Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Image Processing' started by Aushiker, Jul 11, 2017.
According to a blog post at DPReview:
It was about time too. I like LR but it is too slow.
I don't know what to suggest adobe except that I'm already used to LR being slower than every other software, just don't make it worse
Bringing its interface out of the 90's would be nice too.
What's wrong with it's interface? It is clear and easy to use and you can generally find things quickly where you would expect them. It certainly doesn't look old fashioned to me either.
I agree that most problems with LR are about it's sluggish speed even on fast machines and also the lackluster integration of LR mobile (or none if you don't subscribe to them...).
I also think, that by not releasing stand alone releases any more (unless one is in the pipeline that I don't know about) they are losing on income from those who refuse to pay a subscription but would update if the update provided features they would be interested in. A lot of those people will eventually move to the competition, although I assume that many, like me, are still sticking around to see what will actually happen, as the current version still is very good overall.
This is great news. I'm a long time LR user and it feels almost like a second skin to me now - but its speed has deteriorated relentlessly over the years. I'm at the point now where it's acceptable on my over-clocked tower PC with oodles of RAM and fast SSDs, but it brings my reasonably-recent i7 laptop to its knees.
I'll be filling out the survey for sure - a new, faster release can't come quickly enough.
It's a pretty ugly and blocky interface. There's alot of wasted space yet it's still cluttered.
But then they're also getting themselves into a position where they're expected to be supporting legacy versions which is what they're trying to avoid.
For all its faults, I can't think of another piece of photo cataloguing software that can do what Lightroom can. It handles large libraries of over a million images.
That said, there are a few bottlenecks. I'm curious what people are going to be putting on the survey.
I feel like initial load to view or develop times after import are slow (maybe during preview construction).
Application shut down takes far too long. Sometimes startup, but it's generally pretty quick.
Maybe not in scope for this survey, but the adobe updater is one of the worst pieces of software every committed. It is an atrocity. After shutting down all of my Adobe apps, I routinely see a bunch of processes lingering around chewing up memory and twerking against my CPUs. I'm tempted to put "software update" on there just so they'll take a look at it, but worry that they'll just make it worse.
I'm having lots of performance issues on a Surface Book, even with the GPU, and on really small catalogues. In some situations, Lightroom on the new Book performs worse than on my 2011 Mac Air.
I filled out the survey.
The good news is they are asking. By asking mid year it makes me wonder if any serious solutions/improvements will arrive this year. Will there even be a Lr 2017?
Anyone want to bet me that the performance enhancement are only offered on the subscription plan?
On my relatively recent iMac (decent speed, maxed memory), the sync to Lightroom Mobile is by far the worst offender. I have it turned off. Putting in a scheduling function would be a reasonable compromise, as far as I am concerned. With sync off, Lightroom becomes sprightly again. I can deal with the other major Lightroom ho-hum, catalog backup at shutdown, by setting a timer, walking away and doing something else.
Pictures or it didnt happen.
I love the interface! I've tried every raw converter under the sun and I still think it's the best in this regard.
Yeah, I've tried a few myself. Worst one was ACDSee. That was a clunky mess... I quit after about 15 minutes. The Lightroom interface is just properly broken up and structured with the individual tabs.
They could start by fixing the bugs, then trying to speed it up. And make it available to those who aren't CC customers.
If I want to make LR6 act up/crash consistently, I need only turn on the 'Use GPU' option... they could start there.
My Lightroom speed isn't all that bad (could be better), but I just moved to it and don't have a huge library in it yet to slow it down. I guess I have something to (not) look forward to...
I have been playing with DxO Optics Pro 11 and can actually see each move of a slider being applied to an image whereas in Lightroom I do not have this delay evident at all. Maybe I am lucky or have low expectations
I do find importing very slow but.
Here is Apple getting ready to release High Sierra which supports eGPU so that you can hook up your MacBook to an eGPU and drive a 5K monitor with 10 bit color...without having a killer GPU inside the MacBook. And Adobe is acting like they just heard of GPUs and if they should seriously bother with them?
Things should get very interesting by Q4.