# Lightroom 4.2 update



## mws (Oct 3, 2012)

Out now:

http://blogs.adobe.com/lightroomjournal/2012/10/lightroom-4-2-now-available.html


----------



## Jim Saunders (Oct 3, 2012)

Download page: http://www.adobe.com/support/downloads/thankyou.jsp?ftpID=5488&fileID=5498


----------



## Viggo (Oct 3, 2012)

So basically nothing to fix the VERYVERY uselessly slow performance.....


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 3, 2012)

This fixes two minor nuisances I have actually experienced (the gray image placeholder appearing for a short while and the clarity - luminance noise issue). Not that this bothered me too much, but nevertheless I do appreciate things getting better.


----------



## crasher8 (Oct 3, 2012)

Well that certainly went smoother than the last Aperture update.


----------



## loetleen (Oct 3, 2012)

At last tethered shooting with the 5dMkIII is working!!!!


----------



## suburbia (Oct 3, 2012)

the flickr publish authentication issue is also fixed in this release


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 3, 2012)

Viggo said:


> So basically nothing to fix the VERYVERY uselessly slow performance.....



There were several performance enhancements put in to this release.


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 3, 2012)

Viggo said:


> So basically nothing to fix the VERYVERY uselessly slow performance.....


I don't have a performance problem. Sounds like a configuration issue if you have a PC.


----------



## rmt3rd (Oct 3, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> Viggo said:
> 
> 
> > So basically nothing to fix the VERYVERY uselessly slow performance.....
> ...



I have a PC (with plenty of RAM, etc.) and maybe someone can answer my problem about loading photos into Lightroom. Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded. The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load. I have the thumbnails set to the smallest setting so more photos are on the screen at once in the Library module. Is there something I'm missing or I'm doing wrong. I would rather have all the photos load on their own and go do something useful, instead of having to scroll down every 30 seconds until my 1,000 photos or so are finished loading. The reason I make sure all the photos are loaded, meaning the 3 dots have disappeared, is so that in the Develop module it doesn't take forever for a single photo to become ready for adjustments.


----------



## keithfullermusic (Oct 3, 2012)

LR runs fairly slow on my computer too. I have a quadcore iMac (i7) with 12GBs of RAM. I also convert to .dng

The only thing that is slow is when the photo actually loads up. Other than that there are usually tiny delays after adjustments. Maybe i'm expecting too much, but Aperture didn't run this slow. However, LR punishes Aperture in just about every other regard, so I can live with it.


----------



## Zlatko (Oct 3, 2012)

rmt3rd said:


> Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded. The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load.


You don't have to do this. It sounds like you have LR set to build "minimal" previews on import. Then it has to work hard to load them later. Instead, set LR to build "1:1" or "standard" previews on import. This way the import process takes longer, but the previews are all built when it's done. This setting (called "Render Previews") is in the top right of the Import screen. 

Also, I've heard it's good to give LR a big cache for Camera Raw Settings. This is done in LR Preferences, under File Handling.


----------



## rmt3rd (Oct 3, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> rmt3rd said:
> 
> 
> > Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded. The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load.
> ...



Awesome, I'll take a look when I get home today. Thank you.


----------



## Gothmoth (Oct 3, 2012)

compare the LR demosaicing with this new RAW converter:

http://www.picturecode.com/index.php


you may be suprised.....


----------



## AtSea (Oct 3, 2012)

shareholder?


----------



## crasher8 (Oct 3, 2012)

My 5D3 raws take much longer than my 7D raws. Worth waiting for.


----------



## rawbphoto (Oct 3, 2012)

When I installed my Lightroom 4 upgrade the preview build was reset to minimal and this caused what seemed to be horrendous performance slowdowns. It also stopped building previews on import so not only were the previews being built minimal but they weren't even being built until I first tried using the Develop module.

I also set the standard preview size (catalogue settings) to the first listed reso-size longer than the longest edge of my monitor, for example monitor= 1920x1200 then Standard Preview Size=2048.

After changing my preview setting I deleted my preview folder and now rebuild the previews for each folder as I need them. Takes about as long as an import but once done everything is nice and zippy again.


----------



## Dianoda (Oct 3, 2012)

rmt3rd said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...



I'd suggest organizing your photos into folders by date - this way the computer does not immediately try to load thousands of photos each time you open LR. Even better, organize your photos into folders by by month/year and then by date plus brief description of the shoot - I find this very helpful. If it's an exceptionally large shoot, add another level of folders, ie, Ceremony, Couple & Family, Reception, etc. or 1st Quarter, 2nd Quarter, etc. For example:

W:\EOS 7D Master Backup\2012_08\2012_08_25 - Client Name's Wedding\Reception

By doing this I can pretty much get to anything quickly, despite having 40K+ photos tied to LR4 through network attached storage. My LR4 machine isn't a monster, either; it's a laptop with a dual-core Intel i5, 4GB RAM, SSD boot drive, and LR4.2 release candidate runs quite well. Once I'm ready to convert my RAWs, I save the output JPEG/TIFF's to a different drive and back them up to the master later (less I:O on the network drive means faster conversions).


----------



## Viggo (Oct 3, 2012)

It's not my hardware that sucks. Plus I don't have 40k in one catalogue (???) I have the images from import on one card and delete raw's afterwards. Tops 400 images in Lr at one time.

Lr 3 ran fantastic, and the 4 beta also ran great. I'll finish up all my work in Lr 4.1 and uninstall everything and start from scratch with 4.2..


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 3, 2012)

rmt3rd said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > Viggo said:
> ...


The creating preview images is a one time thing, Leave lightroom running for a while and it will create previews for all 1000 in 30 minutes or so.
Go to catalog settings to set your preferences for the previews and the time to keep 1:1 previews.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 3, 2012)

Viggo said:


> It's not my hardware that sucks. Plus I don't have 40k in one catalogue (???) I have the images from import on one card and delete raw's afterwards. Tops 400 images in Lr at one time.
> 
> Lr 3 ran fantastic, and the 4 beta also ran great. I'll finish up all my work in Lr 4.1 and uninstall everything and start from scratch with 4.2..



I have 130,000 images in one catalog, and LR4.0, 4.1 and 4.2 have all run just fine on all my systems, including my thin-and-light laptop. Win 7 64. I don't know why some people have this trouble and others don't.


----------



## cliffwang (Oct 3, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> Lee Jay said:
> 
> 
> > I don't know why some people have this trouble and others don't.
> ...



Do you guys access files via network? the LR on my server is very fast, but it's slow on my another desktop because of the network drive.
How about the LR speed on MAC?


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 4, 2012)

I noticed 4.2 is dramatically faster. Those huge Nikon D800 files now render in about 1 second or less. NR also updates almost instantly on the D800 files where it was taking 20 seconds or more on the D800 files.
Did those who claim its slow actually test it? 
My Canon 5D2 and 5D3 files load instantly, less than .1 sec.


----------



## Lee Jay (Oct 4, 2012)

cliffwang said:


> Freelancer said:
> 
> 
> > Lee Jay said:
> ...



Never.


----------



## wockawocka (Oct 4, 2012)

On my i7 960 with SSD's and 24gb Ram it is fine.

My technique though is to load the raw files, then build 1:1 previews. This takes time but the develop module is then twice as quick.

The biggest determining factor in lightroom speed is the CPU, then Ram. The hard drives, be they Sata 1, 2 or 3 have little of no bearing. The bottleneck is with the CPU.

Load your task manager and watch those cores jump up and down trying to crunch the files and you'll see what I mean.

I'm building a new rig to speed things up further (a 3930k cpu based system) but in a year or two I may go balls out with a dual Xeon setup.


----------



## AmbientLight (Oct 4, 2012)

I believe you are quite correct, that CPU speed is an important factor. I am running LR 4 on a Sony laptop with a standard 750 GB harddisk and 4 i7 CPUs and 8 GBs of RAM and it is blazingly fast, although I have in excess of 10000 pictures in my catalogue. I don't know, if it helps much in this case, but I also organize my pictures in folders on the operating system by year and by date plus location. In general using folders increases file access performance on the operating system level, provided we are talking about thousands of files.


----------



## Hector1970 (Oct 4, 2012)

I was wondering if I was the only person who had a problem with Lightroom 4.1
Lightroom 3 ran no problem for me on my PC (I don't know what the specs are - it's about 2 years old now and probably not state of the art).
Lightroom 4.1 runs like a dog. 
A new camera 5D Mark III and it's file sizes may also not be helpful.
It's been unresponsive quite alot. Very slow in comparison to Lightroom 3.
Hopefully 4.2 will improve it somewhat. I've downloaded and installed it but not used it next.

I was thinking of buying a Laptop to run Lightroom and PS5/6.
Any one give me an idea of what I should look for in the Laptop (Windows).
eg What RAM, what Intel Processor, Do I need a dedicated Graphics Card.
Anything else I should consider.

- Hector


----------



## Jamesy (Oct 4, 2012)

Hector1970 said:


> I was thinking of buying a Laptop to run Lightroom and PS5/6.
> Any one give me an idea of what I should look for in the Laptop (Windows).
> eg What RAM, what Intel Processor, Do I need a dedicated Graphics Card.
> Anything else I should consider.
> ...


Hi Hector, I am in the market for a laptop too - here are some recent threads on CR that talk about what you might need:
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9230.0
http://www.canonrumors.com/forum/index.php?topic=9244.0

Personally I am looking at a Sager NP6350 which is a gamer notebook. It has two HDD bays, optical drive and a seperate GPU (660M). Here is what I will likely get:

Intel 3610QM
nVidia 660M
16GB RAM
256GB SSD for O/S and active LR/PS files
750GB HDD for backup and files
95% gamut NTSC 1920x1080 screen
Windows7 Home Premium (I debated going right to Win8 but I think that may be problematic out of the blocks)


----------



## crasher8 (Oct 4, 2012)

Soup up your PC all you ant but my not made to order MBP is running 4.2 just perfect. You want fast? Try Aperture, wow that loads previews quickly.


----------



## rolsskk (Oct 4, 2012)

But no lens profile for the Canon 24-70mmL II


----------



## Jamesy (Oct 4, 2012)

rolsskk said:


> But no lens profile for the Canon 24-70mmL II


Tethering for the 5D3 only just came out - after being officially launched for over six months.


----------



## RonQ (Oct 4, 2012)

So last night I upgraded to LR4.2 and as before the issue is in the develop module, everytime I attempt to use a brush, the lagging is driving me nuts. It's gotten worse with the upgrade, not sure if I'm missing something... But I'm tempted to go back to 4.0!


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 4, 2012)

RonQ said:


> So last night I upgraded to LR4.2 and as before the issue is in the develop module, everytime I attempt to use a brush, the lagging is driving me nuts. It's gotten worse with the upgrade, not sure if I'm missing something... But I'm tempted to go back to 4.0!


That is strange, 4.2 is much faster for me, and lagging of the brush for 5D MK II or three was not a issue. It was for D800, but is now better.
I have my catalog on a SSD, and my files on a separate internal HDD. Its a huge catalog, and I only optimize occasionally due to the long time it takes.


----------



## crasher8 (Oct 4, 2012)

I'd trash the plist and rebuild your prefs.


----------



## RonQ (Oct 4, 2012)

Mt Spokane Photography said:


> RonQ said:
> 
> 
> > So last night I upgraded to LR4.2 and as before the issue is in the develop module, everytime I attempt to use a brush, the lagging is driving me nuts. It's gotten worse with the upgrade, not sure if I'm missing something... But I'm tempted to go back to 4.0!
> ...


I thought so too. I run my software on a SSD and all my files are on 3 other internal drives, running 16GB ram with an i7 quad core processor. So I know it's not PC performance, everything else in LR runs very fast except the develop module.


----------



## RichM (Oct 5, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> rmt3rd said:
> 
> 
> > Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded. The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load.
> ...



+1

Thanks, increasing the cache provided a big boost in performance when "developing". This might allow me to make it through a few more months with my 4 year old laptop.


----------



## pwp (Oct 5, 2012)

I'll be grateful for any speed gains from LR V4.2. LR3 ran like a dream on my quad core 16Gb memory PC (SSD LR cache & catalog). LR4 was a dog and to a lesser extent 4.1. I loved the LR4 .x functionality but talk about glacial performance!

But an interesting thing which may be useful to some users, and help explain why some photographers have absolutely no speed issues and others do. The Wacom Intuos4 tablet turns out to be a culprit, specifically when using local adjustments. Brush was so bad I just never use it. The havoc it caused was so deep that it took three or four complete shutdown/restart cycles to restore acceptable performance. 

So Wacom & Adobe need to talk to each other. If you use a Wacom and have LR speed issues, unhook it and taste the difference.

-PW


----------



## Jamesy (Oct 5, 2012)

pwp said:


> So Wacom & Adobe need to talk to each other. If you use a Wacom and have LR speed issues, unhook it and taste the difference.
> 
> -PW



When you say unhook it - do you mean un-install the driver or just not to use it in LR4? Are you using the pressure sensitivity mode on the Wacom?


----------



## suburbia (Oct 5, 2012)

Freelancer said:


> cliffwang said:
> 
> 
> > Freelancer said:
> ...



there is no contention with the local HDD? I keep my photo files on a separate disk to avoid problems when multitasking eg streaming music while working on lightroom, especially when say running an export it used to impact my Lightroom performance before I moved the photos to a dedicated disk.


----------



## suburbia (Oct 5, 2012)

RonQ said:


> Mt Spokane Photography said:
> 
> 
> > RonQ said:
> ...



what size previews do you render on import? Develop module needs 1:1 preview renders to display on screen. So if you render smaller previews on import then every time you launch a photo in the develop module you will see a lag. Lags during developing sounds like maybe cache size issue or maybe PC writing reading information to from disk during the developing action? 

Some questions to ask:

* What is CPU and Physical Memory utilisation when doing the developing?
* Where is location of and what size is the OS and Lightroom caches?


----------



## suburbia (Oct 5, 2012)

RichM said:


> Zlatko said:
> 
> 
> > rmt3rd said:
> ...



yes the default cache limit seems strangely small for medium to heavy work, I increased the cache size, located on a separate disk to the photo file disk, but I'm limited somewhat by capacity limits on my SSD so I will be looking to increase in future for more performance gains.

I also have put my lightroom catalogue onto my SSD (however because the catalogue needs to be in same folder as the huge preview file folders (surely an oversight) I have had to create a virtual link from my SSD to the physical location of the preview files on my dedicated photo HDD to save space on my SSD. Also must make backup of catalogue regularly as SSD is not backed up. 


http://morethanwords.be/blog/en/getting-the-most-out-of-your-solid-state-drive-in-lightroom/


----------



## tombu (Oct 5, 2012)

I just realized that DNG.files are like 3x faster in develop mode to load than canon's own cr2.. Anyone else here who noticed that?


----------



## K-amps (Oct 5, 2012)

Zlatko said:


> rmt3rd said:
> 
> 
> > Once I import photos from my harddrive into LR, before I go into the Develop module, I wait for all the photos to "load", by waiting for the 3 tiny dots to disappear from each photo, indicating the photo is loaded. The problem is, only the photos that are displayed on the screen actually "load", so I then have to scroll down to have the next line(s) of photos to show on the screen before they actually load.
> ...



A couple of things could also help in addition to Zlatko's tips:

1) Increasing RAM to 12-16GB (I have 24Gb but I never see it go beyond 12 GB usage)
2) Get a Samsung 830 series SSD. This really helps. 830 series is 6 Gbps

but the most effective tip I have seen work that helps with no spend, is for CPU's with Hyperthreading (all i-7's I think) , open the task manager, right click on the LR process and choose affinity. Unlick affinity to all odd number cpus (these are hyperthreaded) and leave 0,2,4,6 clicked on. This should help some. Non-hyperthreaded CPU's don't suffer that bad from performance that much for this reason.

Hope it helps.


----------



## Jamesy (Oct 5, 2012)

tombu said:


> I just realized that DNG.files are like 3x faster in develop mode to load than canon's own cr2.. Anyone else here who noticed that?


I don't use LR4 yet (I am getting a system that will run it shortly) but I do use DNG because the 5D3 is not supported in LR3. That said, when using DNG it helps to use the conversion setting of 'Embed Fast Load Data'.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 5, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> tombu said:
> 
> 
> > I just realized that DNG.files are like 3x faster in develop mode to load than canon's own cr2.. Anyone else here who noticed that?
> ...



On paper DNG is supposed to be as good as RAW, but does it have "all" the information that a RAW has? Has anyone done tests on this?


----------



## lipe (Oct 5, 2012)

hi

did they fix the sizing when doing the re size

when 

such as 728 x 485 landscape
and 485 x 728 portrait

like dpp you, so simple so easy 4.1 can not do


----------



## pwp (Oct 6, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> tombu said:
> 
> 
> > I just realized that DNG.files are like 3x faster in develop mode to load than canon's own cr2.. Anyone else here who noticed that?
> ...



And when you do your DNG conversion, go to Preferences and check "Embed Fast Load Data".

-PW


----------



## Mt Spokane Photography (Oct 6, 2012)

K-amps said:


> Jamesy said:
> 
> 
> > tombu said:
> ...


Yes and No. It depends on which of the three versions of DNG you select. If you pick the one with the RAW files embeded, everything is there. Otherwise, some of the Canon unique tags may not be there. Lightroom doesn't use these anyway, so it makes no difference.
You can also open DPP and batch save the files to photoshop or wherever you want them. They will be converted to tiff files,which are more universally used than DNG. You will still lose the Canon specific tags.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 6, 2012)

Thanks!

What about ability to recover highlights/ shadows... RAWs seem to have much more DR than jpegs... will this be compromised in TIFF or other renders?


----------



## Jamesy (Oct 6, 2012)

Tons of very accomplished photographers are onboard with DNG. Scott Kelby, Chris Orwig and Jared Platt come to mind. You can embed post processing information into a DNG after the fact - in LR just do a CTRL-S and what ever edits you have done get burned into the DNG.

Embedding CR2's inside the DNG is a waste of space - the files will be huge. Some people would say that you may lose the Canon special sauce but at the same time they rely on Lightroom or Bridge to render their CR2 RAW files which is the same potion that Adobe uses to convert to DNG.

I have yet to see a difference between DNG and CR2 but YMMV.


----------



## K-amps (Oct 6, 2012)

Jamesy said:


> Tons of very accomplished photographers are onboard with DNG. Scott Kelby, Chris Orwig and Jared Platt come to mind. You can embed post processing information into a DNG after the fact - in LR just do a CTRL-S and what ever edits you have done get burned into the DNG.
> 
> Embedding CR2's inside the DNG is a waste of space - the files will be huge. Some people would say that you may lose the Canon special sauce but at the same time they rely on Lightroom or Bridge to render their CR2 RAW files which is the same potion that Adobe uses to convert to DNG.
> 
> I have yet to see a difference between DNG and CR2 but YMMV.



Tks Jamesy.


----------

