Lightroom 4 slow slow slow - very disappointed [Updated 6 june 2012]

pdh

Legend
Jan 2, 2011
One of the reasons I bought a new laptop last year was because LR3 had become very slow ... almost unusably so in fact ... now having used LR4 for a few days, on a 2.7GHz i7 processor with 6GB of RAM, I'm finding nearly as slow as the old system ... the LR4 beta wasn't anywhere near as bad as this ... I'm wondering with tongue only partly in cheek whether this is why they reduced the UK price ... very very disappointing

EDIT:

With the release of LR 4.1, some of these problems have been significantly ameliorated - see post #73 here - https://www.photographerslounge.org...-very-disappointed-7321/index8.html#post82232
 

BillN

Hall of Famer
Aug 25, 2010
S W France
Bill
Paul

I found the Beta slower than LR3 - and for that reason stopped using it - I thought that the reason must be that it was the Beta version and that it would improve when the final version was released.

Is LR4 must bigger than LR3?
 

pdh

Legend
Jan 2, 2011
Oh software always always bloats ... I just had a look around and there are plenty of other complaints about it on Adobe forums and elsewhere ... there are usually complaints about the speed new releases of software runs at, but this really is remarkably slow,
 

serhan

Hall of Famer
May 7, 2011
NYC
That is my experience also on my laptop with 1.7Ghz i7 6GB RAM. I tried to edit some photos and I gave up. It is bad eg lightroom 3 was working fine.

One of the reasons I bought a new laptop last year was because LR3 had become very slow ... almost unusably so in fact ... now having used LR4 for a few days, on a 2.7GHz i7 processor with 6GB of RAM, I'm finding nearly as slow as the old system ... the LR4 beta wasn't anywhere near as bad as this ... I'm wondering with tongue only partly in cheek whether this is why they reduced the UK price ... very very disappointing
 

Armanius

Bring Jack back!
Jan 11, 2011
Houston, Texas
Jack
Hmmm ... I guess it might be a bit slower for me now that y'all mention it. But not that much slower. I'm using the most recent iMac 27 with i5 processor with 12GB of RAM. It has a 1GB video card.
 

Crsnydertx

Top Veteran
Jan 21, 2011
Houston, TX
Chuck
Hmmm ... I guess it might be a bit slower for me now that y'all mention it. But not that much slower. I'm using the most recent iMac 27 with i5 processor with 12GB of RAM. It has a 1GB video card.
Wonder how it will run on an iMac 27 with 1/3 less RAM? Guess I'll find out someday soon...
 

bartjeej

Hall of Famer
Nov 12, 2010
bart
My netbook is specced below the minimum requirements for LR3, but that worked perfectly, really quickly. LR4 beta is noticeably slower, not quite as slow as RawTherapee but still it takes a second or 2 for most changes to become visible, which gets old quite fast.

If LR4 final is even slower, I think I won't be buying it... can't afford a new laptop right now, let alone getting one just for LR4.
 

Amin

Hall of Famer
Jul 3, 2010
Yikes, this does not sound encouraging. If the Core i7 folks are finding it sluggish, there are going to be a lot of unhappy folks out there. Then again, people who buy Core i7 processors are probably more sensitive to performance :).
 

BruPri

Top Veteran
May 11, 2011
Seattle, Washington USA
Bruce J. Pritchard
Works fine on my MacBook Air, I switched from Aperture which was starting to be sluggish, most notably when straightening a picture...

again, LR4 seems fine.
 

pdh

Legend
Jan 2, 2011
Yn, people who buy Core i7 processors are probably more sensitive to performance
.
Perhaps, Amin ... but when I move a denoise slider and the whole machine slows and the processor fan comes on full-blast, or it takes 2 or 3 seconds for an zoomed image to draw (and yes, I do have my 1:1 previews built) ... well, not good, as I've said ... it is consistently amazing to me that companies the size of Adobe, who charge significant amounts of cash for their product, still manage to produce dogs like this ... and I speak as someone who spent a slab of his life having sign-off for software
 

Julien

Top Veteran
Jan 6, 2012
Paris, France
Julien
I run LR4 beta on my Core 2 duo 1.3ghz (not a typo) / 4GB RAM laptop. Startup is slow, slower than LR3, but after that I don't find much performance difference with LR3 in normal use. It's not quick, but adequate for my needs, I rarely have to wait more than a second for any adjustment to be processed (contrary to Color Efex where it can take a while). Now it's a very very clean and optimized computer which probably has a lot to do with it (I work as a computer programmer and do 100% of my pro work on this machine, generally connected to an external monitor and wireless keyboard/mouse). I imagine I'm not very sensitive to performance :p
 

Booka

Regular
Jul 5, 2011
Sweden
I wasn't really interested in LR4 but the cheaper than anticipated upgrade price has me interested, maybe I'll wait for a little while to see how things work themselves out.

Being somewhat of a noob with Lightroom I just learnt to create separate catalogs which greatly increased the speed of the program, having all 100gb of photos in one catalog became a real problem but now I've split them up and the program runs much more smoothly.

Has transfering the catalogs and setting over to LR4 been an issue, i've heard that there are a few problems and you may loose a few changes.
 

pdh

Legend
Jan 2, 2011
Be interesting to know if those people not experiencing significant problems are running the 32- or 64-bit version?
(I'm on 64-bit)
 

Latest posts

Latest threads

Top Bottom