• Welcome to the Lightroom Queen Forums! We're a friendly bunch, so please feel free to register and join in the conversation. If you're not familiar with forums, you'll find step by step instructions on how to post your first thread under Help at the bottom of the page. You're also welcome to download our free Lightroom Quick Start eBooks and explore our other FAQ resources.
  • Stop struggling with Lightroom! There's no need to spend hours hunting for the answers to your Lightroom Classic questions. All the information you need is in Adobe Lightroom Classic - The Missing FAQ!

    To help you get started, there's a series of easy tutorials to guide you through a simple workflow. As you grow in confidence, the book switches to a conversational FAQ format, so you can quickly find answers to advanced questions. And better still, the eBooks are updated for every release, so it's always up to date.
  • Dark mode now has a single preference for the whole site! It's a simple toggle switch in the bottom right-hand corner of any page. As it uses a cookie to store your preference, you may need to dismiss the cookie banner before you can see it. Any problems, please let us know!

Lightroom Classic Very Slow Responding

Status
Not open for further replies.

CameraCarl

Member
Joined
Feb 3, 2017
Messages
63
Location
Minnesota, USA
Lightroom Experience
Intermediate
Lightroom Version
Lightroom Version Number
11.4.1
Operating System
  1. macOS 11 Big Sur
I have an old but reasonably powerful iMac. (All its specs are listed below.) I'm running LrC 11.4.1. My catalog has about 290,000 images and the catalog and associated files are on an external 2TB Sandisk SSD. About 600GB of image files are also on this drive.

When I am doing editing of images in the Develop module, the fan on the computer seems to be always running, and edits seem to take awfully long. For example, when I have masked something and move a slider, it can take 1-3 seconds to see the results of the slider having been moved. When I do one mask edit after another, the delays seem to get longer. When I look at the Activity Monitor I can see that Lightroom is taking 100-125% of the CPU. This happens regardless of how many apps are running in the background. I tried quitting everything except LrC and it doesn't seem to make much difference. The image files I work on are typically 50-70MB files with some HDR files reaching 200MB.

I'm looking for any suggestions about how to speed things up. Thank you.

iMac (Retina 5K, 27-inch, 2017)
Big Sur v. 11.6.8
4.2 GHz Quad-Core Intel Core i7
40 GB 2400 MHz DDR4
Radeon Pro 575 4 GB

Model Name: iMac
Model Identifier: iMac18,3
Processor Name: Quad-Core Intel Core i7
Processor Speed: 4.2 GHz
Number of Processors: 1
Total Number of Cores: 4
L2 Cache (per Core): 256 KB
L3 Cache: 8 MB
Hyper-Threading Technology: Enabled
Memory: 40 GB
System Firmware Version: 451.140.1.0.0
SMC Version (system): 2.41f2

Mac Hard Drive
500GB SSD
374GB available of 499GB

SanDisk 2TB Extreme Portable SSD V2

  • USB 3.2 Gen 2 Type-C connected directly into a Type C port on the iMac
  • Up to 1050 MB/s Read Speed
  • Up to 1000 MB/s Write Speed
  • 1.37TB available of 2TB
  • Contains 600GB of image files and 30GB of Lightroom catalog and files

LrC 11.4.1
Graphics Processor Settings: either AUTO or Use GPU for Image Processing (no difference in response time regardless which setting I use)
Camera RAW Cache 30GB
Video Cache 6 GB
Write xmp sidecar files turned off
Generate Previews in Parallel turned on
Preview cache 22Gb
Standard Preview Size 2880
Preview Quality Low
Discard 1:1 Previews after one week
 
One thing that would be a start is to upgrade the MacOS to the latest Monterrey version. This would allow you to take advantage of any Apple efficiencies implemented since Big Sur.

I did not note your mention of the physical size of the master catalog file (*.lrcat) It should be less than 4GB. There are inefficiencies that for unexplained reasons cause the file to bloat.

The current version of Lightroom Classic is v11.5.x. You should upgrade to the latest LrC version.

After doing these things, let us know if LrC is still sluggish.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Thanks. My .lrcat file is 3.8GB

I'm updating LrC now. I always like to give new versions of software some "soak time" to see if any problems arise, but it appears there are no significant issues with 11.5 so it is about time.

Same with Monterey. With a computer as old as mine is, I am reluctant to update too many times. I need to do some research to see if there are any reasons not to update a 2017 computer. If not, I will update in a few days,

Meanwhile, I shall see if the v 11.5 Lightroom Classic helps.

Thank you.
 
I'm not a Mac guy (I'm a PC guy). So, I don't know how old your Mac is and won't comment on whether or not that rig should or should not be slushy in the develop module. I assume that rig should run LR dev module just fine and will let Mac guys say if they think it is a hardware update problem. But for sure make sure that your system is running the latest software versions and drivers (especially LR and the OS).

You did not say if that iMac setup had ever run quickly and then started running slowly, or if you started using LR on this rig and it just ran slow recently. You didn't say if you made any major changes like moved onto a new external drive or any other new hardware.

There has been a lot of SSD talk on this forum recently and your 2 TB SanDisk Extreme Pro V2 is a nice NVMe external SSD and is not the problem, unless you have it connected to an older slower port. Make sure it is connected to a USB-C 3.2 Gen 2X1 port (10 Gbps or 1250 MBps). That could cause some hiccups and backwards driving if you have it hooked to an older gen slower port.

By the way guys - his 2TB NVMe SSD makes my point for me when I tell all of you to give larger, faster, newer external SSDs a look for your image files working in LR. I told you they are getting cheaper this month. That drive is 500 bucks a week ago and is now half off at 250. See?

Edit after seeing your most recent post. Your rig is 6 (pushing 7) years-old and you are worried about updating critical software. Don't take this wrong, and please guys, give me a break on the Greg is a computer snob bit. Let me just say this.... It is time. I'm not saying that is your problem. But for many reasons I could list ... Trust me. It is time.
 
FWIW, I was experiencing some beachball spinning on a fairly loaded iMac Pro, with a catalog of ~100K images on an internal drive, also on Big Sur 11.6.8. I searched the forum for the word "slow" and found a thread in which @Gnits suggested opening Spotlight Preferences (located in System Preferences) and there, ncheck Images. This resulted in an immediate increase in responsiveness.
 
I saw the effect on a catalog with 800k images.

It is not a guarantee of improved performance, but it is easy to check and does not cost a penny. Also, probably saves on power consumption, fan wear and tear and overheating components unnecessarily.

Watch that the Spotlight feature is not turned on again. I suspect it might, maybe with version upgrades etc. as I have feedback that the 800k catalog machine has started to slow down again. (To be checked out further in due course).
 
Thanks. My .lrcat file is 3.8GB
…Same with Monterey. With a computer as old as mine is, I am reluctant to update too many times. I need to do some research to see if there are any reasons not to update a 2017 computer. If not, I will update in a few days, …

Before I got an M1 iMac last year, I had a 2017 build iMac. I upgraded it to Monterrey just before I replaced it with the M1 iMac. I always upgrade the MacOS any time a new version is released and have never had any problems.

Considering the number of images in your catalog, 3.8GB is probably a reasonable size. If you Export all of the images in your current catalog to a new catalog using the export as a catalog, LrC will leave behind any orphan records producing a more compact catalog file free of detritus. This is the next step that i would recommend if the upgrades I suggested do not show any improvement.

If you have lots of Local Adjustment brushes in use in Develop, these will take longer to process and will need to be processed each time you make a develop adjustment. For this reason it is recommended that your develop workflow save any local adjustments until the last step.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Windows and Mac machines do age at different rates, so a 5 year old Mac doesn't usually show the same degradation as an average 5 year old PC, and upgrading the operating system is usually beneficial even on older machines. Of course, we'd all love to buy the latest and greatest computers all the time, but that's not viable for most of use, so let's focus on what can it's possible to improve without buying new kit. Even my 2013 iMac was still perfectly usable in Lightroom with a few workflow tweaks for nearly 9 years.

First, I'd blow out any dust that could be making it run hotter than needed. (Google that!)

SSD drives speed up overall access, but you noted you've already done that, and you mentioned your issues were with real-time edits rather than loading speed, so that doesn't come into play.

As you have a retina screen, there's a lot more pixels to push around, so making the window smaller or using a lower resolution external monitor can be a big help. Quitting other programs that use the GPU can help, such as Photoshop.

The other thing I'd suggest experimenting with is using smart previews for editing, since you're dealing with really large files. You can read more about it here: https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-performance-previews-caches/

You might like to run through the rest of the Performance series, as things like clearing history can sometimes help a bit too: https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-performance-workflow-tweaks/

There's a list of all of the posts at the bottom of this page: https://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-performance-whats-slow/
 
Windows and Mac machines do age at different rates, so a 5 year old Mac doesn't usually show the same degradation as an average 5 year old PC,

Victoria, come on now.... Who told you that? Apple? LOL. Seriously, Apple builds great laptops and desktops. Especially right now with their M2 chip archetecture and fantastic builds. But PCs do not fall behind quicker than Apple, especially when he bought his. PCs are much easier to upgrade (RAM, CPU, Motherboard, GPU, etc...). Apple is much more limber and quicker at this now, but back years ago when he bought his iMac, Apple was notoriously slow at upgrading to the latest hardware and he was already a year behind on the main components the day he bought it.
we'd all love to buy the latest and greatest computers all the time, but that's not viable for most of us.

I agree with you. You don't have to buy the latest and greatest. You can get a mid-range PC at fairly low cost. But yes, Apple is fantastic (especially now) but expensive. But for his old rig? For a desktop at the age of his rig, I would recommend a new machine before buying a new camera, but I tell photographers that all the time. But the fact is these days (especially right now), a 7-year-old rig is going to be hard to work with in LR if he is shooting any kind of higher-res raw.
As you have a retina screen, there's a lot more pixels to push around, so making the window smaller or using a lower resolution external monitor can be a big help.
True, but I would not move backwards in res on the old setup he already had running. I would never recommend a lower-res monitor for photographers these days for any reason. Higher res monitors provide infinitely better experience in LR and in the enjoyment of photography in viewing the work, and they are cheap and plentiful.
Anyway, we all know the difficulty and expense of upgrading an iMac's GPU, but if it were a PC, and the rig were 7 years old, yes, for sure pop in a new cheap GPU as the first step in the upgrade. Because yes ... it requires updating and updating that old iMac with newer components is not practical for many reasons. Running at lower res or with a smaller screen window? No.
I really do think in this case (and especially if the OP is a serious photographer or enthusiast) that it is time to get a new rig.
 
I'm not arguing whether Mac or Windows is better. The "average" photographer (based on my own experience talking to thousands of photographers) tends to buy a better spec'd Mac than they would a Windows machine, so they're able to keep their Macs going for longer.

But that's not the point. Yes, Carl may choose to purchase a new machine, and that's the obvious solution to a performance problem, but he is perfectly capable of making that decision for himself in his own time. He was asking for suggestions to speed things up on THAT machine.
 
I'm not arguing whether Mac or Windows is better. The "average" photographer (based on my own experience talking to thousands of photographers) tends to buy a better spec'd Mac than they would a Windows machine, so they're able to keep their Macs going for longer.

But that's not the point. Yes, Carl may choose to purchase a new machine, and that's the obvious solution to a performance problem, but he is perfectly capable of making that decision for himself in his own time. He was asking for suggestions to speed things up on THAT machine.
Victoria, you are the last person I want to argue anything with (especially on your fine platform), but you are saying stuff here that makes my head turn sideways a little.... I have been a photographer since I was 16 (50 years ago) and I have been building PCs and been a PC nerd since the dawn of the desktop age. I don't claim to know more than the true computer developers and experts, but I have some opinions based on experience.
I would agree that people spend more on Macs because they cost a lot more. But I do not agree that people who buy Macs buy better spec'd rigs than people who buy PCs. You can spend way less on a better spec'd PC than the equivalent Mac. and that has always been true since the birth of both systems.
Anyway, it is interesting for me because I'm thinking of switching. Seriously considering it.
Oh, and if you think people have traditionally bought better-spec'd Macs than PCs, you must never have met one of these gamers or enthusiasts I know.... LOL.
Anyway, like you said, silly to argue Mac vs PC. Both are incredible and both will run LR at very fine speed and quality at the mid-level. Especially right now and there is about to be a generational leap within the next 6 months.
I'm thinking about a IMac pro or top-end Apple system seriously. I'm close to switching. Maybe.... But if I do, that ends my building days.
Speaking of switching.... The OP? I can feel it in my bones. It is time.
 
the fan on the computer seems to be always running
First, I'd blow out any dust that could be making it run hotter than needed.
To build on Victoria's reply, if your computer's cooling system is not working properly, when the CPU/GPU gets too warm, Mac OS and the chip firmware will slow down the CPU quite a bit until everything cools. Since LR uses the CPU/GPU much more heavily than most apps, users often observe this behavior only when running LR (and blame LR).

The easiest way to verify this is to download the free Intel Power Gadget (there are a gazillion other similar apps, but this one is trustworthy and simple to use). Start the app and then start using LR. If the CPU is running too hot, you'll see the temperature approach 100 and the clock frequency drop considerably (meaning the CPU has been slowed until the temperature drops).

If you see this behavior, then try blowing out dust in the funs. And if that doesn't help, take it to a service shop.
 
But the fact is these days (especially right now), a 7-year-old rig is going to be hard to work with in LR if he is shooting any kind of higher-res raw.
My Mac Pro is 13 years old and I also have a max spec 16" MBP from 2019 and it's not a lot faster despite being double the price and won't last as long as the MP. Because unlike the MP, it can't be upgraded.
 
My Mac Pro is 13 years old and I also have a max spec 16" MBP from 2019 and it's not a lot faster despite being double the price and won't last as long as the MP. Because unlike the MP, it can't be upgraded.
You are doing a great job. You know what you are doing. But you also know it is time....
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top