Gradually grinding

  • 3
  • Problem
  • Updated 11 months ago
  • (Edited)
TL;DR - Lightroom becomes slower and slower over time during normal use, until its next restart.

What's happening:
LR is being used normally. The usual stuff, like tagging, sorting, moving, starring. But also adjusting & editing. Each action makes LR a little slower. Slower and slower, until LR eats so much memory AND BATTERY that the only way out is to restart the program. The task manager doesn't lie - LR may easily use well in excess on 4GB of memory.

Happens always?
Yep. New or old catalog, big or small catalog. Fresh LR installation, newest version LR, updated Windows, totally new Windows. It also "happens always" as in every version that ever came out since I started using Lightroom from version 5.0. That's right, EVERY version since 5.0 has had this problem. So, EVERY version on EVERY machine with EVERY catalog has this problem.

Anything else?
Yes, actually. Adobe, if you're reading this (and you should be):

[rant at Adobe starts here]
I have been reporting this problem over and over and over again. On Twitter, the only thing you manage to "help" me with is "looping in an expert" following by total radio silence. I understand you're ashamed, but this is helping neither us, nor yourselves. Keeping such a severe problem in the program for absolutely YEARS, is totally unacceptable.

And so, I'm not ashamed to say that I've paid for LR 7, but I'm noting paying for LR 8 until this is fixed. I'm not going to pay for your incompetence. I'm trying these new versions, let's say, "unsupported" because you seem to be unwilling to fix the problem - so it's only fair that I'm unwilling to pay for it. What's more: I did pay for it, but you're arbitrarily upping the version number which becomes a payed upgrade, while the previous version is left for dead. In short: fix it for real this time, and you'll have my money again.

Fix it in LR7, and in LR6, and in LR5 as well, because those are products that people payed money for, and so they oughta work. That's how the world works, guys. If I purchase a washing machine and it doesn't work, the manufacturer better bloody make sure it does.
[rant at Adobe end here]

Last note:
If you, dear reader, seem to not be suffering from this problem, consider yourself blessed. But bear in mind that the absense of this problem on your setup, does not mean the problem is nonexistent.

And please refrain from posting tips & tricks to make LR perform better. This is not a performance problem, this is a much more serious problem. It's no use optimizing a car's engine if the axles are broken.


Photo of martijn Saly

martijn Saly

  • 220 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
  • dissappionted in Adobe's incompetence and ignorance

Posted 11 months ago

  • 3
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 777 Posts
  • 149 Reply Likes
You don't say how much RAM memory you have. Try 64GB RAM, (as I have on my 2019 iMac 27"). Now I don't have to use Memory Clean every 5 minutes and restart every day.
Photo of martijn Saly

martijn Saly

  • 220 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
32GB. But it's not relevant either way. LR starts getting crushingly slow around its 2 or 3GB mark. So the problem would be identical on a computer with 8GB of RAM.

Or to put it differently, as long as your memory is not completely saturated, adding more of it will yield absolutely nothing in terms of performance.
(Edited)
Photo of Jerry Syder

Jerry Syder

  • 499 Posts
  • 227 Reply Likes
Try 64GB Ram, Carlos? Try 4GB(minimum)/ 12GB (Recommended) https://helpx.adobe.com/uk/lightroom-classic/system-requirements.html. This is just a statement; I'm sure 64GB is a dream but one can't just try(may not be able to upgrade to) 64GB Ram. This is an ongoing issue. 
Photo of martijn Saly

martijn Saly

  • 220 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
4GB minumum is correct. That's what LR will probably use with normal use.

If you've got a dual Xeon Platinum with a total of 56 cores running at full turbo boost, then LR might remain fast enough to reach that 12GB. But on my pc if LR uses that much, simply selecting a photo in gridview will take at least a couple of seconds.

Ergo, it is not a simple matter of slapping more RAM into a computer, even if that were possible. It is a matter for Adobe to fix the problem, because it is bleeding obvious that is a memory leak - one of the most severe kinds, one that also severely degrades performance, instead of only eating memory alive for breakfast.
(Edited)
Photo of Carlos Cardona

Carlos Cardona

  • 777 Posts
  • 149 Reply Likes
Sorry, 16GB was not enough (for me for the last 4 years), so 12GB is the usual ultra conservative estimate by Adobe so as not to scare off customers. Trust me, Lightroom is a huge resource hog, as are all huge programs. I was a Mac IT guy for 25 years, and supported tons of photographers, designers, etc. You NEVER go with the company estimate, it's like MPG estimates from car companies.

Yeah, it was my dream for 4 long years, until I was able to upgrade!
(Edited)
Photo of martijn Saly

martijn Saly

  • 220 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
12GB is not what I call conservative.

Lightroom should probably use no more than, say, 1GB of RAM. As a programmer I honestly don't see what on Good Mother Earth it needs more for.

Btw, the litres/100km (not an American :P) estimate for my car is pretty spot-on. But Adobe is vastly overestimating their memory usage, even WITH this memory leak in place. Maybe it's an American thing over overestimate :)
(Edited)