Adjustment Brush woes

[Joel.Rosi-Schwartz]

I have been using LR 2.3 for a few weeks and today I upgraded to 2.4. I have very severe performance issues after I have performed a significant amount of work with the Adjustment Brush.

My latest example of this is a 12.8 MB DNG raw file I am currently working on. I have desaturated the image to grey scale, then I used the Adjustment brush to re-saturate about 4'% of the image selectively. As I worked with the brush LR got more and more sluggish. When I was done even the simplest of changes, f.i. update the Blacks 2 points would freeze LR. Watching the Process Monitor while doing so indicates that LR stops responding for extended periods (over 3' seconds) on each increment.

[As a side note, it is telling that I so frequently have the Monitor open with LR these days :-(]

If I return to the original image (I always work on virtual copies) there is no problem with making the same adjustments. It is only post Adjustment Brush.

I have restarted LR checking for memory leaks, but that does not seem to be the issue.

I am happy to do whatever I can to improve the usability issues with LR. This is reproducible on my system. If it is helpful I can provide images to demonstrate the situation.

Many thanks,
Joel

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Welcome Joel, I've moved your post here so that it is more visible and this is probably the best sub-forum for it.

Thank you for creating a really useful signature too!!

 

[kvon]

I'm also having this exact same issue, and FWIW I'm still running 2.3. Would love to hear if there's a fix...??

 

[Kiwigeoff]

I think we may need some more detailed explanations of systems and exactly what you are doing, this is not a common problem as far as I know so could well be something to do with your set ups or applications that are open, etc.

And it could take a bit to work through to establish what is happening - thanks for your anticipated patience...

 

[kvon]

In my case I can say with pretty high confidence that it’s related to the number of adjustment brush edits in 1 image that causes a problem. Specifically, I have 2 photos which have a large number of adjustment brush edits – 1 with 21 and the other with 24. By “edits” I mean either an “add brush stroke”, or “update xxx adjustment” when viewed in the develop module / history pane.

When I work with these 2 photos I have sever performance degradation – namely, when I first load the photo in the develop module it takes inordinately long to load the preview. (1' sec or more). And from that point on, every single action in the develop module happens in slow motion. Some delays are significant – e.g. when you move a slider it takes a second or more for the slider position itself to “catch up” to where you’ve dragged the mouse/cursor. Most noticeably, when using the adjustment brush – when you let go of the left mouse button to end the stroke, it takes a second or 2 for LR to catch up, and if you move the mouse during this lag time it will continue to register as a brush stroke!!!

Here’s a dead giveaway – if I select one of the edit items further down the history stack to revert to that version of the edits (i.e. LR doesn’t have to render all the edits above that point on the stack), the performance troubles are repeatably and predictably proportional to the # of “active” edits. In other words, the further down the history stack I’ve selected, the less severe the performance hit when I manipulate the image.

I’ve also noticed that LR is using huge amounts of memory (as viewed in Task Manager) during these times – upwards of 8''M. And the amount of memory consumed is very definitely related to the number of adjustment brush edits. Note that this is only in the Develop module, when I go back to the library module the performance issues go away, and if I minimize the window LR releases most of the 6''-8''M of memory it was using.

Don’t know if this makes sense, and/or if it’s helpful info, glad to elaborate more if needed. Thanks in advance for any insights.

If it matters, I’m on a Thinkpad T5'', Core 2 Duo 2.53GHz, 2GB RAM, 16'GB HD.

 

[Mark Sirota]

I'd bet it's worse if you've used a lot of auto-mask, too.

Still, I can't recreate it, even with a lot of edits. It just doesn't seem to get noticeably worse for me as I add edits.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

I haven't been able to replicate this either, what are the files you both are using? DNG, NEF, etc is what I'm after and from which camera?? The camera may be most relevant.
If each of you could place one of the offending files somewhere where we could d/l to test, that would be helpful as well.
Thanks.......

 

[kvon]

The image files are from a Canon 4'd, RAW file (.CR2), full resolution - 3888x2592 pixels.

By "offending file", do you mean the image files, the LR cat file or both?

 

[Kiwigeoff]

The image files are from a Canon 4'd, RAW file (.CR2), full resolution - 3888x2592 pixels.

By "offending file", do you mean the image files, the LR cat file or both?

Thanks, I mean one of the CR2 files with the xmp sidecar that has been saved to.
I want to try it on my mac to see if your adjustments bog me down!!

Ho large is your catalog, images? Do you have autowrite to xmp invoked?

 

[kvon]

auto-write to XMP not enabled, no XMP files.
Catalog is approx 1',7'' pictures, .lrcat file is just under 17'MB.

As an experiment I exported one of the offending pictures to a separate catalog and tried working in there -- same result. I could post that catalog & image file if it would help.

I also tried optimizing the LR catalog (shaved off only about 2M), deleting all the previews & rebuilding, and running defrag. No change.

Also, just realized that one of the 2 images I'm talking about is actually .TIF - but that doesn't seem to be significant to the problem.

thanks!

 

[Brad Snyder]

kvon, I see you're on a ThinkPad, Windows I assume? From the info I can find that has ATI graphics? I ask just in case you might be running nVidia. Certain config settings on my nVidia setup, have a drastic effect on Local Adjustment performance.

If you're not running nVidia, ignore this.

 

[garryknight]

I've had similar problems with .cr2 files from my Canon 4'D in Lightroom 2.3 running on a Dell Optiplex 33' with a dual-core Pentium E222' @ 2.4'GHz, 2 GB of RAM and a Radeon HD 24'' XT graphics card. Would love to know if it can be speeded up at all.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

auto-write to XMP not enabled, no XMP files.
Catalog is approx 1',7'' pictures, .lrcat file is just under 17'MB.

As an experiment I exported one of the offending pictures to a separate catalog and tried working in there -- same result. I could post that catalog & image file if it would help.

I also tried optimizing the LR catalog (shaved off only about 2M), deleting all the previews & rebuilding, and running defrag. No change.

Also, just realized that one of the 2 images I'm talking about is actually .TIF - but that doesn't seem to be significant to the problem.

thanks!

If you could upload the cr2 file with an xmp file for it somewhere, that would be great. Thanks.

 

[Braders]

Most noticeably, when using the adjustment brush – when you let go of the left mouse button to end the stroke, it takes a second or 2 for LR to catch up, and if you move the mouse during this lag time it will continue to register as a brush stroke!!!

I get this exact same problem. Most annoying.

 

[kvon]

kvon, I see you're on a ThinkPad, Windows I assume? From the info I can find that has ATI graphics? I ask just in case you might be running nVidia. Certain config settings on my nVidia setup, have a drastic effect on Local Adjustment performance.

Hmmm, interesting... I'm actually running on 2 different machines, I have my image files & LR catalog mirrored on a desktop as well. That machine is a Dell Dimension DXP'61, Windows Media Center/SP2, Intel Core 2 2.4'GHz, 2GB RAM, 25'GB RAID HD and {drum roll} nVidia GeForce 73'' graphics. The thinkpad however has ATI Mobility Radeon HD 365' graphics. In any case this behavior is identical and repeatable on BOTH machines...

If you're really having issues with some config settings with your graphics card, makes me wonder if that is not limited to nVidia? What settings specifically? I'd like to check it out...

Thanks!

 

[Brad Snyder]

Here's one thread. The changes discussed there significantly improved Lr performance for me (albeit back around v2.1 or so). There are also several threads here at lightroomqueen.com/community, try the forum search function.

 

[Kiwigeoff]

Kvon, after a few tests with your file on my system adding to your brushes and placing more brushes, LR performed fine for me with the strokes updating almost instantly.
Loading those Canon files seems to take a long time though!!
Look at your graphics card and drivers I think.

 

[kvon]

Per Brad's suggestion I poked around and found some threads on the nVidia problems. In particular, found a tip to set the "multi display/mixed-GPU acceleration" setting to "single display" mode, and that seems to have helped a LOT. That's on the desktop/nVidia machine, now gotta go find a fix for the laptop/ATI. This seems to be the right track though, thanks for all the tips!!

 

[Kiwigeoff]

You may like to take a moment to fill in your signature block in the userCP, thanks.....

 

[Joel.Rosi-Schwartz]

I have read through all of the replies; thanks everyone for contributing towards resolving this.

I concur with what kvon is experience, except that the memory usage on my Mac is even higher, 2GB real and 6GB virtual. The image itself is 13GB DNG at 3888 x 2592 pixels, so large but not huge. After a number, about 5' seems to the real degredation point, LR stops responding for over 3' seconds at a time.

I run two monitors, the laptop and an Apple 23" Cinema HD. I tried disconnecting the external monitor, but it does not alter the behaviour. I know that there has been LR issues with the Nvidia, but I have not ran into similar issues on the MacBook Pro.

I can but my files in place you can pick them up if you still need them. Please let me know.

Thanks,
Joel

 

[Gene McCullagh]

Hi Joel!

I'm running on virtually the same setup as you are and can only recreate the problem when I have auto-write changes to XMP turned on. When I turn that off all is well. Just an observation you might want to check.

 

[Joel.Rosi-Schwartz]

Hi Gene,

Thanks, that is definitely part of it. I turned off the auto-write and I have a very noticeable improvement. I still have enough performance degradation, though, on Adjustment Brushed images to make it unusable.

I have both my image files and my LR catalogue/previews on a 3'' Gig external USB drive. Wondering if this is not creating a performance issue I moved it all to my internal HD. This, sadly, did nada to improve the situation.

To give you a feel for the issue, if I quit LR with the adjusted image in the develop module and then restart LR it takes 3.5 minutes before the image is "loaded" and I can start working. If I quit LR with the same image, but with the first step in the History panel selected, it takes 8 seconds to load on re-launch! These figures are with XMP auto-write off.

Note that I hardly ever see "Lightroom not responding" in the Activity Monitor except for images that have been adjusted.

Thanks,
Joel

 

[Joel.Rosi-Schwartz]

It may be worth mentioning that in this particular image I have three Adjustment Brushes and 2'' - 3'' brush strokes.

For the fun of it I did another test with about 6' strokes selected. The launch time was about a minute.
joel

 

[Kiwigeoff]

I can certainly see performance issues here, maybe not as severe as what you are experiencing but noticeable!!
It would be helpful if you both filed bug reports, thanks. Adobe is closed for this week so don't expect any response.

Kvon, I would be happy to pass on your files if you are happy for them to go to Adobe.

 

[kvon]

It would be helpful if you both filed bug reports, thanks. Adobe is closed for this week so don't expect any response.

Kvon, I would be happy to pass on your files if you are happy for them to go to Adobe.

Hey Geoff,

Based on my results from tweaking the settings on my graphics drivers, I'm not real clear as to whether this is truly a bug? After changing that setting, my desktop system is still not lightning fast, but it's usable - big difference. Makes me wonder if spending some money to upgrade my graphics card would be worthwhile? I don't really understand the inner working of graphics cards, and/or their role in all of this - maybe someone could give me the "nickel tour", or point me to some reading somewhere?

But to answer your question - if a bug report is appropriate, I don't have any problem with Adobe getting those files I sent you.

Thanks,