Local adjustments are almost unusably slow!

Most of the time I use the local adjustment brush, it runs so slow I can't stand it. I mean sometimes 20-30 seconds to catch up! I am running Vista 64bit with a quad processor, 8 g of ram and a Nvidia 9600. It's a crime such a great program has to work like this. There must be a reason. Anyone have an answer for me?

Those issues may due to the wacom drivers. I have had several issues with them and have decided to go back to the mouse becuase wacom can't seem to get it right in Vista x64

Similar Messages

Safari almost unusably slow since last update

a few sites are almost ok but most are ridiculously slow. I have to keep reloading the page to view it and sometimes that doesn't even work. I thought it was my DSL but tried Firefox and that's fine.

Try :
Clearing Safari Cache: Safari -> Empty Cache
Clear Cookies: Safari -> Preferences -> Security - > show cookies
You can also Reset Safari: Safari -> Reset Safari (this will remove everything and reset)
If you are also having problems with Java sites, you can clear the Java cache. I don't have a machine in front of me running 10.3.x but I think this is the same... In Finder, open Applications -> Utilities -> Java
In 10.4.x there are two Apps, (you may have one or both): "Java 1.4.2 Plugin Settings.app" and "Java 1.3.1 Plugin Settings.app" .
Quit Safari, and Run each one. In Java 1.4.2 you should see a "Cache" tab and or a "Clear" button, in Java 1.3.1 you will see a Cache tab and a "Clear JAR Cache button. Once you clear the Java Caches, open Safari and see if that helps.
An alternate method is to trash the Java cache directory itself - located in:
~/Library/Caches/Java Applets/cache

Aperture (1.1 & 1.0.1) adjustments are chunky and slow

I know there are other threads on "performance is slow" and 1.1 success/failure opinions, but really wanted to just talk specifics here.
I wanted to hold my powder a bit until I had a chance to work the tools a little, and didn't want to post based on just 1.0.1. Anyway, you can see my specs below, I am running on a brand new G5 dual (core)-2.3Ghz, 4.5GB RAM, Nvidia 7800GT video. The images I am working with are roughly 8-9MB CR2 RAW files from a Canon 20D.
I can say definitively that overall Aperture performance is not good. Here's some examples:
1) RAW image loading: when I click between images, it takes about 3 seconds to load each image.
2) Rotation tool: unbelievably chunky. When I first put the rotation tool over an image and move the tool, it takes anywhere from 2-4 seconds before the image responds by rotating. After the image starts to rotate, moving the tool further results in intermittent smooth rotation and 1 second response time, making for a chunky, jumpy rotation.
3) Exposure, Saturation, Brightness, and Contrast sliders: drag the slider, it takes anywhere from 1-3 seconds before the slider responds and catches up with the mouse. After the initial slider movement, if you still have the mouse pressed, additional slider movement is smooth.
4) Crop tool bounding box: intermittent smooth drag/delayed response on changing the bounding box size.
5) Loupe tool: mostly smooth, but occasionally just stops and hangs for several seconds, then jumps to where the mouse is.
I've got brand new hardware, significant processing power, memory, and the on the top end of video card. I have dual SATA-250 drives underneath me, which aren't even half full, so I/O should be good.
Given that 1.1 is the improved-performance update, and I'm fairly tapped on hardware, I don't know how to conclude anything other than Aperture doesn't perform all that well. Am I missing something?
I would appreciate the experience others are having on their hardware -- please no "it performs well for me" responses. I appreciate your subjective opinion, but I don't really know what that means unless you can give feedback on the amount of time for tools to respond.
Thanks,
Brad

1) RAW image loading: when I click between images, it takes about 3 seconds to load each image.
How long does Photoshop take to load the same image? Come on now, it take 3 seconds or longer. Do you expect Aperture to preload your image? I don't get the 'instant' loading complaint when any program takes time to load a large file. 10D 6mp loading is one second. 5D 12mb files 3sec. Your expectations should be the same in Aperture or PS.
2) Rotation tool: unbelievably chunky. When I first put the rotation tool over an image and move the tool, it takes anywhere from 2-4 seconds before the image responds by rotating. After the image starts to rotate, moving the tool further results in intermittent smooth rotation and 1 second response time, making for a chunky, jumpy rotation.
This has depended on other programs open and what is going on in the background. We process only with Aperture open. Rendering takes power and time. That tool takes some skill because of a slight rendering time, but I can pretty much nail the rotation after using it for processing. Agree with the slight rendering/delay but it is not a huge concern. You can always go to the hud and rotate by numbers in increments.
3) Exposure, Saturation, Brightness, and Contrast sliders: drag the slider, it takes anywhere from 1-3 seconds before the slider responds and catches up with the mouse. After the initial slider movement, if you still have the mouse pressed, additional slider movement is smooth.
Again, click the arrow on the sliders. My sliders are real time, but I do prefer to use the arrow in the HUD and possible last adjust by slider. I know by number where I want the adjustment. That comes from experience. Aperture is wonderful for fine tuning. I suggest you go by numbers if the sliders are a bother.
4) Crop tool bounding box: intermittent smooth drag/delayed response on changing the bounding box size.
Smooth enough on our iMac?
<<<Am I missing something? >>>>
Patients for rendering times is what you are missing or so it seems?
The best thing for you is to not use the sliders until the last adjustment and use the arrow adjustments or type in your values. We have grown so used to instant reaction when a button is pushed. The brain says, hey, I clicked and I want it now. It was a frustration in 1.0 for us so we started using the arrows and just got used to that method. 1.1 is much faster and near real time but we are still using our learned arrow adjustments.

Local adjustments slow on Vista 64 (LR 2.1 - not a Nvidia problem)

Hi,
I am using LR 2.0/2.1 from the release of the 2.0 and recently has migrated my PC to Vista 64bit. My hardware is 2 years old but nevertheless is quite up to task - P4 dual core 3.2 Ghz CPU with 4 GB of RAM and SATA RAID with XFX GeForce 6800XT card (with 512MB of card RAM).
It is a very fast system in general but I do have some problems in LR 2.1 with a local adjustments brushes. I know it's a well discussed topic however I feel that in my case it is sufficiently different to warrant a new topic. I've done all the Nvidia driver optimisations - setting all the driver properties to max performance for LR. This did make a difference initially but as brush strokes are added the lags are getting worse and if I have about 8-10 strokes and more - it gets really unusable - very slow to catch up with delays as much as a minute or two.
I don't run any antiviruses or any other scanning utils other that bog standard Vista 64 bit services (all the potential scanning services like disk indexing, defender scanning has been disabled for the purpouse of the performance testing - nothing made a difference). What is curious though, that a few people who have the brush working fast were saying that CPU was not topping up and in my case I noticed that both cores were used quite a lot when the delays started to occur (with the number of strokes around 8 or 10 and more). The combined CPU usage went up to 90% (so both cores were used extensively). I have a relatively medium catalog - around 10000 photos.
Setting the automask on/off does not make a lot of difference - with the automsak off it only is more responsive for a couple more further strokes and then slows down again.
I am sort of exhausted my options of what to investigate further and would appreciate any constructive comments of where to look and what to look for (please no Adobe blaiming here). I will also appreciate some Adobe engineers comments on the CPU usage of the adjustment brush and possible also insights of how can I look at what's going on.
Thanks,
Alex

I've contributed elsewhere but I'll just add another voice to this thread. Same cumulative slowdown here with a very similar system. I don't know if you have noticed but it's not only the brush strokes that slow down to treacle speed. If you get fed up waiting for a response and start clicking buttons you can find them reacting sequentially for up to a minute. Its like watching a very slow recorded tutorial. It's the same for adjustment sliders once the slowdown is under way.
Also I find that if you move the brush too quickly it will abreviate the curve you create into a series of angles. I postulate that, in the case of my Intuos tablet at least, the program has a problem responding to the data rate from the tablet. An example is if I tap the pen in the image, lift and go quickly to make a menu selection. The brush will continue to draw after the pen has lifted along the line of cursor movement and I have to go back and delete the stroke.
Brian

2010 Macbook Pro is running SUPER slow. Almost unusable.

My 2010 Macbook Pro is running so slow that it's almost unusable due to the buffering of data and the color wheel spinning incessantly. I close applications, restart and nothing helps. I have not downloaded any clean up software. I teach and am dependent on my computer for EVERYTHING I do.
HELP PLEASE!!

Back up your Mac if you have not already done so. To learn how to use Time Machine read Mac Basics: Time Machine backs up your Mac - Apple Support
Determine if the same problems exist in "Safe Mode". Read below.
Safe Mode or "Safe Boot" is a troubleshooting mode that bypasses all third party system extensions and loads only required system components. Read about it: Starting up in Safe Mode
You must disable FileVault before you can start your Mac in Safe Mode.
Starting your Mac in Safe Mode will take longer than usual, graphics will not render smoothly, audio is disabled on some Macs, and some programs (iTunes for example) may not work at all.
Merely starting your Mac in Safe Mode is not intended to resolve the problem, it's to observe its performance without certain additional components.
To end Safe Mode restart your Mac normally. Shutdown will take longer as well.
If you are still experiencing problems more information will be required. If you don't know where to start, EtreCheck can help with that. Read below.
Apple Support Communities contributor etresoft wrote a very useful app to quickly gather certain system information that may help point to a cause of this problem. Read about it here. It contains a link to download EtreCheck. Do not download it from anywhere else (such as may be found by following the results of an Internet search).
Click Open - etresoft contributes to this forum frequently and can be considered a trustworthy developer.
It will take a moment to run as it collects its data.
Copy and paste its output in a reply.
Do not be concerned about anything that says "Problem" or “failed” or anything else that may appear in red.
EtreCheck was designed to remove any personal information (such as your computer's name and serial numbers) but if you see anything that looks like an email address or any other personal information that should not be divulged to others, please delete or obscure that information when you post the reply.
When you are finished with EtreCheck, quit the program. It occupies very little space, and you can keep it or drag it to the Trash as you wish.

Photoshop Elements 12 runs really slow and is almost unusable.

Photoshop (and Premiere) Elements 12 runs really slow and is almost unusable.
All other high end software works perfectly including 3D rendering software.
27" iMac mid 2011.
16gb of RAM.
Over 100gb free hdd space.
Radeon HD card 2GB.
3.4 GHz Intel Core i7.
I have tested on tiny low quality images as well.
I bought this with the bundled Premiere Elements which is also unusable even with the smallest and lowest quality video file.
iMovie works fine as does other video editing software. I ONLY have an issue with Photoshop and Premiere Elements 12.
Mavericks 10.9.3
Elements 12.1

After the latest update, Firefox is much better. Using it again.

I updated my 4s, and now the text messaging is so slow its almost unusable (type then wait 20 seconds to see characters)

I updated my 4s, and now the text messaging is so slow its almost unusable (type then wait 20 seconds or more to see characters on the screen). Help Please!

It is possible that there is a problem with the files sessionstore.js and sessionstore.bak in the Firefox Profile Folder.
Delete the sessionstore.js [2] file and possible sessionstore-##.js [3] files with a number and sessionstore.bak in the Firefox Profile Folder.
* Help > Troubleshooting Information > Profile Directory: Open Containing Folder
* http://kb.mozillazine.org/Profile_folder_-_Firefox
Deleting sessionstore.js will cause App Tabs and Tab Groups and open and closed (undo) tabs to get lost, so you will have to create them again (make a note or bookmark them).
See also:
* [1] http://kb.mozillazine.org/Session_Restore
* [2] http://kb.mozillazine.org/sessionstore.js
* [3] http://kb.mozillazine.org/Multiple_profile_files_created

ITunes is totally frozen with multiple paints of same screen within itself. Also incredibly slow. Are there alternative players I can use with my iPhone, or must I use iTunes with my iPhone? iTunes is effectively unusably slow.

iTunes is totally frozen with multiple paints of same screen within itself. Also incredibly slow. Are there alternative players I can use with my iPhone, or must I use iTunes with my iPhone? iTunes is effectively unusably slow. I am using Windows 7.
I only use it once every few weeks and each time it is more disappointing than the previous time. does it run better on a Mac than Windows? Is this app really the future of media? Really?

I am using iTunes 11.1.3 -- The most recent version. When I select something from my albums it just freezes. I have restarted it a few times with same result.

TS4083 The Icloud mail can take 5-10 seconds to open..why is it so slow when all the other emial systems on my Imac are almost instand?

New mail or sent mail takes a long time to open..all other e-mail systems on my IMac are almost instant access.
Why would this be....it occurrs only on my Imac niot my Iphone or Ipad.
Got any ideas why?

I run very few or no extensions with the exception of Java and Flash. I never, '''NEVER''' use stupid toolbars. The problem with FireFox on OS X Lion seems to be related to the OS. The speed of my Internet connection never changed and it continues to be fast for all of my computers, both Mac and Windoze 7.
If you change your default DNS on the Mac to something like the IP address of the Google DNS servers, FireFox and Chrome will run at normal speeds. If anyone needs help with this, please post another message and I will post instructions.

Aperture 3 Unusably Slow on MacBook Pro?

Hi everyone, I have a Mid-2009 2.8 GHz MacBook Pro and a photo library of 61,000 photos. More of them are JPEG than RAW, but there is a lot of RAW in there. I have the masters stored on an external FW800 drive with the library itself on my internal HDD.
Aperture 3 is unusably slow. It takes probably close to a minute to load, freezes for five or ten seconds at a time when I ask it to do things, cannot display thumbnails as I scroll, etc., etc. It freezes a lot.
When it is doing almost anything, the whole system grinds to a halt. Finder is very slow. Mail has a hard time switching folders. Safari freezes between pages.
Yet: generally, Aperture's CPU usage is below 100% (e.g. just one core, not both), often at 60% or less even when working really hard (only occasionally tapping the second core). Disk i/o never seems to go over 6MB/s, yet the system almost feels like it would if the disk were too busy and couldn't work with the other apps.
Any idea what might be a miss? I've tried all kinds of different ideas and can't get the system to work well. It feels vastly (and I do mean vastly!) slower than iPhoto on my old PowerMac G5 2.7 GHz. I used Aperture 2 briefly, and I think it may have been a bit faster, but it too was really, really slow.
Using the 9600M doesn't seem to make much difference over the 9400M, incidentally.
Thoughts? I appreciate any help you can provide!
Thanks,
Tim

Turn on "Quick Preview" mode in Aperture when browsing on your laptop and you should not have any performance problems when rapidly browsing the library.
To understand what it is and how it works, see this:
http://documentation.apple.com/en/aperture/usermanual/index.html#chapter=5%26sec tion=7%26tasks=true
The performance difference between iPhoto and Aperture has to do with a significant difference w.r.t. how they store adjusted images.
Neither app will destroy the original image you import from the camera. But that's about where the similarities end.
When you make an adjustment to an image in iPhoto, iPhoto makes a copy of the original. Also, iPhoto doesn't work in RAW -- only JPEG. It can read RAW but the moment you make an adjustment, it creates a copy which is a JPEG. Thus when you scan the library, you're really scanning copies of JPEGs. JPEGs are small and open quickly. Thus it seems to be quick & snappy. Unfortunately, it's not RAW and you lose the control you would have had doing a complete RAW workflow.
Aperture, doesn't actually make a copy at all. It just stores a list of instructions for all the adjustments you've made. When it opens an image you shot in RAW, it opens the RAW file and applies all the adjustments as the image opens (which takes significantly more processing power than merely opening a JPEG). This means it takes longer, but you have a true RAW workflow with all the power and control that goes along with it.
Aperture does create a couple of JPEG copies of your RAW images -- but if you're working in RAW it doesn't use them for any purpose other than rapid browsing of the library. Just turn on 'Quick Preview' mode and you'll have all the speed you enjoy in iPhoto. If you try to make an adjustment while Quick Preview mode is enabled, you'll notice the adjustments tab tells you that adjustments are disabled while in that mode. Fortunately you can toggle preview mode on & off very quickly.

Lightroom has a hard time with local adjustments:

Local adjustments: Spotting / Cloning / Healing Brush, Adjustmenst Brush, Graduated filter
I posted the piece below as a response to thaehn’s post “Lightroom freezes on Dust Spot Removal” but I thought the topic is important enough to warrant its own post.
This in advance: I'm running WIN XP SP4 with all available patches; have 4 GB of RAM; have a dual-core processor at 3 GB.
Apart from my drive C, I have two internal hard drives in Raid 0 configuration (thus they show up as one drive). I also have an external hard drive that's in Raid 1 ( "mirroring') and is connected by fire-wire 400.
Yes, LR "freezes" when using the dust spot tool and also when using the adjustment brush or - but to a lesser degree - when using the grad filter.
My observation though is that it's not a true "freezing", because if I wait long enough LR starts working again. So when using these tools, LR gets extremely busy und just doesn't have enough resources left to respond to further commands right away - but it "stores" the comands and acts on them eventually.
If I turn on my task manager I observe the following when using these tools: the CPU gets extremely busy (i.e. the green bar is at 100%) while the RAM usage is high but not to the max. The "freezes" occur when and as long the CPU works at 100%. If the CPU is below 100% LR responds sluggish and the response is normal again when eventually the CPU usage is at 0%.
Also, in my observation, this behaviour of LR is compounding, i.e. the wait-times for my CPU to get back to 0 are increasing, the longer I work with these tools or the more photos I work on. Re-starting LR does not bring change: the behaviour establishes itself when using the tools again. It is as if LR needs to do some work in the background and that this background work piles up the longer I work in LR.
I am not a software or hardware specialist, so the following observations are somewhat subjective and not really quantifiable.
In Photoshop I observed a similar behaviour (although never as bad) when working on files of 500 MB and above. It was particularly bad when working on photos residing on my external RAID 1 hard drive. I had a hunch that it might have to do with the reading and writing from a drive that a) is external and b) is in RAID 1. It is known that RAID 1 has slower writing (and also reading) speeds than RAID 0 (or no RAID at all). So in Photoshop I managed to cut down on the unresponsiveness by moving large files to my internal RAID 0 hard drive and working from there.
From this experience I come to the assumption that some of the "busy-ness" in LR (or of the CPU) is due to reading/writing to/from the hard drive.
To test this assumption for LR, I moved some photos from my external (RAID 1) to my internal (RAID 0) hard drive and did some "intensive" work: first some "fancy" lens correction, then a few grad filters, and a "final touch" with the adjustment brush. I thought that LR could handle these tasks somewhat better when the photos were on the internal drive - so some of the "sluggishness" or " freezing" is due to the reading/writing from/to the hard drive.
Acually I cannot explain why this should be so: In my naivete I thought LR writes everything only into the catalog (?), that - by the way - is on my internal RAID 0 drive.
I think it would be good if Adobe could look into this and maybe give us some recommendations, just as they do for Photoshop by saying that the scratch disk should be on a different drive than Photoshop.
But it seems also that local adjustments - spotting, adj. brush. etc - are a very high "number-crunching" business for LR - independent of where the photo is located on the drive. (Interestingly the grad filter is not as bad as the adjustment brush). The clone-tool in Photoshop hardly registers on my CPU and if at all only with a very short spike, while the clone tool in LR sends the CPU through the roof for 10 to 30 seconds- even when the photo in question is on the internal drive.
I'm sure loots of people will now tell me that this is due to the difference between pixel-based adjustment and non-pixel-based ones. OK, I acknowledge that. But still ...
It seems some guys are still in denial about this (or maybe they have two quad processors and 16 GB of RAM):
But it's a fact: LR has a hard time with localized adjustments. There must be by now 100's of complaints to that respect, and that can't be dismissed by blaming it on the hardware specs alone.
I just hope Adobe is working on that.
LR3 is a fantastic program that I would not want to work without. Often I have to work on a lot of photos with a very tight deadline. Without LR it would be impossible.
Thank you,
ErnstK

You are right Samoreen.
I posted my above message in July 2010 and this topic has been re-opened by Adobe under the thread Lightroom 3.3 Performance Feedback
I think it would be best if everybody would post their concerns only under this thread.
Otherwise we'd have two different threads for the same issue.
So let's close this one here.
WW

My iMac is now almost unusable! Thanks Lion!!

Upgraded to 10.7.2 Lion and now my system is so slow it's rendered itself almost unusable. On top of that my internet drops out at every gust of wind, resulting in my having to restart it every 15 minutes!! We are a retail comany ramping up big time now for Xmas printing and I can't work with this any more. On top of that, my machine has spent 4 days in the apple store being rebuilt from scratch, thanks to Lion upgrade!!
Thanks, Apple - to whom do I complain please?!

Please read this whole message before doing anything.
This procedure is a diagnostic test. It won’t solve your problem. Don’t be disappointed when you find that nothing has changed after you complete it.
Third-party system modifications are a common cause of usability problems. By a “system modification,” I mean software that affects the operation of other software -- potentially for the worse. The following procedure will help identify which such modifications you've installed. Don’t be alarmed by the complexity of these instructions -- they’re easy to carry out and won’t change anything on your Mac.
These steps are to be taken while booted in “normal” mode, not in safe mode. If you’re now running in safe mode, reboot as usual before continuing.
Below are four lines of text in monospaced type, which are UNIX shell commands. They’re harmless, but they must be entered exactly as given in order to work. If you have doubts about the safety of running these commands, search this site for other discussions in which they’ve been used without any report of ill effects.
Some of the commands will line-wrap in your browser, but each one is really just a single long line, all of which must be selected. You can accomplish this easily by triple-clicking anywhere in the line. The whole line will highlight, and you can then either copy or drag it. The headings “Step 1” and so on are not part of the commands.
Note: If you have more than one user account, Step 2 must be taken as an administrator. Ordinarily that would be the user created automatically when you booted the system for the first time. The other steps should be taken as the user who has the problem, if different. Most personal Macs have only one user, and in that case this paragraph doesn’t apply.
To begin, launch the Terminal application; e.g., by entering the first few letters of its name in a Spotlight search. A text window will open with a line already in it, ending either in a dollar sign (“$”) or a percent sign (“%”). If you get the percent sign, enter “sh” and press return. You should then get a new line ending in a dollar sign.
Step 1
Copy or drag -- do not type -- the line below into the Terminal window, then press return:
kextstat -kl | awk ' !/com\.apple/ { print $6 $7 } '
Post the lines of output (if any) that appear below what you just entered (the text, please, not a screenshot.)
Step 2
Repeat with this line:
sudo launchctl list | sed 1d | awk ' !/0x|apple|com\.vix|edu\.|org\./ { print $3 } '
This time, you'll be prompted for your login password, which won't be displayed when you type it. You may get a one-time warning not to screw up. You don't need to post the warning.
Step 3
launchctl list | sed 1d | awk ' !/0x|apple|edu\.|org\./ { print $3 } '
Step 4
ls -1A {,/}Library/{Ad,Compon,Ex,Fram,In,La,Mail/Bu,P*P,Priv,Qu,Scripti,Servi,Sta}* 2> /dev/null
Important: If you synchronize with a MobileMe account, your me.com email address may appear in the output of the above command. If so, change it to something like “[email protected]” before posting.
Remember, steps 1-4 are all drag-and-drop or copy-and-paste, whichever you prefer -- no typing, except your password.
You can then quit Terminal.

Adjustments are copied to next image...

Have noticed a strange behavior lately with LR 5 when I am making small adjustments in the Basic panel.
The problem seems to happen when I am moving through the images too fast.
If I make some adjustments to an image and then hit the arrow key to go to the next image, all of the previous adjustments are copied over.
I typically use the Previous button for a lot of my editing but LR does this on it's own. I then need to Reset the photo to default and start over.
Not a huge annoyance until it gets to the point where you need to re-edit some photos and it copies over everything.
This happened several times to me today. I had an event fully edited but decided there were a few photos that needed minor adjustments.
As I was quickly scrolling through making adjustments where needed, I would notice that LR would drastically change the settings to match the previous photo.
This completely slowed me down and I had to re-edit so many photos. In some cases it would even copy over the cropping I had done.
Very annoying.
I hate to say but I am not very impressed with this version of LR so far. Feels rushed and not polished. I understand that each version has it quirks and issues but so many for
an established program. Tempted to go back to 4. Slow and unusable healing brush and now this annoyance are two major hits for me.
Regards,
Toby

After installing LR5 yesterday, importing the existing LR4 catalog and working on pictures imported in the LR4 catalog but not edited in LR4, I detected the same behavior. After looking to the hot issues, I thought, that this is only a problem on my system. Then I found your entry in the forum. During serching for an entry for our issue, I found a lot of bugs reported for LR5 by users which are not mentioned in the "hot issues". I'm using LR since version 1 and I had never expected a bug during the first basic steps in a new version. LR 5.0 seems really to be on of the worst versions ever issued by Adobe. I think I will do the editing of my holiday pictures with LR 4.3 and waiting at least for LR 5.1.
Regards,
Roger

IPhoto 11 unusably slow

Yes, I've seen the other posts.
iBook 2.1GHz, 4GB RAM, 500 GB drive, over 200 GB free. 10.7.4 fully patched. iPhoto 9.2.3
iPhoto starts with in as muc as 15 se, but is immediately unusably slow. Any click on any item in the UI causes a spinning beachball and the action takes 20 to 30 seconds to complete. Scrolling is essentially impossible. Menu actions are somewhat faster, taking 5 to 10 seconds to respond. Activity Monitor shows it using only a few percent CPU throughout, although there a brief spikes into the 30's which quickly fade. Over 2.2 GB of 4GB of RAM is free throughout, no major disk or network activity.
I have:
rebuilt the library, thumbnails, and permissions
turned off spotlight for the entire Picture directory
never had Bootcamp installed
Open to any suggestions.

Hi There
I have also had the same problem with iPhoto 11 after the latest update. I have ordered new RAM and have tried all the above steps. Nothing has worked so far.
I note that photostream is using almost all of my CPU which would explain wht everything takes forever to respond if it ever does. The strange thing is that I have photostream turned off on my iPhone and Ipad, and also don't have any of the boxes ticked in the photostream tab in preferences. I am not sure what photostream is trying to do when it is not even turned on. Any suggestions would be welcome and I will keep everyone posted if I find the fix as this appears to be causing the issue.
Regards
Graham

I7 Fully loaded iMac becoming unusable slow apps not responding with Mavericks

Very frustrating. My 2012 iMac with an i7/16Gig memory is crawling with Mavericks. It didn't start out that way, but it's almost unusable now. I will get a few minutes of seeming to work fine, then periods of long lasting slowness. Evening typing an email will have a delay where typing will not come out as I am typing it for a few seconds, then it all bursts out. Simple interactions get spinning beach balls from 5-45 seconds. The activity monitor shows nothing taking any particularly large amount of processor load, memory pressure and status is all green & good. Some disk activity but nothing that should account for the lags. Loading applications, the system grinds to being unresponsive. Adobe applications and running aperture have delays in activity from 5-60 seconds in simple interaction. The activity monitor then shows several of the larger apps (iTunes, Aperture, Premiere Pro) as Application Not Responding. It can take from to 30 seconds (if Im lucky) to several minutes for the system to become responsive again. Sometimes it never does.
I have run DiskUtility /repair permissions several times with no real results. There are documented issues with Finder being slow to pull up files and directories. I ran the fix for that as well as the slow restart/bootup issues documented. Those fixes made a difference but not with the overall issue of the system just grinding to a halt.
Has anyone else seen this, any suggestions on what to do to fix it? Im spending more time fighting the computer than getting my work done.

Very frustrating. My 2012 iMac with an i7/16Gig memory is crawling with Mavericks. It didn't start out that way, but it's almost unusable now. I will get a few minutes of seeming to work fine, then periods of long lasting slowness. Evening typing an email will have a delay where typing will not come out as I am typing it for a few seconds, then it all bursts out. Simple interactions get spinning beach balls from 5-45 seconds. The activity monitor shows nothing taking any particularly large amount of processor load, memory pressure and status is all green & good. Some disk activity but nothing that should account for the lags. Loading applications, the system grinds to being unresponsive. Adobe applications and running aperture have delays in activity from 5-60 seconds in simple interaction. The activity monitor then shows several of the larger apps (iTunes, Aperture, Premiere Pro) as Application Not Responding. It can take from to 30 seconds (if Im lucky) to several minutes for the system to become responsive again. Sometimes it never does.
I have run DiskUtility /repair permissions several times with no real results. There are documented issues with Finder being slow to pull up files and directories. I ran the fix for that as well as the slow restart/bootup issues documented. Those fixes made a difference but not with the overall issue of the system just grinding to a halt.
Has anyone else seen this, any suggestions on what to do to fix it? Im spending more time fighting the computer than getting my work done.

Local adjustments are almost unusably slow!

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for