• #2121
    David K

    Just upgraded to the latest version and it seems to be a substantial improvement for both my Leica and Nikon files. Anybody else feel the same way?

    David and Josh… your presets need to be reworked for this iteration of LR. The old ones give bizarre results.

  • #2122
    Paratom

    David K;1999 wrote: Just upgraded to the latest version and it seems to be a substantial improvement for both my Leica and Nikon files. Anybody else feel the same way?

    David and Josh… your presets need to be reworked for this iteration of LR. The old ones give bizarre results.

    substantial improvement in which regard?

  • #2123
    Mark Gowin

    I had been using the LR4 beta since it came out and came to the same conclusion as you. Now that LR4 has been officially released, I have to pony up for the upgrade.

  • #2124
    David K

    It seems to me that the new sliders (Highlights, Whites, Shadows, Blacks) in the Basic section of the Develop module allow for better control over the way the image is rendered. The attached Nikon D3S image (using LR4) is a shot that I had worked up in LR 3 but was not happy with. Couldn't lighten up the faces and the horses without the rest of the image getting funky. Granted this could be attributed to shortcomings in my post processing skills with LR3…but the fact is that I couldn't get it where I wanted it before and now I can. For those who do upgrade I'd suggest watching a few tutorials since the tweaking workflow has changed a bit. There are a number of other improvements, e.g. mapping, making books, etc. that are impressive as well but it's these Develop sliders that I was referring to.

    Attached files

  • #2125
    Paratom

    Thanks David for the info. Sounds good. As soon as I find some time I will probably upgrade.

  • #2129
    David K

  • #2137
    David K

    Thinking maybe I should have waited a while before touting LR4. Recently tried to export 200+ S2 DNG's to relatively small jpegs and it takes forever. Much, much slower than LR3. Probably best to wait a while before making the changeover. I would have thought that after the extensive beta testing Adobe would have worked these kinds of bugs out…

  • #2155
    Al Tanabe

    David,
    Are you running it in 64bit mode? Does seem odd that a simple process should take so long. Good excuse for a cool beer or a mojito I guess. 😎

  • #2163
    David K

    Al, the performance issues for LR 4 are apparently very common. I'm sure that Adobe will address them…just a question of how soon. You can download the free trial and see if you have problems on your machine. I'm still using it for adjustments but the slowness in exports is annoying. And I don't need any excuses to enjoy a good mojito…although I do prefer a Caipirinha these days 🙂

  • #2164
    David Farkas

    David K;2044 wrote: Al, the performance issues for LR 4 are apparently very common. I'm sure that Adobe will address them…just a question of how soon. You can download the free trial and see if you have problems on your machine. I'm still using it for adjustments but the slowness in exports is annoying. And I don't need any excuses to enjoy a good mojito…although I do prefer a Caipirinha these days 🙂

    We just ran a quick test with 10 S2 images in LR 4. Export to 1000px wide, 90 quality JPG with screen sharpening took 44 seconds on our Windows 7 64-bit desktop machine (about 4 sec/image). How long is it taking for you?

  • #2165
    David K

    About 1min 15 secs for the same number of images with the same settings. The problem manifested itself for me when I needed to process a few hundred images for upload to the web so the client could make selections. That process took well over half an hour which seemed awfully slow. But at 7.5 secs per image…it makes sense.

  • #2166
    David Farkas

    Okay, so I did a little bit more testing. First I took a batch of ten S2 files (all different real-life images) and processed them in LR 3.6 with my standard S2 preset. Ten images exported to 1000px wide JPG, quality 90 with screen sharpening took 38 seconds. I then ran the exact same images through LR4 two ways. The first was without adjustments, the second was with my standard sharpening and some tone adjustments. Without any changes, LR4 took 45 seconds (the same as I posted here initially). With adjustments, though, the time jumps significantly to 58 seconds. The results are outlined here:

    LR3.6 (w/ preset): 38 sec
    LR4 (no edits): 45 sec
    LR4 (w/ edits): 58 sec

    I assume I'm getting faster times just because of the computer used for testing. It's a new machine we built for imaging: quad core i7 overclocked to 4.4Ghz with 16GB RAM and a fast SSD. I'm not sure why LR4 is taking so much longer than LR3.6 though with the same image and roughly the same edits. :confused:

  • #2167
    David K

  • #2180
    Mark Gowin

    I had been using the Lightroom 4 beta and didn't notice any speed issues. In fact, it seemed very fast on my new laptop. Now that I have upgraded to the actual LR 4 release I am noticing slow downs even when zooming to 100% which was near instantaneous in the Beta version.

  • #2186
    ski542002

    Hello.

    I've found the updated LR4 develop module to be a fantastic upgrade from LR3, and I use it if I have a small number of image files to process. I'm thrilled with the updated capabilities.

    IF I have a large commercial job to run (200 to 1000+ files) that requires minimal adjustments where I can ignore the develop module, I revert to LR3. I've found LR4 to be virtually unusable running large jobs because it is so much slower than LR3.

    My laptop's hardware specs have even improved from months ago and yet the LR4 slowdown is dramatic. I am hoping Adobe updates soon to address this issue. Just Google “Lightroom 4 is slow”. The threads are prolific.

  • #2384
    tllabron

    David Farkas;2050 wrote: Okay, so I did a little bit more testing. First I took a batch of ten S2 files (all different real-life images) and processed them in LR 3.6 with my standard S2 preset. Ten images exported to 1000px wide JPG, quality 90 with screen sharpening took 38 seconds. I then ran the exact same images through LR4 two ways. The first was without adjustments, the second was with my standard sharpening and some tone adjustments. Without any changes, LR4 took 45 seconds (the same as I posted here initially). With adjustments, though, the time jumps significantly to 58 seconds. The results are outlined here:

    LR3.6 (w/ preset): 38 sec
    LR4 (no edits): 45 sec
    LR4 (w/ edits): 58 sec

    I assume I'm getting faster times just because of the computer used for testing. It's a new machine we built for imaging: quad core i7 overclocked to 4.4Ghz with 16GB RAM and a fast SSD. I'm not sure why LR4 is taking so much longer than LR3.6 though with the same image and roughly the same edits. :confused:

    Folks,

    I am new to this posting and was reading this thread and just could not resist. Isn't it interesting how impatient we all have gotten. I can remember waiting 2.5 minutes as my 4.7 megahz computer saved to my 5.25 floppy.

    Plus David, using an SSD drive speeds up everything. I have SSD's on 3 out of the five computers I use and it makes a big difference in almost everything that I do here in the scanning department at the university.

    Tom L.L.

  • #2392
    ski542002

    Hello.

    After my initial griping about the painful slowness of LR4, I received a beneficial link. http://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html

    The two most important points I implemented are:
    -Leave autowrite XMP turned off. I save the XMP data just before I do the final archive of the project. I don't know the reason but this has helped speed.

    -Render 1:1 previews intentionally on import. The initial import is a lot slower, but when you're in the develop module doing your edits, LR4 does not have to render the file while you're waiting.

    My LR4 problems are gone, and I've realized these improvements without a hardware tweak.

  • #2535
    GMB

    I intend to update over the weekend. Is there anything one needs to be aware of. The worst thing that I can imagine is that my catalogue of 30 k (not all S2 though) immages goes south or that the development settings are suddenly way off.

    Thanks.

    Georg

  • #2536
    David Farkas

    GMB;2494 wrote: I intend to update over the weekend. Is there anything one needs to be aware of. The worst thing that I can imagine is that my catalogue of 30 k (not all S2 though) immages goes south or that the development settings are suddenly way off.

    Thanks.

    Georg

    Georg,

    I updated my entire catalog to LR4.1. No issues and 4.1 is noticeably faster than 4.0. Totally worth it. The added CA and defringing tools are really, really nice as well.

    I'd recommend making a backup of your LR catalog before upgrading. This is always good practice.

  • #2537
    Kurt Kamka

    Hi David,

    Have you made an S2 preset for this version of Lightroom? I've used one that you developed in the past that was a great jumping off point. If you have a new one, would you mind sharing?

    Thanks.

    Kurt

  • #2540
    GMB

    +1

  • #2887
    Leica Guy

    I'm curious about this. Looking at Adobe's site about Camera Raw, I see that the S2 isn't listed: http://www.adobe.com/products/photoshop/extend.html. (The MM is listed.)

    Anyone know why that is? I'm upgrading software and saw this. Also, does anyone have any opinions about CS6/Lightroom 4.1 versus Capture 1? I haven't used Capture 1, but since I'm upgrading a bunch of things, I thought I'd ask.

  • #2889
    Mark Gowin

    I can assure you that Lightroom 4 fully supports the S2. In fact, LR4 is included when you buy a S2. Leica and Adobe seem to have an excellent relationship. In fact, this link shows that the latest release candidate for LR4 includes profiles for S lens that haven't even been released yet.

  • #3453
    Alex AR

    Mark Gowin;3027 wrote: I can assure you that Lightroom 4 fully supports the S2. In fact, LR4 is included when you buy a S2. Leica and Adobe seem to have an excellent relationship. In fact, this link shows that the latest release candidate for LR4 includes profiles for S lens that haven't even been released yet.

    Mark, looking at the link shows profiles for R-lenses which will come back into fashion once the new M is released due to the adaptor that will become available. Together with live view and focus peaking (or peeking?) you will be a whole new set of great glass for your M! 😮

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.