Lightroom: 1:1 zoom on 4k monitor

  • 1
  • Question
  • Updated 2 years ago
  • (Edited)
I just can't figure out what is going on here. I'm on a mac using a 4k 27" (LG 27MU67) monitor. Mac allows you to use scaling so I shot the screen at all 5 options. As expected, the mac toolbar and the 1:1 preview scale smaller until you get to the native 4k resolution where Lightroom enlarges it? Whats going on here?

Small, smaller, smaller, smaller,.... larger? What gives?
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes

Posted 3 years ago

  • 1
Photo of Simon Chen

Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist

  • 1385 Posts
  • 413 Reply Likes
What is your catalog's standard preview settings? Under "Catalog Settings>File Handling>Standard Preview Size". Is it set to "Auto"? If yes, Lr would render the same sized image previews as your screen resolution.
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Sorry, I should have clarified. This is a 1:1 zoom into the DNG in the Develop module where the previews are ignored.
Photo of Simon Chen

Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist

  • 1385 Posts
  • 413 Reply Likes
Still, Lightroom is retina HiDPI aware, the develop would render a bigger sized image as you increase the scaled screen resolution. There is some performance cost to Lightroom as a result of that as well.
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Seems like it is producing a higher resolution render as as I progress up through the scaled screen res options, but then at top where I select native 4k, the apparent render output size gets smaller (I can see less of the image on the screen)?
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Update:

So, I noticed the same peculiarity when generating Standard previews. I'm using a 27" 27MU67 LG 4k monitor (3840x2160) and OX 10.10.4.

1504 x 846 scaling: Auto (3008px)
1920 x 1080 scaling: Auto (3840px)
2560 x 1440 scaling: Auto (5120px)
3008 x 1692 scaling: Auto (6016px)
3840 x 2160 scaling: Auto (3840px)

Shouldn't 1:1 zoom be an exact pixel for pixel representation regardless of UI scaling? I'm trying to figure out how to speed up LR.
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
Is this something that OS X is relaying incorrectly to LR? I have many other 4k issues with LR.
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
I have yet to get resolution for this. I'm still seeing a "Auto 6016x3384px" preview size for my 3840x2160 monitor 4k 27" monitor. In Develop module with 280X GPU enabled and 4790K CPU @ 4.7GHz, LR is entirely unusable. I have to build smart previews (proxies) and hide my originals AND scale the window down to get a responsive UI. Simon?
Photo of Simon Chen

Simon Chen, Principal Computer Scientist

  • 1377 Posts
  • 408 Reply Likes
Interesting. My guess is at 3840 x 2160 scaling, the Mac OS X finds that there isn't enough device pixels to support the HiDPI mode at that screen resolution. It is entirely Mac OS X's reporting. Lr does not try to look the other way if the OS reported so.

What is the dimension of your original raw? I could see rendering a preview of 6016x3384px could tax the system. What aspect of the develop that slows you down? Do you have a second monitor attached? GPU acceleration enabled?
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
GPU acceleration is ON but it kinda drives me nuts because it shows the DNG pre-adjustment render then flashes to a version with adjustments after it hits the GPU. Slider adjustments are indeed faster, but the image-to-image time is considerably longer which is magnified when I develop about 30,000 images a year (1 second difference is 8 hours more time waiting around, yearly- a full workday just looking at the LR interface).  

Slow: clone/heal sometimes take a few seconds to register. Image to image changes waiting for slider controls is 2-4 seconds. D750 24MP DNG w/ fast load. High end SSD and 32GB of 2100MHz ram. Cache is 100GB. 

What is super confusing is that I want to look at files 1:1. At each screen res, the zoom should be 1:1 pixel to pixel but I get totally different zoom levels. Is there anything you can do about this? If not, then perhaps there's goign to be a way to enlarge the LR interface so that it's not microscopic?
(Edited)
Photo of sean

sean

  • 256 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
FWIW