Why is Lightroom 5.7.1 so slow in develop module?

Lightroom CC slows right down and becomes unbearably slow when in develop module and working with brushes, or zooming/panning.
My computer is not the problem...running 32GB RAM and dual Nvidia GeForce GTX 780M graphics cards...

Lots of adjustment brushes and lots of spot removal can bog things down. Your best bet is to move those takes to the end of your develop cycle.

Similar Messages

Why is the "basic" edit option missing from the develop module?

why is the "basic" edit option missing from the develop module?

http://www.lightroomforums.net/showthread.php?19775-Missing-Panels-Modules

Lightroom 5.7.1 upgrade broke my Develop module

I downloaded Lightroom 5.7.1 upgrade and now my Develop module doesn't work. Please help!

Lots of adjustment brushes and lots of spot removal can bog things down. Your best bet is to move those takes to the end of your develop cycle.

Lightroom 4.1 low quality image in develop module

Hi all, i have a macbook pro with retina display, in my lightroom 4.1 the images in the library look normal but when i go to develop module the image is blurred and very low quality. In settings the rendering are high quality 2048 1:1
Any way to fix this? Also in my external monitor i notice this thing with minor loss.

This probably won't help you but the preview settings don't affect the Develop module. In Develop the image is rendered from the raw data.
Are you seeing this with raw files? JPEGs? Is it a huge camera file?

Installed Lightroom cc. photos do not show in develop module. blue rectangle & white cross is all that shows in edit area. photos show in library and icons in develop collection and in navigator not in edit area.

Just installed Lightroom CC. Catalogue updated. Photos appear in library module and can be selected. When I switch to the Develop Module I can see and select photos from the collection icons but they appear as a blue rectangle & white cross on the edit area. The file name is displayed over the blue rectangle but the photo does not show.

I have the same problem,all I can see in develop module is a blue rectangle with two crossed white lines..

Why is Lightroom 5 Crop tool so slow?

Having this problem all the time. Sluggish crop tool making it impossible to make fine adjustments. Sole solution is to NOT use the 2nd monitor view. It seems this is causing the problem.
Except I WANT to use the 2nd monitor-option as a part of my workflow.
Using a Macbook Pro Retina 2,3 i7 with 8gb Ram, NVIDIA GeForce GT 650M 1024 MB and OSX 10.9 latest version. Surely this config is strong enough?
Secondary monitor is a Lacie324 hooked to the MBP through Apple-HDMI cable.
Help wanted! This is driving me crazy.

Hi John,
Sorry but no. Still having the problem. Just installed CUDA driver for Mac. Hope this will help. Don't know if LR really takes advantage of this driver though.
Read somewhere to uncheck the "dynamic switching between Graphics Cards" - box in "Systemprefs>energy saving options". But still haven't seen improvements in performance.
Had no response to the issue by anybody else so it's difficult to come up with a solution.
Peter

Lightroom 4.3 moving slow in Develop module

After i updated from LR4 to LR4.3 ,,, i have been using LR 4.3 for a couple hrs now only to find out i am having same issues as before:
1) when i select an image in the film strips, it shows it in Navigation panel but takes forever to change in my develop/ working photo window
2) If i do Edits like brush strokes,, same issue LR takes forever to update my Edits.
SPECS- Mac OS X, 2.5 Ghz i5, 4GB, 1333MHz ddr3
( the catalogues i work from are on a Western Digital 500GB external HD plug in to my Mac)
Nikon camera raw files
Any helpful advice please?? This thing is consuming far too much of my time>>>>headaches>>>

Same issue
Win8 x64, quad amd, hd5850, 2x 1T hdds + 60gig scratch + 160gig os,

Corrupted Lightroom (Can't access Basic controls in Develop module.) Do I need to delete and reinstall and, if so, how to do it without involving Creative Cloud swamp?

I am running on a McBook Pro, and suddenly cannot see or access the Basic options. Have I pushed the wrong button or has Lightroom gotten corrupted by my visit to Hawaii?
My thought is that the program has been corrupted; normally I woiuld simply delete it and reinstall, but Adobe seems to want me to jump through the Creative Cloud hoops, which I tried once and quit almost immediately.
Is there something that I ought to do to regain control ofmy life, or at least Lightroom?

That's odd - remember it is "Adobe Photoshop Lightroom."
On a MacBook, show the Launchpad (4-finger pinch on the trackpad) and type "Lightroom" in the search bar to find the app... Pin it to the dock when it's open so you can easily find it in the future (right click the dock icon, Options > Keep in Dock).
mh++

Upgraded to Lightroom 5.6 I no longer have folders develop module

First of all I own Lightroom 5. I do not have a creative cloud membership.Everything was fine until I updated to Lightroom 5.6 and now in the Develop module, I only have Collections, History, and Presets. I no longer can access my folders. On the Library module I can see and access my folders that are on my hard drive.
This is the folder section that I see in the Library module and I used to see in the Develop module.
This is what I see in the Develop module

I think you are mis-remembering. The Folders panel is not available in the Develop module, and am pretty sure it never has been since Lightroom 1.

Why is Lightroom 2.4 Thumbnail Rendering SLOOOOOOOOW...?

For some reason Lightroom 2.4 is taking an enormous amount of time to render thumbnail previews and in spite of having my thumbnail cache set to 50 GB, it still re-renders the thumbnails every single time I use the scroll bar.
Every other aspect of Lightroom performs just fine on my machine. But the library is so slow that it is unusable. Every time I touch the scroll bar I can see a somewhat darker preview of the thumbnails and then as soon as I stop scrolling, the CPU shoots up to 100% utilization and I watch as the thumbnails brighten and adjust one by one. 30 to 45 seconds later I can click on the thumbnails and navigate around just fine. Performance is great in fact until I touch the scroll bar again.
The basic question is this. Why does Lightroom refuse to cache my thumbnails? And why does it take soooo long to render them when Vista's explorer can render hundreds of thumbnails off even a flash card in seconds? Even if thumbnail rendering was slow it would be fine if Lightroom would only cache them for me so it doesn't have to redo it every time I scroll back and forth. Shouldn't there be an option to render thumbnails on import as well as 1:1 previews?
I am running Vista 64 bit with 4GB of RAM with a Gforce 7600GT graphics card. My library has about 18,000 images in it. But I've also tried with a brand new small catalog. I'm shooting and processing Nikon D300 RAW files.
I've done all the standard performance tweaks that everyone talks about:
1. I render 1:1 previews and never expire them.
2. I have tried all the various nvidia card tweaks.
3. I've updated to the latest and greatest nvidia drivers.
4. I have my catalog on a separate drive from my images, and my thumbnail cache on yet a 3rd drive.
5. My machine has plenty of RAM, and in fact Lightroom is only using 1.5GB leaving me with well over 1GB remaining.
6. My machine is not swapping at all.
I've been reading and reading for the past 24 hours about this issue but have yet to come up with an answer to it. I did find this old thread from over a year ago that describes the EXACT same problem I am experiencing except his problem was with version 2.3: http://forums.adobe.com/message/1395391#1395391
Does anyone have ANY idea what can be causing this? As is, I can't use Lightroom under these conditions.
Thanks!

So I spent all evening experimenting with different things in Lightroom to try and improve performance and found 1 solution that worked. Although I'm not sure why.
I understand that a design decision was made to render thumbs on the fly. Fine. But what I couldn't understand was why it took so incredibly long. I mean the process was literally locking up my entire machine every time I touched the scroll bar.
The ONLY thing I could get to clear up the problem was to select the top level folder in my catalog, and export the entire catalog as a new catalog. For export I did NOT choose to export the image files or the previews since I only wanted to keep my database (image adjustments, keywords, etc).
Upon opening this newly created catalog, of course everything was slow because there are no previews for anything. Fine. So I chose to render standard sized previews for a couple of the folders in the catalog (about 150 photos each). And then lightroom became extremely fast for browsing and scrolling through thumbnails on those particular folders.
What I can't undertand is why rendering standard sized previews on my old catalog (same photos, same folder) does not improve performance, yet doing it for the new catalog which should be an exact copy DOES improve performance.
The only thing I can think of is that my original catalog must have either been corrupt or there may be some upper limit on how many previews Lightroom can handle gracefully? Since I had standard previews for my entire catalog before.
I'm going to try and render standard sized previews on my entire new catalog tonight and see if the performance remains snappy. But something is definitely not right here.

Why does my iPhoto open and run slow since upgrading to OSX 10.8.5

Why does my iPhoto open and run slow since upgrading to OSX 10.8.5? I have an Imac - Intel 2.5 GHz quad core I5 - with 20 GB of memory. Before the upgrade it was much faster.

Why does my iPhoto open and run slow since upgrading to OSX 10.8.5? I have an Imac - Intel 2.5 GHz quad core I5 - with 20 GB of memory. Before the upgrade it was much faster.

Why is Lightroom taking so long to download? I have been trying for 2 and a half hours with no change.

Why does Lightroom take so bloody long to download?

HI,
I am facing the same problem. I jsut purchase LR 5 upgrade, and am trying to download it. However, it says it takes 8 hours to download?? I have sufficient disk space, so why is this taking so long? It also says there is approx 504 MB for LR 5...
Please assist.
I previously downloaded LR 3 years ago, and it was very fast. Kindly help!!
thanks.

ACR 8.7 has been released with support for the Nkon D750. Why no Lightroom support yet?

ACR 8.7 has been released with support for the Nkon D750. Why no Lightroom support yet? Am I wrong or was support for the D810 available far more quickly?

ACR 8.7 has not yet been released. The ACR 8.7RC has been released. It is a Release Candidate - and as such, is not a final version. I wouldn't be concerned about a lack of Lightroom support until a final version is released.
Adobe Photoshop Camera Raw 8.7 Release Candidate | digital camera raw file support - Adobe Labs

Why does Lightroom (and Photoshop) use AdobeRGB and/or ProPhoto RGB as default color spaces, when most monitors are standard gamut (sRGB) and cannot display the benefits of those wider gamuts?

I've asked this in a couple other places online as I try to wrap my head around color management, but the answer continues to elude me. That, or I've had it explained and I just didn't comprehend. So I continue. My confusion is this: everywhere it seems, experts and gurus and teachers and generally good, kind people of knowledge claim the benefits (in most instances, though not all) of working in AdobeRGB and ProPhoto RGB. And yet nobody seems to mention that the majority of people - including presumably many of those championing the wider gamut color spaces - are working on standard gamut displays. And to my mind, this is a huge oversight. What it means is, at best, those working this way are seeing nothing different than photos edited/output in sRGB, because [fortunately] the photos they took didn't include colors that exceeded sRGB's real estate. But at worst, they're editing blind, and probably messing up their work. That landscape they shot with all those lush greens that sRGB can't handle? Well, if they're working in AdobeRGB on a standard gamut display, they can't see those greens either. So, as I understand it, the color managed software is going to algorithmically reign in that wild green and bring it down to sRGB's turf (and this I believe is where relative and perceptual rendering intents come into play), and give them the best approximation, within the display's gamut capabilities. But now this person is editing thinking they're in AdobeRGB, thinking that green is AdobeRGB's green, but it's not. So any changes they make to this image, they're making to an image that's displaying to their eyes as sRGB, even if the color space is, technically, AdobeRGB. So they save, output this image as an AdobeRGB file, unaware that [they] altered it seeing inaccurate color. The person who opens this file on a wide gamut monitor, in the appropriate (wide gamut) color space, is now going to see this image "accurately" for the first time. Only it was edited by someone who hadn't seen it accurately. So who know what it looks like. And if the person who edited it is there, they'd be like, "wait, that's not what I sent you!"
Am I wrong? I feel like I'm in the Twilight Zone. I shoot everything RAW, and I someday would love to see these photos opened up in a nice, big color space. And since they're RAW, I will, and probably not too far in the future. But right now I export everything to sRGB, because - internet standards aside - I don't know anybody who I'd share my photos with, who has a wide gamut monitor. I mean, as far as I know, most standard gamut monitors can't even display 100% sRGB! I just bought a really nice QHD display marketed toward design and photography professionals, and I don't think it's 100. I thought of getting the wide gamut version, but was advised to stay away because so much of my day-to-day usage would be with things that didn't utilize those gamuts, and generally speaking, my colors would be off. So I went with the standard gamut, like 99% of everybody else.
So what should I do? As it is, I have my Photoshop color space set to sRGB. I just read that Lightroom as its default uses ProPhoto in the Develop module, and AdobeRGB in the Library (for previews and such).
Thanks for any help!
Michael

Okay. Going bigger is better, do so when you can (in 16-bit). Darn, those TIFs are big though. So, ideally, one really doesn't want to take the picture to Photoshop until one has to, right? Because as long as it's in LR, it's going to be a comparatively small file (a dozen or two MBs vs say 150 as a TIF). And doesn't LR's develop module use the same 'engine' or something, as ACR plug-in? So if your adjustments are basic, able to be done in either LR Develop, or PS ACR, all things being equal, choose to stay in LR?
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
PS RGB Workspace: ProPhotoRGB and I convert any 8-bit documents to 16-bit before doing any adjustments.
Why does one convert 8-bit pics to 16-bit? Not sure if this is an apt comparison, but it seems to me that that's kind of like upscaling, in video. Which I've always taken to mean adding redundant information to a file so that it 'fits' the larger canvas, but to no material improvement. In the case of video, I think I'd rather watch a 1080p movie on an HD (1080) screen (here I go again with my pixel-to-pixel prejudice), than watch a 1080p movie on a 4K TV, upscaled. But I'm ready to be wrong here, too. Maybe there would be no discernible difference? Maybe even though the source material were 1080p, I could still sit closer to the 4K TV, because of the smaller and more densely packed array of pixels. Or maybe I only get that benefit when it's a 4K picture on a 4K screen? Anyway, this is probably a different can of worms. I'm assuming that in the case of photo editing, converting from 8 to 16-bit allows one more room to work before bad things start to happen?
I'm recent to Lightroom and still in the process of organizing from Aperture. Being forced to "this is your life" through all the years (I don't recommend!), I realize probably all of my pictures older than 7 years ago are jpeg, and probably low-fi at that. I'm wondering how I should handle them, if and when I do. I'm noting your settings, ssprengel.
ssprengel Apr 28, 2015 9:40 PM
I save my PS intermediate or final master copy of my work as a 16-bit TIF still in the ProPhotoRGB, and only when I'm ready to share the image do I convert to sRGB then 8-bits, in that order, then do File / Save As: Format=JPG.
Part of the same question, I guess - why convert back to 8-bits? Is it for the recipient? Do some machines not read 16-bit? Something else?
For those of you working in these larger color spaces and not working with a wide gamut display, I'd love to know if there are any reasons you choose not to. Because I guess my biggest concern in all of this has been tied to what we're potentially losing by not seeing the breadth of the color space we work in represented while making value adjustments to our images. Based on what several have said here, it seems that the instances when our displays are unable to represent something as intended are infrequent, and when they do arise, they're usually not extreme.
Simon G E Garrett Apr 29, 2015 4:57 AM
With 8 bits, there are 256 possible values. If you use those 8 bits to cover a wider range of colours, then the difference between two adjacent values - between 100 and 101, say - is a larger difference in colour. With ProPhoto RGB in 8-bits there is a chance that this is visible, so a smooth colour wedge might look like a staircase. Hence ProPhoto RGB files might need to be kept as 16-bit TIFs, which of course are much, much bigger than 8-bit jpegs.
Over the course of my 'studies' I came across a side-by-side comparison of either two color spaces and how they handled value gradations, or 8-bit vs 16-bit in the same color space. One was a very smooth gradient, and the other was more like a series of columns, or as you say, a staircase. Maybe it was comparing sRGB with AdobeRGB, both as 8-bit. And how they handled the same "section" of value change. They're both working with 256 choices, right? So there might be some instances where, in 8-bit, the (numerically) same segment of values is smoother in sRGB than in AdobeRGB, no? Because of the example Simon illustrated above?
Oh, also -- in my Lumix LX100 the options for color space are sRGB or AdobeRGB. Am I correct to say that when I'm shooting RAW, these are irrelevant or ignored? I know there are instances (certain camera effects) where the camera forces the shot as a jpeg, and usually in that instance I believe it will be forced sRGB.
Thanks again. I think it's time to change some settings..

Why is my mid 2007 iMac so slow now that I've loaded 10.9.4

Why is my mid 2007 iMac so slow now that I've loaded 10.9.4? Everything seems to be slow. It was quick enough on 10.4. I now have wireless connection issues, and wired keyboard connection issues?
2.4 GHz Intel Core2 Duo, 4GB 667 Mhz DDR2 SDRAM

Hi there - thanks. No, I haven't run anything like Clean My Mac - what would you suggest?
EtreCheck version: 1.9.15 (52)
Report generated September 9, 2014 at 8:56:44 PM PDT
Hardware Information: ?
iMac (24-inch Mid 2007) (Verified)
iMac - model: iMac7,1
1 2.4 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo CPU: 2 cores
4 GB RAM
Video Information: ?
ATI,RadeonHD2600 - VRAM: 256 MB
iMac 1920 x 1200
System Software: ?
OS X 10.9.4 (13E28) - Uptime: 14 days 9:40:19
Disk Information: ?
SAMSUNG HD103UJ disk0 : (1 TB)
S.M.A.R.T. Status: Verified
EFI (disk0s1) <not mounted>: 209.7 MB
Macintosh HD (disk0s2) / [Startup]: 999.35 GB (321.09 GB free)
Recovery HD (disk0s3) <not mounted>: 650 MB
USB Information: ?
Apple, Inc. Keyboard Hub
Apple Inc. Apple Keyboard
Seagate FA GoFlex Desk 1.5 TB
S.M.A.R.T. Status: Verified
disk1s1 (disk1s1) <not mounted>: 32 KB
FreeAgent GoFlex Drive (disk1s3) /Volumes/FreeAgent GoFlex Drive: 1.5 TB (20.68 GB free)
Apple Inc. Built-in iSight
Apple Inc. Bluetooth USB Host Controller
Apple Computer, Inc. IR Receiver
Gatekeeper: ?
Mac App Store and identified developers
Kernel Extensions: ?
[loaded] com.seagate.driver.PowSecDriverCore (5.1.1) Support
[not loaded] com.seagate.driver.PowSecLeafDriver_10_4 (5.1.1) Support
[loaded] com.seagate.driver.PowSecLeafDriver_10_5 (5.1.1) Support
[not loaded] com.seagate.driver.SeagateDriveIcons (5.1.1) Support
[not loaded] net.pocketmac.driver.BlackberryUSB (3.0.9) Support
[not loaded] net.pocketmac.driver.BlackberryUSBDev (3.0.9) Support
Startup Items: ?
AdobeVersionCueCS2: Path: /Library/StartupItems/AdobeVersionCueCS2
Problem System Launch Daemons: ?
[failed] com.apple.printtool.daemon.plist
[failed] com.apple.wdhelper.plist
Launch Daemons: ?
[loaded] com.adobe.fpsaud.plist Support
[loaded] com.adobe.SwitchBoard.plist Support
[loaded] com.google.keystone.daemon.plist Support
[loaded] com.microsoft.office.licensing.helper.plist Support
Launch Agents: ?
[not loaded] com.adobe.AAM.Updater-1.0.plist Support
[running] com.adobe.AdobeCreativeCloud.plist Support
[running] com.brother.LOGINserver.plist Support
[loaded] com.google.keystone.agent.plist Support
[running] com.seagate.SeagateStorageGauge.plist Support
User Launch Agents: ?
[loaded] com.adobe.AAM.Updater-1.0.plist Support
[loaded] com.adobe.ARM.[...].plist Support
[loaded] com.facebook.videochat.[redacted].plist Support
[running] com.memeo.Memeod.plist Support
User Login Items: ?
Microsoft AU Daemon
SpeechSynthesisServer
iTunesHelper
AdobeResourceSynchronizer
Google Drive
Dropbox
Microsoft Database Daemon
Microsoft Outlook
ExpanderDaemon
VersionCueCS2Status
Internet Plug-ins: ?
o1dbrowserplugin: Version: 5.4.2.18903 Support
Google Earth Web Plug-in: Version: 7.1 Support
Default Browser: Version: 537 - SDK 10.9
Flip4Mac WMV Plugin: Version: 2.3.8.1 Support
OVSHelper: Version: 1.0 Support
RealPlayer Plugin: Version: (null) Support
AdobeAAMDetect: Version: AdobeAAMDetect 2.0.0.0 - SDK 10.7 Support
FlashPlayer-10.6: Version: 15.0.0.152 - SDK 10.6 Support
AdobePDFViewerNPAPI: Version: 10.1.6 Support
DivXBrowserPlugin: Version: 2.1 Support
Flash Player: Version: 15.0.0.152 - SDK 10.6 Support
iPhotoPhotocast: Version: 7.0
googletalkbrowserplugin: Version: 5.4.2.18903 Support
QuickTime Plugin: Version: 7.7.3
AdobePDFViewer: Version: 10.1.6 Support
SharePointBrowserPlugin: Version: 14.1.0 Support
Silverlight: Version: 5.1.20125.0 - SDK 10.6 Support
JavaAppletPlugin: Version: 14.9.0 - SDK 10.7 Check version
Safari Extensions: ?
wpa
html5video
Audio Plug-ins: ?
BluetoothAudioPlugIn: Version: 1.0 - SDK 10.9
AirPlay: Version: 2.0 - SDK 10.9
AppleAVBAudio: Version: 203.2 - SDK 10.9
iSightAudio: Version: 7.7.3 - SDK 10.9
iTunes Plug-ins: ?
Quartz Composer Visualizer: Version: 1.4 - SDK 10.9
User iTunes Plug-ins ?
TuneUp Visualizer: Version: (null) Support
User Internet Plug-ins ?
Move-Media-Player: Version: npmnqmp 071303000006 Support
fbplugin_1_0_3: Version: (null) Support
WebEx: Version: 1.0 Support
WebEx64: Version: 1.0 Support
3rd Party Preference Panes: ?
Adobe Version Cue CS2 Support
DivX Support
Flash Player Support
Flip4Mac WMV Support
Time Machine: ?
Skip System Files: NO
Auto backup: YES
Volumes being backed up:
Macintosh HD: Disk size: 930.71 GB Disk used: 631.68 GB
Destinations:
FreeAgent GoFlex Drive [Local] (Last used)
Total size: 1 TB
Total number of backups: 100
Oldest backup: 2013-08-22 07:36:47 +0000
Last backup: 2014-09-10 03:01:26 +0000
Size of backup disk: Too small
Backup size 1 TB < (Disk used 631.68 GB X 3)
Time Machine details may not be accurate.
All volumes being backed up may not be listed.
Top Processes by CPU: ?
      76% Microsoft Outlook
      7% ARM
      4% Google Drive
      1% launchservicesd
      1% Microsoft Database Daemon
Top Processes by Memory: ?
172 MB Finder
135 MB Microsoft Outlook
94 MB Google Chrome
94 MB com.apple.IconServicesAgent
94 MB WindowServer
Virtual Memory Information: ?
158 MB Free RAM
866 MB Active RAM
706 MB Inactive RAM
655 MB Wired RAM
93.45 GB Page-ins
3.83 GB Page-outs

Why is Lightroom 5.7.1 so slow in develop module?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for