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

Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by pdh, Mar 11, 2012.

  1. pdh

    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


    With the release of LR 4.1, some of these problems have been significantly ameliorated - see post #73 here -
  2. BillN

    BillN Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Aug 25, 2010
    S W France

    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?
  3. pdh

    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,
  4. P.H

    P.H Regular

    Apr 4, 2011
    Derby, UK
    Oh no! I'm on an i5 4Gb and I've just ordered LR4... what hope for me?
  5. serhan

    serhan All-Pro

    May 7, 2011
    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.

  6. Armanius

    Armanius Bring Jack back!

    Jan 11, 2011
    Houston, Texas
    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.
  7. Crsnydertx

    Crsnydertx Top Veteran Subscribing Member

    Jan 21, 2011
    Houston, TX
    Wonder how it will run on an iMac 27 with 1/3 less RAM? Guess I'll find out someday soon...
  8. bartjeej

    bartjeej Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Nov 12, 2010
    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.
  9. I'm on a 5 year old iMac with 6G and a C2D and its running fine here... (trial anyway)

    @bartjeej: You're running it on a *netbook*???? *faint*
  10. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    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 :smile:.
  11. BruPri

    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.
  12. Amin Sabet

    Amin Sabet Administrator

    Jul 3, 2010
    Hmmm... conflicting reports. Smells like a bug to me.
  13. pictor

    pictor All-Pro

    Jul 14, 2010
    It's version 4.0 - I bet that version 4.1 will run more quickly.
  14. olli

    olli Super Moderator Emeritus

    Sep 28, 2010
    Metro Manila
    Running it on my more than 2 year old 4GB Sony Laptop. Can't say I've noticed any difference one way or the other.
  15. bilzmale

    bilzmale Super Moderator Emeritus Subscribing Member

    Jul 17, 2010
    Perth, Western Australia
    Bill Shinnick
    I'm running a 3GHz quad AMD with 8GB of RAM and it is slower but not enough to think about not using it. I too am hoping 4.1 will address the issue.
  16. pdh

    pdh Legend

    Jan 2, 2011
    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
  17. Julien

    Julien Top Veteran

    Jan 6, 2012
    Paris, France
    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 :tongue:
  18. Booka

    Booka Regular

    Jul 5, 2011
    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.
  19. pdh

    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)
  20. bartjeej

    bartjeej Hall of Famer Subscribing Member

    Nov 12, 2010
    32-bit here (but as stated previously, running slowly on my netbook).