Comments on: Hurry up Lightroom! The best speed tips! http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/ Tips, Tricks and Lightroom Updates Mon, 01 Mar 2010 01:43:03 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.9.2 hourly 1 By: Brian http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-509 Brian Sat, 14 Nov 2009 17:31:49 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-509 I'm still looking for a good documented process for clearing out my Lightroom cache. It's saved on my C: drive which is running out of space and WinDirStat shows most of that space is used in "C:\Doc Settings\\Local Settings\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\Cache\". I've exported my old collections to a separate catalog, deleted them from the current catalog, and ran the relaunch/optimize catalog however my cache is still 1GB in size. I'm wondering if I can delete my .dat files and LR will auto recreate only the ones needed. <em>[In the Preferences > File Handling panel, you can change the cache size and location. - VB]</em> I’m still looking for a good documented process for clearing out my Lightroom cache. It’s saved on my C: drive which is running out of space and WinDirStat shows most of that space is used in “C:\Doc Settings\\Local Settings\Application Data\Adobe\CameraRaw\Cache\”. I’ve exported my old collections to a separate catalog, deleted them from the current catalog, and ran the relaunch/optimize catalog however my cache is still 1GB in size. I’m wondering if I can delete my .dat files and LR will auto recreate only the ones needed.

[In the Preferences > File Handling panel, you can change the cache size and location. - VB]

]]> By: Brett http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-417 Brett Mon, 19 Oct 2009 16:01:20 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-417 Thanks Victoria. I tried it that way at first, but unfortunately that doesn't quite do it for me. The Navigator preview is too small for such a critical color decision. Thanks Victoria. I tried it that way at first, but unfortunately that doesn’t quite do it for me. The Navigator preview is too small for such a critical color decision.

]]> By: Brett http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-416 Brett Sun, 18 Oct 2009 02:33:03 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-416 I'd pay a million bucks for a little plug-in that allowed you to cycle through the available camera profiles and see how each one affects a given image simply by repeatedly pressing a single key. This would be a huge time saver for me when processing large shoots. <em>[Create a preset for each profile, and then hover over each preset, and you'll see a small preview of each. - VB]</em> I’d pay a million bucks for a little plug-in that allowed you to cycle through the available camera profiles and see how each one affects a given image simply by repeatedly pressing a single key. This would be a huge time saver for me when processing large shoots.

[Create a preset for each profile, and then hover over each preset, and you'll see a small preview of each. - VB]

]]> By: Brett http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-415 Brett Sun, 18 Oct 2009 02:15:41 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-415 What about the thousands of empty folders LR leaves behind in the previews when you take images out of the library. Can't help things. Can get rid of them with a utility like RED (Remove Empty Directories) <em>[Just leave them there - Lightroom reuses them. - VB]</em> What about the thousands of empty folders LR leaves behind in the previews when you take images out of the library. Can’t help things. Can get rid of them with a utility like RED (Remove Empty Directories)

[Just leave them there - Lightroom reuses them. - VB]

]]> By: Ron_XSi http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-413 Ron_XSi Thu, 15 Oct 2009 03:38:48 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-413 With Windows XP and Lightroom 2.5, I have found there to be a huge performanace difference when using Lightroom based on how the files get into the Develop module. For example, launching Lightroom and then selecting "Import File(s) from Hard Drive" to load them into the catalogue is MUCH better than going to a file in a directory, right-clicking on the file and selecting "Open With...Lightroom" (which loads the file into Lightroom and drops you into the Develop Module) For whatever reason, the latter option will make Lightroom crawl. The adjustment brush is almost unusable due to the cursor lag and the whole interface is extremely slow. Always Launch Lightroom first, then load photos via the Organizer interface!! <em>[Interesting observation. I'd suggest you report that using the <a href="http://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform" rel="nofollow">Official Feature Request/Bug Report Form</a> as there shouldn't be any difference. - VB]</em> With Windows XP and Lightroom 2.5, I have found there to be a huge performanace difference when using Lightroom based on how the files get into the Develop module.

For example, launching Lightroom and then selecting “Import File(s) from Hard Drive” to load them into the catalogue is MUCH better than going to a file in a directory, right-clicking on the file and selecting “Open With…Lightroom” (which loads the file into Lightroom and drops you into the Develop Module) For whatever reason, the latter option will make Lightroom crawl. The adjustment brush is almost unusable due to the cursor lag and the whole interface is extremely slow.

Always Launch Lightroom first, then load photos via the Organizer interface!!

[Interesting observation. I'd suggest you report that using the Official Feature Request/Bug Report Form as there shouldn't be any difference. - VB]

]]> By: Lars Clausen http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-409 Lars Clausen Tue, 13 Oct 2009 20:38:52 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-409 Another speed tip: if you're going to select large amounts of images (I sometimes do to catch up on missing keywords), make sure that the keywords and metadata areas are closed. LR can take a *long* time pulling in all that data. Once you're done with the huge selection, you can open them up again. Another speed tip: if you’re going to select large amounts of images (I sometimes do to catch up on missing keywords), make sure that the keywords and metadata areas are closed. LR can take a *long* time pulling in all that data. Once you’re done with the huge selection, you can open them up again.

]]> By: Daniel http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-408 Daniel Mon, 12 Oct 2009 19:13:50 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-408 "On the Mac, you don’t need a 64-bit OS to have LR use more than 4 GB of RAM, so feel free to pile it on there." Sorry, this is wrong and not even technically possible. You cannot address more than ~3.3GB of memory with a 32-bit operating system. The point is that MacOS X (I don't know since which version) allows both the 32-bit and the 64-bit kernel to run in parallel. So even if you usually run your Mac system in 32-bit mode, Lightroom can be started in 64-bit mode and address more memory. But it *does* require both a 64-bit processor and the 64-bit kernel of MacOS. “On the Mac, you don’t need a 64-bit OS to have LR use more than 4 GB of RAM, so feel free to pile it on there.”

Sorry, this is wrong and not even technically possible. You cannot address more than ~3.3GB of memory with a 32-bit operating system. The point is that MacOS X (I don’t know since which version) allows both the 32-bit and the 64-bit kernel to run in parallel. So even if you usually run your Mac system in 32-bit mode, Lightroom can be started in 64-bit mode and address more memory. But it *does* require both a 64-bit processor and the 64-bit kernel of MacOS.

]]> By: Mark Dalrymple http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-401 Mark Dalrymple Mon, 05 Oct 2009 01:35:53 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-401 On the Mac, you don't need a 64-bit OS to have LR use more than 4 GB of RAM, so feel free to pile it on there. On the Mac, you don’t need a 64-bit OS to have LR use more than 4 GB of RAM, so feel free to pile it on there.

]]> By: 6 SpeedUp-Tipps für ein schnelleres Lightroom | Digitale Fotografie Lernen - KWERFELDEIN - Martin Gommel http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-394 6 SpeedUp-Tipps für ein schnelleres Lightroom | Digitale Fotografie Lernen - KWERFELDEIN - Martin Gommel Fri, 25 Sep 2009 12:16:32 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-394 [...] Hurry Up Lightroom: The best speed tips [...] [...] Hurry Up Lightroom: The best speed tips [...]

]]> By: CAMXposure http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/2009/05/02/hurry-up-lightroom-the-best-speed-tips/comment-page-1/#comment-331 CAMXposure Wed, 29 Jul 2009 01:43:24 +0000 http://www.lightroomqueen.com/blog/?p=360#comment-331 I fell unto this site and love the ideas (you can't hear my R- when I pronounce it 'eye-deers') and tips you bring to the arena. Since I've loaded LR on friends PCs, no longer the availability of using MAC for now. I've use the basic apps to do my photo work and made the most of each, by utilizing the applications built in and plugged task handlers. Always looking for short-cuts Thanks Charles Muller I fell unto this site and love the ideas (you can’t hear my R- when I pronounce it ‘eye-deers’) and tips you bring to the arena. Since I’ve loaded LR on friends PCs, no longer the availability of using MAC for now. I’ve use the basic apps to do my photo work and made the most of each, by utilizing the applications built in and plugged task handlers.
Always looking for short-cuts
Thanks
Charles Muller

]]>