Lightroom CC 2015.10 - Poor Performance

  • 42
  • Problem
  • Updated 1 year ago
  • In Progress
  • (Edited)
This issue collects information passed between myself and the Adobe care team on twitter, who as of April 21st recommended that I make a post here so that the development team could track it.

Starting off with the most up to date system info post:
https://pastebin.com/ngEf5L9y


The summary of the problem is basically laggy / insufferably slow performance issues with LR CC running on a system as follows:
  • i7 4790k @ 4Ghz
  • 32Gb RAM
  • SSD Catalog
  • 2x HGST 5Tb RAID 1 image host drives
  • nVidia 970 GTX 
  • 2560 x 1440 display, LR in Single Display mode only
  • Windows 10 Pro 64bit
Issues such as laggy brushes, 6-10 second wait times when navigating between images, laggy UI interactions, colour shifting and screen blackout behaviours. Screen updates when moving sliders in the develop module can take several seconds to display, and don't even think about using the program in any capacity if an export or import is underway. Multitasking is so passé ;)

I have been engaged with Adobe on this issue for several months, during which time I have kept my display drivers and lightroom up to date.

Performance *HAS* improved slightly since 6.10
but is still not at a point where it is comfortable to smoothly work. Every operation has a lag / UI update that just makes the whole experience jarring. The memory leak that would send LR to its knees was indeed resolved with 6.10, so performance no longer degrades as rapidly over time as it used to, however baseline performance is still not what I'd expect and is certainly not comfortable to work with. Editing in Lightroom is a headache to be dreaded right now, so much so that I've been putting off jobs that I really shouldn't be.

Video 1

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ymh7o9H9wD4

This initial video opened up the dialog with Adobe, and was recorded on 6.8. This is the best performance I ever see from LR as it was freshly loaded up and hadn't been subject to the memory leak in versions < 6.10 . I'm currently regenerating the 1:1 previews on the images in the video to see if the cache was corrupted or something. It's taken 2 hours so far, and it's at 58%. (700 images). In another 2 hours I will be able to say.

(Though I'm not sure 4 hours rendering time is in any way acceptable for 700 images. I'm fairly confident I can render video quicker... :D )


Video 2

https://youtu.be/_e1xTbA3L94

I've produced another video that shows the GPU accel colour shift and screen blackout. This time LR had been open for a few hours, so it's the absolute worst case performance. Running on 6.8 / 6.9 as 6.10 had not yet been released

Video 3

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=22LgfhKskJA&feature=youtu.be

Another video, this time with some diagnostic information onscreen. It's a long video as I was discussing with a reddit group ideas on how to improve performance. Skip through and you'll find CPU readouts, HDD benchmarks and some other stuff. This was recorded during a 1:1 preview generation session, which took 3 hours for 1000 images.

I've had lightroom open long enough to import 286 images and generate 1:1 previews for them. Performance is still just as bad as in the recorded videos. I'll leave it open and idling overnight to see if it leaks any memory, but honestly the concept of editing even this tiny set of ~300 images is enough to give me a headache.

Face tagging, geotagging, and all other extraneous gubbins turned off from day 1. 1:1 and Smart previews. 90% CPU over 4 cores, but no account given, seemingly, to people trying to use LR while an import is in progress. Its borderline unusable as it is (As I demonstrated in my videos) but during import - no chance. I normally leave it on overnight importing images, but this was a rush job. Rush. Hah.



At this point I was tempted to revert back to 5.7 as , although not exactly a greased sow in terms of performance, it is certainly less cumbersome than CC.
Photo of Denyer Ec

Denyer Ec

  • 55 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
  • Frustrated, stressed

Posted 2 years ago

  • 42
Photo of alberto guglielmi

alberto guglielmi

  • 26 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
While Adobe is busy trying NOT to acknowledge the problem,  the engineers are working on other products ignoring LR, and marketing is as usual hiding any new release date, I have a question for the other pro (or not) users.
Which other alternative software did you try, or are you considering? I tried the new capture, but there a display scaling issue with 4K monitors. Any alternatives? On the video side Resolve is becoming strong enough to abandon Premiere. But I need a good alternative for photo cataloging, editing, delivery.

And Adobe, if you are reading, my patience is finished. It has been wasted looking at images while trying to adjust them using sliders that won't move....
Photo of Christian Stella

Christian Stella

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
For me, Lightroom runs identical to Denyer's sample videos, especially the really bad video. Been about 18 months or so since it became truly insufferable. I upgraded to a new system because of it, and if anything, it only got worse. As with most of the others, my computer is a beast. i7 6700k, 32GB DDR4, Nvidia 970, SSD, Windows 10, Windows Defender.

My last computer was a 6 core i7 980x with 24GB ram and it was the same.

Meanwhile my i5 model of a Surface Pro 4 tablet runs Lightroom FAR better. Still very slow, but not 10 second waits.

It's been over a year that I've been trying all the different suggestions on websites and forums. I've got tons of non-critical shoots just sitting there, as I can't stand to edit them.

Lately, I've been doing my critical paid work in Canon's (pack-in software) Digital Photo Professional. It sucks for culling, but I'm getting way better color and sharpness than Lightroom's profiles for the Canon 5D mark iv. Plus, I can use Canon's new Fine Detail profile, which is great for my work (food photography).

Looking like I'll have to finally give up and switch to a 3 program workflow of Photo Mechanic > Canon's DPP > Photoshop.

Maybe throw in the towel and switch to shooting JPEG for personal photos, since I haven't wanted to edit those in years, and at least I could lightly stylize them blazingly fast on a 99 cent app on my phone.
Photo of David Converse

David Converse

  • 507 Posts
  • 153 Reply Likes
I don't suppose anyone wants to hear this but...

I'm running LR 2015.10 on a 2012 13" MacBook Pro, 2.3GHz i5, 16GB RAM, Intel HD 3000 integrated graphics, macOS Sierra. SSD system drive, LR catalog on a USB 3 drive via a Thunderbolt dock, RAW files (Canon 6D) on another USB 3 drive also via Thunderbolt. I also have Photoshop and Apple Mail running pretty much always. Built-in screen plus a 25" HP 1920x1080 display.

My catalog has 326,177 photos (referenced), across four drives including three USB 3 and one FW800.

Performance is great. It slows down a bit when I do a big import but otherwise it is not laggy in the slightest. The ONLY thing that really takes forever is backing up the catalog.
Having said that, I pretty much only do global adjustments and export changes to sidecar files. Almost all retouching is in Photoshop.
I use a PC (much better spec'd) at my day job and in testing, LR runs well there under Windows 7. Due to my workflow (lots of scripting and batch processing) I use Bridge instead. Sadly, THAT is a pig. Slowest software in existence.

Moral of the story? YMMV.
Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Global edits are not a problem.  I experience severe slowdowns doing detailed edits on images that already have a substantial number of edits on them.   I edit a lot of head shots so I get into detailed cloning / healing and also some brush for dodge and burn.   Last night I spent 4 hours editing and around 75% of the time was spent watching a spinning ball on the screen.   The length of the waits seem random, sometimes 15 seconds, sometimes two minutes.  

The only other slowdowns I experience are scrolling through new images where I have not previously created 1-1 previews.

I take endless precautions such as shutting down all other applications and leaving 100 gig available for caching.   2015 MacBook Pro 13" maxed out with I7 and 1TB SSD and 16 gig memory. 
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 4656 Posts
  • 943 Reply Likes
Another question for those who are still experiencing performance issues - particularly laggy sliders, brush strokes and other related items.

Do you calibrate your monitor?
What device do you use?
What is the version of the software you are using?
If you change your monitor to sRGB Profile instead of your calibrated profile is the performance better? Worse? The Same? 
Photo of Matthew George

Matthew George

  • 24 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
I'm not noticing much of a difference. Adjustments are still pretty slow. I haven't done it enough to be sure, and there might be some minor improvement with spot healing, but nothing obvious. 
Photo of James Dong

James Dong

  • 14 Posts
  • 4 Reply Likes
Me too having the similar problem with my desktop machine (i7, 16G and dedicated SSD, two monitors, mainly use LR on 28 4K one, using or not using the second monitor does not seem to change anything). LR just gets slower and slower while using. Nearly every movement, editing or navigating around, all very slow.

On the other side, my Macbook Pro (15', late 2016) is not too bad, some delays once in a while but not as slow as my PC does.

I cannot verify if the problem started from the last updates which I did over a month ago, but definitely, I suffered quite a lot recently.

Last time I experience the slowness was almost a year ago and it went much better after I started using SSD for the whole system.
Photo of Jose Mondia

Jose Mondia

  • 7 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Rikk,

What does the development team have to say about this? We have 4 photographers in our photography group and LR makes us want to pull our hair out. We are currently evaluating a possible move to Capture One due to the intolerable mess that is LR CC. The difference in performance between Capture One and LR is stunning. There is absolutely no lag moving from image to image in Capture One.
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 194 Posts
  • 113 Reply Likes
Rick,

Yes, we can all try all these things so Adobe does not have to do any real field testing... I for one am running a photography business NOT a software testing company! Why does Capture 1 run so fast, and the new ON1 RAW run so fast, and Adobe Lightroom is an absolute DOG.

Dozens of us are complaining and all the responses come from the forum. Will Adobe ever care enough to address this issue? I ask again, does this software run fast on the PC's at Adobe Testing Lab? Do they have a PC based Testing Lab? Do they care how it runs.

I am tired of shooting in the dark to try to fix a problem in software that I am paying to lease.
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Because its base code is OOOOOOLD software, stuff that they build on instead of replace and overhaul as time is needed. The GPU enablement and Smart Preview editing to speed things up are workarounds, not enhancements. 
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Experiencing the same issues on both my computers.

Cameras used:
Nikon D810
Nikon D600
Sony NEX 5N
Sony NEX 5R

Desktop:
AMD FX 8350 8 Core Processor 4.0 GHz
RAM: 32GB
Graphics: Radeon RX460
Windows 7 Ultimate
Dual 1080 Displays, Calibrated

Laptop
Intel i7-3630QM 2.4GHz
RAM: 16GB
Graphics: Nvidia 635M
Windows 10 Home
1080 Display, calibrated
Photo of Pixel Surium

Pixel Surium

  • 1 Post
  • 1 Reply Like
Same problems here:

i7 6700k
64 GB DDR4
Win 10 home
2k Monitor calibrated with spyder 5
Geforce GTX960
SSD Samsung pro
SSD M2 Western Digital

its a shame, its not the first time users reported that performance issues
(Edited)
Photo of Jose Mondia

Jose Mondia

  • 7 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled When will adobe fix the performance issues in LR6?.

I have upgraded to LR6 from LR5 and I have been using LR6 for over a year now and I am so frustrated with the performance. I process over a thousand images per wedding and LR6 is so slow in loading raw images on the develop module. I know there are workarounds like converting the raw files to DNG first and generating smart previews but these adds extra steps to my processing. This new version of LR is poorly engineered. This is definitely a software issue and the reason I say that is because I downloaded a free trial of Capture One Pro and I am shock at the performance difference. When I am moving from one image to the next while developing in Capture One Pro, there is zero delay in image loading. The image previews load instantly!! I also noticed something that I think is part of the problem and I am convinced LR6 is not programmed right. When you move from image to image, look at the tool panels on the left and right side (presets tool, histogram, tone curve, etc.). What happens when you move from one image to the next? The entire tool panels reload! It almost seem like the programmers took shortcuts and choose to unload and reload the tool panels with new data points instead of just doing a refresh. Compare this to Capture One Pro and you will see what I am talking about. 
Photo of Denyer Ec

Denyer Ec

  • 55 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
To skirt the UI lag I bought a MIDI console and run a plugin that allows me to control LR using that... Because the controls physically map to the console, I can actually force image tweaks via the hardware sliders, which then apply when the UI finally decides to load... The biggest gain is with the rotate tool, which is SO laggy as to be an exercise in patience - fortunately with the physical faders it's easy to set the rotation without needing the UI to update.  Imagine that, having to use a separate piece of hardware just to make the UI interactions tolerable (It's still very frustrating, just less so).
Photo of Jose Mondia

Jose Mondia

  • 7 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
I too have bought a midi tool and it has been a useful tool for mass editing in LR. 
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
Which midi tools do you guys use? If it's a performance upgrade, even slightly, I'm all in.
Photo of Denyer Ec

Denyer Ec

  • 55 Posts
  • 43 Reply Likes
I use LRControl with a Behringer BCF2000 I got cheap on Gumtree. The author of LR Control is very receptive to users and quick to turn around changes and bugs.
Photo of alberto guglielmi

alberto guglielmi

  • 26 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I moved back to Mac. And LR works fine on it.
I can't believe that Adobe is unable to create a product for W10. It was such a disappointing experience, that I am considering switching all my software.
Photo of Brad Reeve

Brad Reeve

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
I'm also experiencing abysmal performance on Windows 10 with an otherwise high end machine, matching the descriptions given by many others above.

I have recently happened across a bit of a workaround, by using smart previews and then moving the original RAWs out of the way while editing. When doing this, performance increases dramatically, to the point where it's actually bearable to get things done. There are obviously some drawbacks (you can't view anything at 1:1 for instance), but for working through a few hundred images where you aren't doing any pixel peeping, it helps a lot. 

This isn't anything new, and I'm sure others know about this already, but I couldn't see it mentioned on scanning through this thread.

Give it a whirl:
  1. Generate Smart Previews for the images you want to edit.
  2. Close Lightroom
  3. Locate the folder containing the corresponding source RAW images
  4. Rename this folder (eg put ".tmp" at the end)
  5. Re-open Lightroom
Lightroom won't be able to find your RAWs (don't worry, this is temporary!), and will use the Smart Previews for your editing instead at this point. They are accurate enough and contain sufficient latitude for global editing and most local edits in my experience. Edit away and see how you go, you should find things much more responsive.

Once you are done but before exporting, reverse the procedure:
  1. Close Lightroom
  2. Put the folder name back to normal (ie remove ".tmp")
  3. Re-open Lightroom
Now you'll be back to normal, but your editing will be done. You can now export your images as normal, and your smart preview edits will be applied.

Is it perfect? Not at all. Should you have to do this? Of course not. But if you need to process 500 images by tomorrow, it is pretty appealing. Hopefully it'll help someone anyway.

Cheers (and bring on performance improvements!)
Photo of Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen

Victoria Bampton - Lightroom Queen, Champion

  • 4593 Posts
  • 1755 Reply Likes
You know there's a checkbox to do that automatically now Brad? Look in Preferences > Performance tab. You'll still build the smart previews, as you do now, but you won't need to take the files offline. It'll automatically use the smart previews unless you zoom into 1:1, at which point it loads the full size original, which means you can do most of your editing on the smart preview and then easily zoom into 1:1 if you need to perfect sharpening.
Photo of Jerry Syder

Jerry Syder

  • 240 Posts
  • 116 Reply Likes
You beat me to it Victoria
Photo of Brad Reeve

Brad Reeve

  • 2 Posts
  • 1 Reply Like
Thanks for the tip Victoria! I think I'd happened across that before, and actually had that option ticked in my case - but now that I think about it there is the odd occasion where I hadn't been fully generating smart previews (doh - that's on me!). So that's certainly a great suggestion and something to keep in mind.

One thing I do like about removing the RAWs entirely though is that Lightroom is simply unable to access them. If I've done any significant editing, there is still a performance hit going to 1:1 (my default zoom when the RAWs are present) as LR is now having to fully render the updated image.  So I think for maximum speed this is probably still preferable.

Personally, anything overly detailed ends up in Photoshop anyway so I don't mind missing 1:1, with the exception of evaluating noise.

Thanks again for bringing that option to the forefront though - I've looked at the Lightroom options so many times now that it's easy to overlook some of them!
(Edited)
Photo of William Niessen

William Niessen

  • 1 Post
  • 0 Reply Likes
Seeing this slowness (especially brushes) on my Mac (27-inch, Late 2013 fusion drive) since .10 update. So is it isolated or something an update will eventually fix?
Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Ask the developers to checkout the products called "fastrawviewer" and "photomechanic", look at how they operate, compare to lightroom.   Pay attention to the fact that the Lightroom speed problem is so well known that people have developed ENTIRE PRODUCTS as a workaround!!!
Photo of avpman

avpman

  • 103 Posts
  • 71 Reply Likes
Careful! Adobe will just buy those companies and bury them.
Photo of Matt Quinn

Matt Quinn

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
I just wanted to note, that the latest update to Lightroom and my AMD drivers (RX480 video card) appear to have fixed some the performance issues, however, Lightroom will almost always crash when in develop mode. In some cases I can use the app for a few moments to flip through images, but it will eventually fail after a few minutes and the application will crash and exit. I get the "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom has stopped working" prompt from windows. If I turn off the GPU acceleration, the develop module will function but it so painfully slow that it makes any productive work nearly impossible. 

This issue is getting so unbearable that it's hard for me to continuing paying a subscription for software that is so flawed. However, given so much time is invested into my Lightroom library I feel somewhat trapped. Can someone at Adobe please acknowledge that this issue is being actively worked on?
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
I'll throw another log on this bonfire. I've noticed that the publish services are now utilizing 100% CPU (during updating published collections) and causing major LR instability. It's also insanely slow and the progress bar seems to be going nowhere.
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
Oh, the crop tool is now stiff and not as fluid as it once was. I've turned 'use graphics card' back on and it seems to resolve the problem. Seems that LR can't effectively utilize my 4th gen i7 to perform simple cropping tasks on its own. 

Man, this software keeps getting worse and worse. Unbelievable. 
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Maybe instead of commenting on this thread we should just continue to make new ones. At least we get an acknowledgement someone read it since they end up having to merge the comments, lol.

Get it together Adobe, actually respond to your customers.
Photo of Rikk Flohr

Rikk Flohr, Official Rep

  • 4647 Posts
  • 940 Reply Likes
Greetings Geoff, 

Additional threads will not be of assistance. Engineering is monitoring this thread and bugs assigned to performance issues raised here cross-reference it.  The cumulative count of persons affected with performance issues is based in-part on this thread. Creating a different thread dilutes the impact. Threads relating to poor performance in Lightroom will typically be merged back into the definitive thread. 

Adobe is aware of performance issues some users are experiencing and working (directly with users who've volunteered) to resolve these. 
Photo of Matt Quinn

Matt Quinn

  • 6 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Thanks for the update Rikk. If you need any assistance, I'd be happy to work with your engineers to try and track down the problem. 
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
And yet its the only way to get you guys to reply. So yeah, if you go silent, I am going to make new threads. How about actually supporting the customers and keeping us up to date instead of ignoring us?
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 152 Posts
  • 40 Reply Likes
Something is in the woods. The more serious technical question one asks, the less is the chance to actually get an answer.

Maybe Google will acquire Adobe soon and discontinue Imaging software, respectively implement the curve tool into a Google+ photo tool and abandon the rest.

Joking aside. I really start to suspect that something is going on which we're not aware off... But I can smell it...
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
Even if you're right about something major coming down the pike in the near future, the fact that we've had to wait so long for it just leaves a bad taste in my mouth. The first rule of operation when a company is coming under heat from its consumers is to keep communicating, not to go silent.
There will soon be competition to LR and whatever it is and whenever it's ready to ship, I'll gladly make the switch.
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 152 Posts
  • 40 Reply Likes
I would hate it! I use Photoshop since 1991. I really like that with Adobe products we get everything graphics/photo form one source. Plus the depth Adobe apps have from years of us giving feedback is amazing.

But yea, at the end of the day we'll all move on, away from this old friend, if it becomes too much of a drag. And Adobe definitely lost that "teen spirit" grove we all love over the last few years.

Come on guys, get back to rocking!
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
IKWYM...I do love Photoshop including CC. It's just baffling that it runs so well and LR does not.  
Photo of Steve Gandy

Steve Gandy

  • 109 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
How is Bridge/Camera Raw behaving for the people that having so badly?
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled How about fixing your software instead of creating new features.

Lightroom just does not work anymore. From crashing with new drivers to overall poor performance using the sliders and the lack of support for multiple core processors, its just bad code. 

So when can we expect fixes instead of new features for all of the above? Or is it a waste of time to remain with Adobe? Capture One Pro actually listens AND responds to its customers...
Photo of jbedford

jbedford

  • 136 Posts
  • 31 Reply Likes
I'm guessing that the team is reworking the software from scratch. Their hands are probably tied as they can't leak any of that information to its users until it's ready. I'm guessing that this forum isn't ignored by devs and that they're well aware of the issues. It's the head-honchos at Adobe who probably weren't willing to give the LR dev team the resources and time to re-develop the software, unfortunately. (if any of this is true, can a moderator not reply to this? wink wink)

It's just so frustrating as many of us need to cull and edit over 5000 images per week (raises hand) and that spending 30 seconds per photo - due to the inefficiencies in LR-, instead of the 5 or 10 that it should, really starts to add up. 
Photo of Arnold Bartel

Arnold Bartel

  • 193 Posts
  • 44 Reply Likes
Or they are heavily working on Nimbus to replace Lightroom and therefore keeping the efforts to rework Lightroom at a minimum level.
(of course this is just speculation...)
Photo of avpman

avpman

  • 103 Posts
  • 71 Reply Likes
Another way for Adobe to get their hands deeper into our pockets.

I'd switch to Capture One in a heartbeat, but I currently depend on LR's plugin and publishing features. I feel trapped.
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 152 Posts
  • 40 Reply Likes
@jbedford I agree about the head-honchos all the way. I've worked at so many companies where the people that love the machine that goes "ping" run around all day and all they're good at is distracting/misguiding their resources. And most importantly, all they see is profit. So yeah, I get them, selling 10 million 2 dollar subscriptions on mobile products certainly makes more money than 100k professional photographers subscribing to CC.

@Arnold First time I hear about Nimbus. And quite frankly, I could not care less. I will probably not even be able to use this. I have a 17 Mbit down/1 Mbit uplink and I have a D810. I do live in a beautiful place where it's actually worth taking real high resolution images right in my backyard!

I watched the video and the guy lost me at about 30 seconds into it when he said "smart phones with high resolution cameras"... Really?!? And later on "shooting architecture with a go-pro"... So I should forget investing into a $3.5k 19 mm tilt shift lens and use auto lens correction on my iphone through the cloud. Let's see how this 6 foot wide print will look like...

Adobe seems to be moving towards the Instagram, Twtter, Google+ selfie hipster users and away form people that make money with photography. Like I am going to edit my 32k pixel panoramas with 4 luminosity mask adjustment and 3 retouching layers on an iPhone and wait for the file to upload and download to and from the cloud. Plus what about all that sensitive corporate material some of us work on. No way the clients will agree to have their data on the web.

OnOne, Afinity and PhaseOne together cost less than a year's subscription to Adobe CC and those are perpetual licenses...

Please, remember, I rant because I care. I love Adobe products (there I said it again) It's just that LR is slow as slow can be, Photoshop is lacking "modern" things like full 16 and 32 bit support, Panorama editing capabilities, is memory hungry and in some parts inefficient. But fundamentally, the Adobe product line is great. The interconnection between photography, design, layout and video is remarkable. And yes, I admit, I am a dinosaur, I really, really don't care about mobile editing for my professional work.
(Edited)
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 194 Posts
  • 113 Reply Likes
This reply was created from a merged topic originally titled Lightroom Speed, GPU, and ON1 RAW.

I have been a Lightroom user since version 1. I have come to love Lightroom and use it daily. I manage multiple catalogs, some small and some large.

 

From version 1 through version 5.7, I simply loved the software. I was using an HP workstation with 2.1 Ghz Quad-Core processor, 32Gig of 1600 speed RAM, 5400 RPM Hard Drives for my catalog, USB3 Drobos for my photo storage, and an Nvidia video card from 2003 that supported my two monitors (27" LG Monitors - neither is 4k or 5k)). Most of my images are Nikon RAW format from cameras with 12 or 16 megapixel FX sensors (D3, D5, D750, D500).

 

When Adobe announced the Creative Cloud, I was hesitant but in an effort to remain current, I dove in and began using all Cloud applications (Lightroom was not yet a cloud product). Soon after, Lightroom became a part of the cloud but still a stand alone piece for the most part.

 

With the advent of Lightroom CC, especially when the new GPU processing was introduced, I felt it was time to upgrade my PC. So, I custom configured a new workstation with 3.3 Ghz 12 Core processor, 64 Gig of 2400 speed RAM, 1 terabyte SSD internal PCI accelerated storage for my catalogs and software, the same USB3 Drobo units for my photos, an NVidia GEForce GTX Titan X Graphics card with 12 Gigi dedicated Video RAM, and the same two monitors.

 

Every piece of software I use is lightning fast! My computer boots completely from a restart in less than 90 seconds. Only Photoshop and Lightroom perform pitifully. I have spent countless hours working with support people from Adobe, managers from Adobe, and some of their lead engineers (so I'm told) and I have made no progress. After tweaking some settings in one of the last updates with an engineer from Adobe, it looked like it might be a little better. That was an illusion! It is not better and gets miraculously worse with every update. I even asked if I should change graphics cards and the engineer told me my card was fine and I will be okay for the near future with Lightroom. Obviously, this is not the case. In an effort (as per their suggestions) to speed things up, I have deleted all my smart collections and built and tested using brand new catalogs with a few hundred images - nothing seems to help! After an hour of editing, everything slows down so much that I need to exit Lightroom completely and then restart Lightroom - this does give a small measure of relief for a short time!!! I am even editing Smart Previews as they suggested recently and it is still too slow to use!

 

One thing that helps a little is to disable the GPU altogether in both Lightroom and Photoshop. This is far better for overall performance and gives me more time before I need to exit and restart Lightroom. Why should I need to do this? If the GPU implementation is designed to improve performance, how do I make that happen? I designed and bought this computer with the biggest (RAM) and fastest Graphics board made by NVidia at the time. How do I get the "better performance" promised from the GPU implementation? Adobe can't help or won't help or doesn't know - not sure which!

 

Along with many loyal Lightroom users, I have been playing with ON1 RAW and just installed the latest RAW update. Had a few issues when I first started to use it so I emailed tech support. A few hours later, I received an email with instructions to update to the latest Graphics driver and try again. They even suggested some settings to change in the graphics driver implementation to improve performance and it works! It simply works. It is not slow by any means and makes Lightroom look positively dead slow. Even Photoshop tools have become slower and are annoying to use now - not so in ON1 RAW.

 

There are still things missing in ON1 RAW holding me back from cancelling my Adobe cloud subscription and making me stay and SUFFER with Lightroom and Photoshop performance because I love some of the features in Lightroom that are not yet implemented in ON1 RAW. I suspect this issue will be resolved eventually and unless we get some relief from Adobe soon, I suspect many of us will be forced to abandon Lightroom and Photoshop in favor of ON1 RAW.

 

As always, Adobe is scarily quiet on this issue which has plagued Lightroom for the last few years.

 

Is it that Adobe does not care?

 

Does Lightroom perform speedily on Windows computers at Adobe?

 

Have they tried the graphics card I am using to see if Lightroom is compatible?

 

Will they even respond?
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 194 Posts
  • 113 Reply Likes
I know it will not be simple but these are the guys that invented and wrote to code for Photoshop, Lightroom, InDesign, etc. so I am quite sure someone there knows what to do if the marketing team would stop demanding more and more features and allowed them to focus on this issue. 
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Its not something Adobe is all that interested in (as it would need to be rebuilt from the ground up to truly fix it) until Adobe starts losing customers over it.
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 152 Posts
  • 40 Reply Likes
@Robert It might be so for you. If I limit LR to 4 threads (which is 2 cpus of my 6...) I can work an entire evening. And that means I will do edits in LR, jump to Photoshop and edit further and sync back t LR to maybe do some final touches. If I run it on all 6, I will have to reboot the machine every two to three hours.

@Joel The easy way is to launch the taskmanager by clicking on the task bar, or hitting Ctrl-Shift-ESC. Then from the Process overview which opens you can right-click "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom" (maybe sort by memory usage if you can't see it) and choose "Go To Details". There, click lightroom.exe and choose affinity. Remember, each checkbox is one thread. Two make up one cpu, starting @ zero.

There's another way to run it form the shell, but It's almost 2 am and I just came home form the opening of an exhibition I am taking part in. I will dig it out tomorrow. Basically auto correct wrote this post if you know what I mean...
Photo of Robert Frost

Robert Frost

  • 414 Posts
  • 67 Reply Likes

I'm not saying that your problem is imagined, but that it doesn't affect everyone. If it did it would be easy to solve. So the question is why is your computer affected and not mine? Someone needs to look at the differences in hardware/software on our computers and find what is causing the problem in one but not the other.

For instance, I gave up using AMD graphics cards years ago because of problems with LR. I now use NVidia quadro cards for reliability - I don't play games. Gaming drivers seem to be full of bugs and each driver update cures some and creates more.

My LR problem is the slowdown with time during rendering etc. By using MS Process monitor I can see this happening but can't find a cure for it yet.

The abysmal lack of communication with LR's engineers seems to have got worse. I remember when I used to use a printing program QImage. If you found a bug, you emailed the author Mike Chaney, and if he reproduced it, an update was often issued next day! Now that is customer support and service!!

Thank goodness for our 'Lightroom Queen' Victoria Bampton. She is far more communicative, and helpful (and knowledgeable?) than most Adobe support staff IMO.

I'm waiting for LR 2018; it's getting a bit late for a 2017 version! Just think of all the problems they will have cured by then!!!


Bob frost


(Edited)
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 194 Posts
  • 113 Reply Likes
Okay, I have spent the last few days testing different combinations of processor cores enabled and disabled while running Lightroom. Hours and hours spent "working" for Adobe - haha.

I have thoroughly tried and tested running Lightroom with fewer cores and have the following results to share (maybe even Adobe will see this and think about it.

All 12 cores enabled: Lightroom is okay (not fast but okay) for the first 12-24 images. After that, it begins to gradually slow down to an unusable state so I backup and exit and then reload Lightroom and again it is okay for 12-24 images.

6 cores enabled: Lightroom is slower (brushes, scanning images, etc) (not fast, not good, but usable) for the first 30-40 images. After that, it begins to gradually slow down to an unusable state so I backup and exit and then reload Lightroom and again it is okay for 30-40 images.

4 cores enabled: Lightroom is too slow to use for any serious work. The brushes, screen display, image scanning, and zoom in/out are pitiful.

If I was a home user editing photos for the fun of it, I am sure I would not be writing in this forum. But, as a professional photographer with a super-fast state of the art workstation (judged by the performance of everything else except Adobe PS & LR) I expect my main productivity software to perform better on a faster computer, not slower.

So, I guess for me I will have to disable 50% of my processor's capability just to run Lightroom until ON1 RAW adds the missing features holding me back from switching.

Finally, as a loyal Adobe supporter for the last 30 years, I hope that someone at Adobe will care enough so that when LR CC 2017 or 2018 shows up, it will measure up to all our hopes and expectations.
Photo of Jose Mondia

Jose Mondia

  • 7 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes
Guys, I was just thinking that since Adobe does not seem to care about our issue, that maybe we need to bring this to the attention of popular photography or tech review sites. Maybe we could get Adobe's attention if they get negative publicity. Of course the other way to get their attention is if users leave for other platform. I am currently trialing capture one and the difference in performance is astounding. It is unbelievable how bad software can cripple otherwise beastly PCs. 
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Oh hey Adobe removed this comment. Lets post it again and see what happens...

Agreed. Currently writing up an article for one of them detailing this experience, the poor customer service, and how to replace Adobe with Capture One and Affinity.
Photo of Matthew George

Matthew George

  • 24 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
If Capture One wasn't $300, and I didn't have to keep paying monthly for PS & Lightroom, I'd have switched a long time ago. Adobe's priorities and customer treatment have been pretty backwards for years now.
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
I think you can do a subscription to CapOne as well...
Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Someone posted a question about Lightroom speed at dpreview.com
see: https://www.dpreview.com/forums/thread/4178073#forum-post-59796458
Photo of Conrad Allan

Conrad Allan

  • 9 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
LR Slows to a crawl for me too after about 10 min.

____________
I work in film and have batches of ~20,000 images to process to HDR and Panorama's on a regular basis. About 18 months ago I had a Dual Xeon desktop which handled it fine (read that as "acceptable") but had to downsize for portability and have an XPS 9560 with 32gb of Ram (2.8GHz Intel Core i7-7700HQ, 1920 screen, etc).
____________


I posted a detailed write up on my experiences on the adobe forums with graphs showing the differences.

https://forums.adobe.com/message/9636250#9636250

^ please check that out Rikk

---

I'm sure the engineers are aware of the issue, we really do need a fix for this soon.
Photo of Conrad Allan

Conrad Allan

  • 9 Posts
  • 5 Reply Likes
Out of interest... is anyone here who is having these slow downs using Windows 7?

Quick Poll... maybe it's Windows 10 that is the culprit (I know my VFX studio rolled back to windows 7 because of performance issues with Photoshop in W10)
Photo of Matthew George

Matthew George

  • 24 Posts
  • 9 Reply Likes
W10 here
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
W7 Ultimate x64
Photo of Alex Furer

Alex Furer

  • 152 Posts
  • 40 Reply Likes
W10 X64
Photo of Tom Peterson

Tom Peterson

  • 7 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
The OS makes very little difference it seems. OSX is like a hint better, but it's still so bad there's no point...
Photo of smolnar18

smolnar18

  • 1 Post
  • 3 Reply Likes
I described my performance issue on Laura Shoe's Facebook Group page and was sent here to see if others have the same issues.  Of course, it turns out that my issues are described accurately by many, many others here (black screen, not responding, 10-20 seconds of spinning for every brush action, flashing picture from several edits ago, having to restart frequently just to be able to use Lr, zoom delay, and more).  I'm on Win 10. I've tried checking and unchecking the GPU box, updating my graphics driver, making sure my version of Lr CC is up to date (it is and has been kept up to date).  NOTHING helps.  My laptop is a decent configuration, but from reading here, it looks like equipment upgrades don't help, anyway.

Bottom line? I'm new to CC (was previously using Lr stand-alone until last month), and now I feel it was probably a mistake to sign up for a subscription model for Lr when the developers don't seem to be interested in solving performance issues that are making the product unusable.

I'll be rethinking my subscription, and hoping that, in the meantime, Adobe decides its Lr customers are worth supporting properly.
Photo of Geoff Decker

Geoff Decker

  • 72 Posts
  • 16 Reply Likes
Careful, you might make them stop their year long coffee break...
Photo of Tom Peterson

Tom Peterson

  • 7 Posts
  • 12 Reply Likes
This is easily turning into one of the most shocking cases of neglect by a software company I have seen in recent years. 
No acknowledgement of the problem, no timeline or indication of what's being done to fix it.
Are there just swathes of managers aware this is happening and ignoring it?
Are there meetings where this issue is always the last point on the agenda?
Are there any developers assigned to this at all in a meaningful way?
Are Adobe just prioritising creating more useless apps to get more subscription profits while completely alienating their user base?
The thing is, among record profits they will never care.
You know, no software is better than bad software honestly. You lock people into your ecosystem and then you completely break it. What's the point of that? Do you honestly not have the profits to fix this dismal shambles?
Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Sorry for  yet another note but I just discovered this text on the Adobe site and I think it's very helpful!

(1) It acknowledges that Lightroom is not designed to handle a large number of "localized adjustments", precisely what I've been saying.  
(2) It recommends a sequence of types of editing to optimize speed.
(3) They recommend deleting the history list if it has gotten long.   I've never tried that.   We shall see. 

===========================================
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html

"Spot Removal tool, local corrections, and History panel

The Spot Removal Tool and Local Corrections Brush are not designed for hundreds to thousands of corrections. If your image contains many (hundreds) of localized adjustments, consider using a pixel-based editing application such as Photoshop for that level of correction.

If you have many corrections, check your History panel. The History panel has no limits, and it isn't deleted unless specified. If you've been creating many local or spot corrections, your history could be long, which can slow Lightroom's performance as a whole.

Clear the History panel by clicking the X on the right of the History panel header.

Order of Develop operations

The best order of Develop operations to increase performance is as follows:

  1. Spot healing.
  2. Geometry corrections, such as Lens Correction profiles and Manual corrections, including keystone corrections using the Vertical slider.
  3. Global non-detail corrections, such as Exposure and White Balance. These corrections can also be done first if desired.
  4. Local corrections, such as Gradient Filter and Adjustment Brush strokes.
  5. Detail corrections, such as Noise Reduction and Sharpening.

Note: Performing spot healing first improves the accuracy of the spot healing, and ensures the boundaries of the healed areas match the spot location.

==============================================


Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
Below are some constructive suggestions that I picked up off of a current dpreview.com discussion.

Notice the general acknowledgment of the problem.

Please make sure that the engineers see this and the above recent notes.  It appears to be a structural problem in Lightroom where the software does excessive recalculation in D mode for each additional edit once there are a LOT of edits.  

Why not allow the software to simply update the image that is already in memory, rather than rebuild the whole thing each time?

-----------------------
"One pretty good answer is to use Smart Previews. Just create them on import and LR will edit the previews much faster.  In Preferences, Performance set it to edit Smart Previews and this works well, the preview itself may have lower resolution on the screen but final product is normal."

[Art notes:  My understanding is that smart previews in LR stop helping you when you get to very detailed edits with magnification of 2 to 1 or larger.  Maybe even 1-1.  Please correct me if you know otherwise. ]

-------------------------
"This slowdown because of lots of brushing or lots of spot healing is a known deficiency in Lightroom, a drawback of the non-destructive editing methodology (which otherwise works wonderfully).

This happens on maxxed out computer hardware, and while there are a few work-arounds, in my opinion none of them actually eliminate the problem, although they can make it better.

Try these:

  1. Turn off the GPU acceleration
  2. Do the brushing/spot healing as the next to last editing step, with the final step being to turn on lens corrections and transformations (if desired)
  3. do the brushing and spot healing in Photoshop or Photoshop Elements, where speed will not be a problem
  4. Get a faster CPU (yes I know you said you have maxxed out hardware, but I do not believe that a 2015 MacBook Pro has a "maxxed out" CPU by today's standards)"
----------------------------
"This is a well-known design issue in LR. The best current answer is to do your spotting and other complex operations in Photoshop. The tools there are far more powerful/versatile and don't slow down."

----------------------------
".... you are right, LR reprocesses the image after every use of the healing brush, which is fine if you only fix a couple of spots but not if you have a lot to fix. I love LR but like ... I do all my heavy retouching in Photoshop, working in a non-destructive way."

[Art notes:  The author of the last piece goes on to recommend some tutorials for Photoshop and editing "actions".]

-----------------------------
[Art notes:  I've been hesitate to integrate Photoshop into my workflow with Lightroom because Lightroom has the functionality that I need - at least in principle - and the Photoshop workflow is extremely different.  And Photoshop creates files of 200meg to 400meg whereas LR does not even change the RAW at all!   So, that's why I'm writing this note is to encourage the engineers at Adobe to fix the structural issues within Lightroom that cause massive slowdowns in D mode on images with a lot of edits.

Ok, back to work!]
------------------------------
Photo of Steve Gandy

Steve Gandy

  • 109 Posts
  • 36 Reply Likes
Because you asked: The equipment that does not show any real slow downs for me is an iMac from 2011, 3.4GHz i7, 32GB RAM. The application lives on the SSD drive and the data lives on a high end Seagate drive via Thunderbolt. I have the graphics card setting turned off. I never have it looking for faces or addresses. I have it using Smart Previews for image editing. And I reboot the system every day or two.
Photo of Art M.

Art M.

  • 83 Posts
  • 18 Reply Likes
It sounds like the primary reason you dont have slowdowns in editing is that you create smart previews first. Also you might not be doing heavily detailed edits as many of us do editing faces.
Photo of Joel Weisbrod

Joel Weisbrod

  • 194 Posts
  • 113 Reply Likes
Actually, I have switched to editing Smart Previews and it is faster for the first 30-40 photos and then the big slowdown begins. With the Smart Previews, I can get 30 good image edits but without Smart Previews, I get only about 20. So, yes it id a little better but still horrible.