe has a poor QA. End of story. And whatever the reasons, releasing V10 was a pure stupidity.

Regards

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@photostudiotnk 

Thanks for confirming you know nothing about or have experience with Adobe software testing or development. 

I do (as a software developer too).

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

You do not need to know the internal processes of Adobe to just see that V10 should not have been released and that QA is 0.

If you can prove the opposite, I send you 12 bottles of (French) Champagne!

Regards

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

You do not need to know the internal processes of Adobe to just see that V10 should not have been released and that QA is 0.

More assumptions like the number of actual V10 users versus the numbers who've uncovered this bug. Again, it runs just fine on my Mac as did all the betas. No software is bug free. There is a bug here, it will  get fixed. It's very rare in that of the massive user base, we hear some here reporting it, it wasn't reported inside of Adobe or outside during beta. 

I'm sorry the facts of how this process works, one you have zero experience with, ruined your day. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

a month ago

I got to comparing sRGB with my custom profile. I noticed one thing that the sRGB profile did not have a UniCode Name: while the custom profile did. This may be a fluke but I removed the UniCode Name: from my custom profiles and saved them. I opened up up 10.1R4 and it seems there is some difference. I can't believe it would make a difference but others can test that as well.

(edited)

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@DYP My custom profile has a UniCode Name, my custom profile has no issues with V10. It's not that. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

Yes but your custom profile was just as slow on my system as my custom profile.

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

Yes but your custom profile was just as slow on my system as my custom profile.

Which is why, it's not the profile per se as it's not slow on this end

This is a very complex issue that involves a lot of moving objects; perhaps the display itself, video card, GPU, display resolution etc. It affects few users (compared to the user base). 

Let Adobe engineering do it's job. Supply via pre-release whatever they ask you to supply. Don't assume they don't care or are not working on a fix. It's untrue and doesn't serve yourself as a tester or your audience here. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

I realize it is a very complex issue, and I did not realize that it affected such few users. While I did not expect the unicode name to have any affect on performance it seems to have. 

(edited)

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

@DYP What profiling software did you use to make your profile? My profile from i1Profiler doesn't have a "unicode name" that I can find, and my profile also slows down the scrolling speed in LR.

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

What profiling software did you use to make your profile?

NEC Spectraview.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

What tag is that value in? This is a screenshot of my profile tags

(edited)

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

'desc'

I did select Andrew's profile with the unicode name and there was a difference. Might be triggering something or might be wishful thinking on my part. Others need to try it.

(edited)

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

I don't have that in my desc tag
DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

Try this. Save as your custom display profile with a new name (change internal name to match) from ColorSync and see if that makes any difference.

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

a month ago

Dear @andrew_rodney another answer to your posts...

So you are a beta tester. OK

Now my questions to you.

What do you know about software development?
What is your personal experience?

Testing a software before release is not beta testing: it is having non regression routines that are launched after each modification, that run every night, with simulators to have all the possible machines/software configurations.

Even in OpenCascade, with only 120 employees,it was our process 20 years ago, with hundreds of possible configurations.

So, again, in this domain, what is your own experience and knowledge?

Last question: are you paid by Adobe as a beta tester?


1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@photostudiotnk 

Now my questions to you.
What do you know about software development?
What is your personal experience?

I'm a partner in a software company (Pixel Genius) that produced three Photoshop Plug-in's and  two for Elements, and some of our sharpening code was licensed by Adobe for LR and ACR. Which means, my company and I have worked with Adobe engineering down to the code level. 

Last question: are you paid by Adobe as a beta tester?

No. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

@photostudiotnk

 

You tested hundreds of combinations VS the literally billions of hardware/software platform combinations that exist for the Mac. That's like saying row boat testing helps in the development of an aircraft carrier. 

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

Hundreds were the number of configurations to be tested after modelization and some other approaches as Monte Carlo or Agents methods.

The workstations at that time were IBM, SUN, HP, SGI, etc, with different OS, different level of OS, 32 or 64 bits, different compilers even on same model at different customers', different memories, different I/O systems, etc
All this seem at least equivalent to Apple Mac configurations.

Regards

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

You're not even 1/1000th of  the Mac variety. Just think of the thousands of Mac base configurations, plus thousands of different monitors, thousands of different monitor calibrations, tens of thousands of different external devices... 

You're still a row boat compared to an aircraft carrier. 

 

You remind me of a bank I was visiting in my consulting days who thought they had the most complex banking software environment in the country with 750 thousand lines of application code. I mentioned that another large bank had 15 million lines of code in just one application and was approaching a billion lines overall. 

  

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

I gave you some hints on how to go from millions of configurations to a few hundreds to be modelized and simulated. I will not blame Adobe not to do this kind of things, they to not have the skills to do it.

But, please, explain me the thousands of Mac base configurations, when OS is known and fixed on all of them, when hardware is known and fixed on Mac Mini, iMac and Mac Books, where no hardware upgrade is possible.

You speak about screens? The issue concerns the UI.
Monitor? Same
Calibration: changing it does not solve anything?


Kind regards

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

Just look at all the problems folks are having with different monitor calibrations from different calibrators. Some work, others don't. The same calibration works on one machine but not on another; with one monitor but not another. RGB ok on one but another needs sRGB. 

 

Photo editing is a couple orders of magnitude more complex than your software, talk to a mathematician just about noise reduction as an example. Sorry but you just don't get complexity, not your fault, most people don't. 

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

Photo editing is a couple orders of magnitude more complex than your software

And the kinds of images (raw or otherwise) bit depth, metadata read (or not), the degree of GPU acceleration and the number of GPU's out there etc. Indeed, there's no comparison and his software wasn't bug free either. This 'debate' is silly and serves zero purpose here in terms of one bug, few are finding, that is going to get fixed. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

a month ago

LOL
Is a Mathematics PhD enough in your opinion?

For sure mechanics, hydraulics, photonics, molecular modelization, or flybywire softwares are a piece of cake in comparison with photo editing.

Sorry, I have to go out to ROFL for an hour or more as I do not want to wake up my wife. And  I will stop feeding the troll.

Regards

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@photostudiotnk  Is a Mathematics PhD enough in your opinion?

Enough for what? You know zero about the source code of Adobe products, you know zero about the pre-release aspects of the company. Is a PhD in math enough whereby I believe you can add and subtract, maybe far more complex mathematics? Sure. What's that got to do with the price of cheese or your experience with imaging software for the wide general public on multiple platforms? 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

I was answering to Bill about understanding complexity.

For the rest, you are absolutely right. This debate is useless.

My opinion is that Adobe has 0 QA. And not only for this bug.

My opinion is that Adobe does not care about customers.

Best and kind regards

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

My opinion is that Adobe has 0 QA

My opinion is that Adobe does not care about customers.

You are entitled to your own opinion, but you are not entitled to your own facts (about Adobe). 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

a month ago

Sorry, English is not my native langage.
What do you mean by: "you are not entitled to your own facts"

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@photostudiotnk What do you mean by: "you are not entitled to your own facts"

https://www.literacyideas.com/teaching-fact-and-opinion

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

a month ago

OK and agree. 

This is why I have written twice "My opinion is", supported by some personal experience with Adobe support and software.

Best and kind regards

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

@photostudiotnk Again, you are welcome to post an opinion that has no basis on facts.

If your opinion is, the Earth is flat, fine. It is not. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

In my opinion, your post contain a lot of contempt.

41 Messages

 • 

776 Points

STOP BLOWING UP EVERYONE'S INBOX with your petty back and forth's that provide no solution to the topic!

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

The solution that seems to work for most is calibrate to sRGB specifications then load not that profile but the sRGB installed by Adobe, maybe lower the display resolution too. At least the display calibration and that profile should provide decent previews and color managed. What software you use to calibrate and the instrument you use will play a role. Once the bug is fixed, go back to the original workflow for the display/profile.

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

But is there a compelling reason to use LR10 as opposed to using 9.4 that does not have this problem allowing you to use your normal workflow for the display/profile?

For me LR 10 sRGB is still slower then 9.4 display/profile.

(edited)

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

But is there a compelling reason to use LR10 as opposed to using 9.4 that does not have this problem allowing you to use your normal workflow for the display/profile?

Well that's a good question each user has to decide on and hopefully they have backed up their older catalogs. 

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

20 Messages

 • 

282 Points

I found the cause of the problem on my MacPro with individual calibrated profile from EIZO Color Navigator:

If you move the image in the library module permanently, only the CPU is calculating, not the graphics card. If you move the image in the Development-Module and in Photoshop permanently, the graphic adapter is calculating and the moving is flawless. So the calculations made in the Library-Module for the preview and the loop does not involve the graphic adapter on my system (Catalina).

When scrolling through the Loop or slide around the preview in Library module with profile AppleRGB it is much faster but also there no graphic adapter is involved. 

Conclusion: Involving the Graphic Adapter in the calculations for display in the Library adapter would increase the speed and "snappiness" dramatically. 

So Adobe. This is what you have to do to solve this problem...

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

I see the same thing happening here.

1 Message

 • 

62 Points

a month ago

I'll echo that my older Mac setup is suffering from the v10.0 update.  I tried running with base color profiles recommended to no effect. Library browsing seems to be the only function affected - persistent spinners on scroll refreshes/hovers. I've disabled most overlay functions however remained completely unusable. I've reverted to v9.4 and am back up and running. But paying via subscription model i'd prefer to be running best/latest!  

Machine specs:
Mac Pro (Mid 2010) with lots of internal hardware upgrades

Processor: 2 x 3.06 6-Core Intel Xeon

Memory: 64 GB

Disk (Primary): SAMSUNG MZHPV256HDGL (M.2 Interface: PCIe 3.0 x4 lanes)

Graphics: Radeon RX 580 8GB

Monitor: LG 27UK850-W 27" (3840x216)

P.S. I should note that i run the Lightroom CC (non-classic), latest version, and it flies!

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

Perhaps unacceptable but choosing the default sRGB profile seems to solve the problem.

  

2 Messages

 • 

72 Points

You said it, man. 

unacceptable. 

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

a month ago

Having the same problem ... making it almost unusable.

1 Message

 • 

60 Points

a month ago

Mac 5,1 with Radeon HD 7xxx 24GB Mojave 10.14.6 same issues as everyone once upgraded to 10.0

I was able to speed things up by selecting the sRGB profile for my PA329C, but obviously not ideal.

I am using a secondary display and it too was unusable until I also set that to sRGB.

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

I doubt it would make any difference but has anybody tried resaving their custom profile as sRGB? You would probably need to rename the internal names as well.

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

LR v 10.1 is out - I'm seeing improvement in Library mode with a custom monitor profile. This is on a 2019 MacBook Pro 16"

(edited)

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

Are you referring to the beta as it hasn't shown up for my system? 

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

No, it's release version. see attached.

792 Messages

 • 

9.5K Points

Of course, right after I entered the above, the update came thru for me. 

 

Thanks 

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

a month ago

Do not update to 10.1 if you are experiencing the custom color profile issue!!! This 10.1 version has an additional bug with the local adjustments that freezes the whole app. It's really really bad.

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

@Adam Crowe what kind of local adjustments? I'm applying graduated and brush, no freezes yet.

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

@SydLow Are you affected by the sRGB issue with the Library module?

I tried to apply a simple local adjustment brush with only exposure change on it. After about three seconds, the Mac Pro went into about 10 minutes of "spinning beach ball" during which the OS was completely unresponsive. I couldn't Cmd+Alt+Esc or switch between apps. During this time, Lightroom switched a few times on its one between the Develop module I was on and the Library for reasons best known to itself. And then after those 10 minutes, without refreshing the screen, out of nowhere, the macOS login screen appeared. Somehow macOS had rebooted by itself and it wasn't even visible.

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

@Adam Crowe yes, I've put back my custom profile and have no problems with local adjustments on an iMac Pro and the MBP 16" - just finished a batch of editing.

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

@SydLow Unfortunately, it's just done it again over here. That's why it's taken me so long to reply. The smallest adjustment makes the whole OS irresponsive.

And also, this happens:

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

Is this with GPU on or off? Or it doesn't matter?

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

@SydLow GPU on.

I have just downgraded back to 10.0. The Library module is discouragingly slow but at least the Develop module works well.

17 Messages

 • 

238 Points

@Adam Crowe Bummer. No problems with Canon CRAW from a R6. I've got graduated, radial and brush on an image and it's working fine.

- Custom monitor profile

- GPU on

24 Messages

 • 

334 Points

Adam, the behaviour you describe of your workstation reminds me of issues I've seen on systems with faulty GPUs (display artefacts, hard lock-ups and spontaneous reboots without any updates of the UI). This might be something worth investigating...

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

Thank you @Ron_Pfister 

How can I investigate this? Is there a diagnostic that can be done? It doesn't manifest in any other version of Lightroom, nor on any other app (Photoshop, Capture One, some OpenGL accelerated apps, etc.)

24 Messages

 • 

334 Points

The only way to be certain is to swap GPUs if that's possible on your hardware. In my experience, such issues are triggered on faulty GPUs either by high GPU load or rising system/GPU temperature. In the latter case, the issues only appear once the system has been running for a while, irrespective of GPU load. It might be worth running different GPU benchmark apps to see if you can trigger any issues. Do you ever see temporary artefacts on your display (green or magenta blocking on parts of the screen)?

(edited)

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

@Ron_Pfister Thanks Ron. I never see this under any other circumstances and I don't see temperature spikes. The Mac Pro (2013 "trash can") responds to GPU spikes as expected. For example, the fan speeds up when exporting 300 photos from Lightroom and slows down to almost in audible level right after it's done.

(others in the LR preview program have reported similar green blocks behaviour)

24 Messages

 • 

334 Points

Then it's likely that this is triggered by specific GPU calls executed by LR on your particular hardware. FWIW, I've seen a variety of display-related issues on 2013 Mac Pros that I haven't seen on any other system. Some of them can be resolved by using a different Thunderbolt port or switching to an HDMI display connection. Perhaps that's worth checking out...

Edit: the issues I mentioned don't concern artefacts. They relate to displays not waking up after sleep, display arrangement changing after sleep or reboot, etc. It seems to me that there is something 'odd' about the GPU-implementation on the 2013 Mac Pros, but I've never delved deeper into the subject.

(edited)

13 Messages

 • 

194 Points

@Ron_Pfister It's possible I guess. I'm using HDMI already. Should be straightforward I would have thought. I just ran a Geekbench stress test on the GPU. Nothing got flagged up and no artefacts anywhere. Who knows :-/

24 Messages

 • 

334 Points

If you have never experienced GPU/display-related issues before, it's likely an LR-specific issue. NB: Apple Diagnostics contains a GPU test - here's more info on how to run it: https://support.apple.com/en-us/HT202731

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

Same here and I agree.

11 Messages

 • 

164 Points

I see exactly the same thing on my MacPro 2013.  Add a few local adjustments, and the whole system freezes. Only recourse is power cycle.  This is a new bug in 10.1, it isn't there in 10.0.  GPU Acceleration off seems to fix it, but I'm done taking risks.  Seriously thinking about being done throwing money at Adobe too.  This is getting beyond a joke.

Note, I'm running many other applications, including several Lr rivals, and other GPU accelerated apps, and seeing no issue whatsoever.  It's only Adobe. Well, actually, it's only LrC.

24 Messages

 • 

334 Points

a month ago

I just updated to 10.1 and there has been no discernible change for me at all: still the same sluggish performance in the library module when using custom display profiles (and no issues with local adjustments - with or without GPU support enabled). I'm back to using the sRGB profile on my secondary display...

(edited)

29 Messages

 • 

360 Points

Agree...10.1 is sluggish by comparison. Going back to 9 again since there is nothing in 10 that I really require or use...

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

10.1 was not ready to be released. None of these problems were fixed so why was it released?

Champion

 • 

6.1K Messages

 • 

106.1K Points

> 10.1 was not ready to be released. None of these problems were fixed so why was it released?

10.1 fixes quite a number of other problems, although sadly this one will take more work. Should people suffering from the other bugs be made to wait until Adobe can find the solution for this one?

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.

31 Messages

 • 

404 Points

Good old Adobe.

There is no problem that Adobe (with a little effort) cannot make worse :)

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

Mac Pro 2019/96gb/Radeon Vega II/12 core. Same sluggish and pathetic performance on 10.1. Custom profile or not doesn’t matter for me. It’s the same. 

going back to 9. Which is super smooth. 

DYP

64 Messages

 • 

710 Points

It is like Adobe is clueless as to what they changed from 9 to 10.

1.9K Messages

 • 

22.8K Points

It is like Adobe is clueless as to what they changed from 9 to 10.

Utterly wrong assumption! They know and are still working on it. Making up stuff and posting it doesn’t help anyone.

(edited)

Author “Color Management for Photographers"

38 Messages

 • 

550 Points

As your are not an Adobe Employee, it is your own belief and opinion.

Champion

 • 

6.1K Messages

 • 

106.1K Points

Andrew is correct, they do know what changed, but simply rolling back the changes wouldn't solve the problem. You can do that yourself by rolling back to 9.4. This problem runs a lot deeper and clearly isn't easy to fix, or they would have done so already. 

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.

11 Messages

 • 

164 Points

@Victoria_Bampton_Lightroom_Queen

...10.1 may well fix "other issues".  But it INTRODUCED this one - it isn't there in 10.0.