Why is LR so sluggish but Photos app is blazing fast?

nomnomnom

Leading Member
Messages
569
Reaction score
102
What exactly is LR doing that makes it so slow when browsing photo? I have a 32GB ram 2013 mac pro with maxed out specs. But when I try to navigate from one photo to another, it takes sooo long to render. Is it because I have a 4k external monitor?

If I browse photos in the Photo app, it is instant. Literally 0 seconds. In fact, I can hold down the arrow keys and have it play like a movie.
 
Something is definitely not working right with LR and the way it handles previews.
on my MACs (that have faster storage) I experience no speed issue.
If I need to buy 10Gb interfaced SSDs drives just so LR can load JPEG previews a bit faster, then the problem lies with LR.
I need to buy 10 GbE for Video as well - that was the root cause for me to have a faster connection - I was not satisfied with 400 MB/s on my DAS before since this was still too slow for the amount of data so smoothly load - nothing wrong with the software IMHO
My 2013 system is roughly 10x faster - my new rMBP 13 mid 2017 is even 20x faster being a laptop - that's the reason for having a responsive system.

LR is not the problem.
I would disagree, I have a 2013 27" iMac with 16GB of RAM, it also uses the LR GPU acceleration. LR is the slowest of all the apps for a similar task. For quick browsing, all it has to do it load a JPEG preview, which should be pretty instantaneous on even older system.
which storage system? HDD and fusion drive are not good options
These are all HDDs. HDDS are a very good option if you're on a limited budget, and need reasonable amounts of reliable storage.
Sure - and my point is that with HDDs even USB 3.0 is very adequate since they are much slower than the interface
For example, a 2TB thunderbolt drive starts at over £200(UKP). That's before I go to SSD options.
I own some 150 TB in HDDs - I purely use SSDs for booting and cache in my NAS
Of course it'd be a nice to upgrade to Thunderbolt storage of course, but the cost of the enclosures is pretty scary, and I don't have the option of 10Gb NAS on the iMac. Standard 1Gb Ethernet isn't going to be any advantage over FW800.
yes - buy regularly new machines - financially no big effort
It's nice to have sufficient funds to do that, not all of us do.
I've elaborated that many times - the target is to spend near to nothing over time - just but my tax payback a few days ago - and here is how this works out:
  1. Buy a new MAC as cheap as you can - there are some nice dealers and deals out - also with 0% interest rate still
  2. Declare your MAC at the tax office - in case you have a job that demands IT you can do that - almost every job is today dependent on modern IT infrastructure at home => I get 45 % of the purchasing price back over 3 years
  3. Sell you MAC shortly after the 3 years and you get from a dealer some 40-50 % of the list price => cashout is normally 10-15 % over three years. e.g. a 4 k USD MAC costs you 400-500 USD cashout in three years or in other words 150 USD per year
You can look at it as a kind of very affordable leasing and you get every three years a new machine - this is how I do it and it works pretty well.
USB3 would probably be better, but I've never got those to work properly on my iMac anyway, and for the short time I have tried one, it didn't make any difference to LRs speed.
As said before my MACs have no issue having faster storage.

In case you've wanted to clarify you question - this is it ,-)
And, as I said, having looked into this over a few years, it isn't. There are many variations on this problem, including different base machines with variations of graphic cards, and variations of storage types.
I've owned some dozen MACs and LR run on maybe 5 or 6 of them and I never experienced the behavior you described when I used fast RAID systems - for me the main influence is the storage array - the smallest I've used in the past years was a 4 HDD Raid 0 setup from Akitio => some 300 MB/s - 8 years ago - ever since the speed got better with new RAID systems and the latest incarnation is my NAS with > 900 MB/s

Works extremely satisfying
Putting in faster storage might fix it, but it might not too. I've seen plenty of comments with users on even older hardware, with similar storage on HDDs that don't suffer speed issues at all.
It does - try it - have you personally seen these machines?

I trust very little in forums - there are a lot of misconceptions and wrong user interpretation - I want to see the setup myself - normally I rent stuff and try it out.

With the modern return policy it is easy to rent a raid casing and put in your HDDs and give it a weekend try.

This is how I would approach this topic.

--
__________________________________
A7R II - one camera to rule them all
ISO 9000 definition of quality: 'Degree to which a set of inherent characteristic fulfills requirements'
I am the classic “Windows by Day, Mac by Night user'
“The horizon of many people is a circle with zero radius which they call their point of view.” Albert Einstein
"In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and been widely regarded as a bad move." Douglas Adams
well I don't know if any of that matters because I just bought the fastest 5 imac money can buy from apple and hooked it up to the fastest RAID drive. LR is sluggish as hell, after navigating every 4-5 photos in the film strip it would begin to show "loading". Now granted, the "loading" goes away in half a second or so. But why is it loading? Loading what? There's no loading in Photos.app or any other app for that matter (capture one for example). LR is just so garbage.
 
Last edited:
I think part of the answer is that Photos, being a much newer application, taps into the GPU for displaying thumbnails and scrolling and processing raw images (and maybe even for decoding raw files), while Lightroom only uses the GPU in the Develop module for accelerating image adjustments, e.g. dragging sliders, and not in the Library module. This discrepancy is made even more acute if you have a 4k or 5k display.
 
Andy, lots of expensive options being bantered around here. I know few think there's any life other than Lightroom but I ended ALL speed issues by moving my 1 million image library over to Mylio. Mylio even has the ability to directly work with Lightroom if you need the more powerful editing tools. I use Mylio with DXO Optics but it can be combined with anything, including Photoshop or as I said, Lightroom. Adobe has been supposedly working to improve the speed of Leightroom ever since it was released but it hasn't gotten much if any better. Why, because they have no competition. Aperture used to be our only hope. I'm telling you with all sincereity, if you need speed you should at least give Mylio a try. It's lightning fast.
Hmm, perhaps too much emphasis has been put on my fixing LR here, I don't need to, I've already migrated to Photos, and happy with it. Someone just asked about LR being slow, and I agreed.

Mylio has been mentioned all too often as a solution, but personally I don't want a subscription option, and I don't really like Mylios editing tools.

At this time, I find Photos is actually pretty good, I now have a managed layout that I like, and I find its editing tools good enough for basic adjustments. A set of MacPhun extensions does anymore I need.
 
Something is definitely not working right with LR and the way it handles previews.
on my MACs (that have faster storage) I experience no speed issue.
If I need to buy 10Gb interfaced SSDs drives just so LR can load JPEG previews a bit faster, then the problem lies with LR.
I need to buy 10 GbE for Video as well - that was the root cause for me to have a faster connection - I was not satisfied with 400 MB/s on my DAS before since this was still too slow for the amount of data so smoothly load - nothing wrong with the software IMHO
Well, there has to be something wrong. No other photo app is as bad at loading previews as LR is.

If I need to buy hundreds of ££s worth of gear to load a JPEG preview faster, then there is something wrong with that software.

Most apps on my old G5 PowerMac were at least as fast for such a task. It shouldn't even be a matter of discussion on a machine such as I own now.

I've elaborated that many times - the target is to spend near to nothing over time - just but my tax payback a few days ago - and here is how this works out:
  1. Buy a new MAC as cheap as you can - there are some nice dealers and deals out - also with 0% interest rate still
  2. Declare your MAC at the tax office - in case you have a job that demands IT you can do that - almost every job is today dependent on modern IT infrastructure at home => I get 45 % of the purchasing price back over 3 years
  3. Sell you MAC shortly after the 3 years and you get from a dealer some 40-50 % of the list price => cashout is normally 10-15 % over three years. e.g. a 4 k USD MAC costs you 400-500 USD cashout in three years or in other words 150 USD per year
You can look at it as a kind of very affordable leasing and you get every three years a new machine - this is how I do it and it works pretty well.
You seem to forget that there's a world of different countries out there, and people with different situations. This doesn't work everywhere.
USB3 would probably be better, but I've never got those to work properly on my iMac anyway, and for the short time I have tried one, it didn't make any difference to LRs speed.
As said before my MACs have no issue having faster storage.

In case you've wanted to clarify you question - this is it ,-)
And, as I said, having looked into this over a few years, it isn't. There are many variations on this problem, including different base machines with variations of graphic cards, and variations of storage types.
I've owned some dozen MACs and LR run on maybe 5 or 6 of them and I never experienced the behavior you described when I used fast RAID systems - for me the main influence is the storage array - the smallest I've used in the past years was a 4 HDD Raid 0 setup from Akitio => some 300 MB/s - 8 years ago - ever since the speed got better with new RAID systems and the latest incarnation is my NAS with > 900 MB/s

Works extremely satisfying
Ever heard of the saying, 'use a sledgehammer to crack a nut'?
Putting in faster storage might fix it, but it might not too. I've seen plenty of comments with users on even older hardware, with similar storage on HDDs that don't suffer speed issues at all.
It does - try it - have you personally seen these machines?

I trust very little in forums - there are a lot of misconceptions and wrong user interpretation - I want to see the setup myself - normally I rent stuff and try it out.

With the modern return policy it is easy to rent a raid casing and put in your HDDs and give it a weekend try.

This is how I would approach this topic.
Yeah, that may not work here in the UK. Returns are possible, but usually in a 'unused and new condition, in original packaging' (unless the item is faulty of course).

That's not renting, that's fraud.
 
Andy, lots of expensive options being bantered around here. I know few think there's any life other than Lightroom but I ended ALL speed issues by moving my 1 million image library over to Mylio. Mylio even has the ability to directly work with Lightroom if you need the more powerful editing tools. I use Mylio with DXO Optics but it can be combined with anything, including Photoshop or as I said, Lightroom. Adobe has been supposedly working to improve the speed of Leightroom ever since it was released but it hasn't gotten much if any better. Why, because they have no competition. Aperture used to be our only hope. I'm telling you with all sincereity, if you need speed you should at least give Mylio a try. It's lightning fast.
Hmm, perhaps too much emphasis has been put on my fixing LR here, I don't need to, I've already migrated to Photos, and happy with it. Someone just asked about LR being slow, and I agreed.

Mylio has been mentioned all too often as a solution, but personally I don't want a subscription option, and I don't really like Mylios editing tools.

At this time, I find Photos is actually pretty good, I now have a managed layout that I like, and I find its editing tools good enough for basic adjustments. A set of MacPhun extensions does anymore I need.
 
Andy, lots of expensive options being bantered around here. I know few think there's any life other than Lightroom but I ended ALL speed issues by moving my 1 million image library over to Mylio. Mylio even has the ability to directly work with Lightroom if you need the more powerful editing tools. I use Mylio with DXO Optics but it can be combined with anything, including Photoshop or as I said, Lightroom. Adobe has been supposedly working to improve the speed of Leightroom ever since it was released but it hasn't gotten much if any better. Why, because they have no competition. Aperture used to be our only hope. I'm telling you with all sincereity, if you need speed you should at least give Mylio a try. It's lightning fast.
Hmm, perhaps too much emphasis has been put on my fixing LR here, I don't need to, I've already migrated to Photos, and happy with it. Someone just asked about LR being slow, and I agreed.

Mylio has been mentioned all too often as a solution, but personally I don't want a subscription option, and I don't really like Mylios editing tools.

At this time, I find Photos is actually pretty good, I now have a managed layout that I like, and I find its editing tools good enough for basic adjustments. A set of MacPhun extensions does anymore I need.
 
just finished my (payed) LR workshop today and got many new fans attracted.

interstingly not one was complaining about the preview speed on their LapTops :-)

I do a few Lightroom trainings a year - people love the interface, speed and outcome - me too and it pays some new toys like a faster NAS.

You're unhappy with LR - buy something different or get a decent new MAC :-)

I love having the latest and greatest and I do e.g. LR Tutorials and other photo Trainings - that pays easily a faster NAS

Next on my list is the new iMac Pro in December - can't wait to get a MAC with built in 10 GbE
 
LR and Aperture were very similar programs written in code that was over 15 maybe 20 years old. Adobe keeps it going. Apple killed it, knowing people are eventually going to get tired of waiting to work with their pictures. Mylio is also written on a foundation gamers use. It's incredibly fast
There are two factual problems in that paragraph. The first is that neither program was over 15 years old let alone 20. Aperture was released in 2005, it was only 9 years old when Apple killed it. Lightroom was released in 2007, so it has only turned 10 this year. They were young programs.

As far as Mylio supposedly being faster because it was "written on a foundation gamers use," it is well known that Lightroom was written partly in Lua. Wikipedia will tell you that, and also that "In video game development, Lua is widely used as a scripting language by game programmers, perhaps due to its perceived easiness to embed, fast execution..." Lua was used for several Star Wars games and World of Warcraft.

Lightroom has some serious performance problems, but it isn't because of age or what it was written in.
 
What exactly is LR doing that makes it so slow when browsing photo? I have a 32GB ram 2013 mac pro with maxed out specs. But when I try to navigate from one photo to another, it takes sooo long to render. Is it because I have a 4k external monitor?

If I browse photos in the Photo app, it is instant. Literally 0 seconds. In fact, I can hold down the arrow keys and have it play like a movie.
So I have this mid-2010 iMac and none of your problems. Why do you think that is?
 
What exactly is LR doing that makes it so slow when browsing photo? I have a 32GB ram 2013 mac pro with maxed out specs. But when I try to navigate from one photo to another, it takes sooo long to render. Is it because I have a 4k external monitor?

If I browse photos in the Photo app, it is instant. Literally 0 seconds. In fact, I can hold down the arrow keys and have it play like a movie.
So I have this mid-2010 iMac and none of your problems. Why do you think that is?
Do you have a 4K/5k monitor?
 
What exactly is LR doing that makes it so slow when browsing photo? I have a 32GB ram 2013 mac pro with maxed out specs. But when I try to navigate from one photo to another, it takes sooo long to render. Is it because I have a 4k external monitor?

If I browse photos in the Photo app, it is instant. Literally 0 seconds. In fact, I can hold down the arrow keys and have it play like a movie.
Lightroom performance is acceptable on my 2013 Mac Pro (6-core 3.5GHz with 64GB RAM), but I have an all-SSD system (2x2TB Samsung 850 EVO in RAID 0 over Thunderbolt 2 plus the 512GB internal SSD). Hard drives do not make sense as anything but a backup medium. You would be better off with a cheaper system with faster storage.

As you found out, Adobe's software is very poorly optimized. Perhaps that is because they write the the cross-platform lowest denominator for Windows and Mac and can't leverage platform-specific stuff like Grand Central Dispatch. The best that can be said about LR is that it is not a legacy-riddled dog like Photoshop.

The 2013 Mac Pro's internal SSD is slow compared to the NVMe ones in the newer laptops, and its USB3 bus is known to be sub-par.

Not all RAID is created equal. RAID 5 is horrendous, for instance. Use the free BlackMagic Disk Speed Test Tool to benchmark your RAID array. Depending on which bus you have hooked it up to, speed can vary. If you are connecting over USB, low-spec cables will degrade speed to USB2 levels. Also, whether the RAID enclosure supports UASP (SCSI over USB3) makes a huge difference in performance.

There is hope on the horizon:

 
Do you have a 4K/5k monitor?
2560 x1440, so not quite. But I don't think the display matters much.
correct - my spouse has a late 2014 iMac 5k and none of these perceptions.

In fact her 5k iMAC runs blistering fast with her 50 MPixel 5DsR files on the Fusion drive - even though I don't like fusion drive concepts in a MAC.
 
What exactly is LR doing that makes it so slow when browsing photo? I have a 32GB ram 2013 mac pro with maxed out specs. But when I try to navigate from one photo to another, it takes sooo long to render. Is it because I have a 4k external monitor?

If I browse photos in the Photo app, it is instant. Literally 0 seconds. In fact, I can hold down the arrow keys and have it play like a movie.
Lightroom performance is acceptable on my 2013 Mac Pro (6-core 3.5GHz with 64GB RAM), but I have an all-SSD system (2x2TB Samsung 850 EVO in RAID 0 over Thunderbolt 2 plus the 512GB internal SSD). Hard drives do not make sense as anything but a backup medium. You would be better off with a cheaper system with faster storage.

As you found out, Adobe's software is very poorly optimized. Perhaps that is because they write the the cross-platform lowest denominator for Windows and Mac and can't leverage platform-specific stuff like Grand Central Dispatch. The best that can be said about LR is that it is not a legacy-riddled dog like Photoshop.

The 2013 Mac Pro's internal SSD is slow compared to the NVMe ones in the newer laptops, and its USB3 bus is known to be sub-par.

Not all RAID is created equal. RAID 5 is horrendous, for instance. Use the free BlackMagic Disk Speed Test Tool to benchmark your RAID array. Depending on which bus you have hooked it up to, speed can vary. If you are connecting over USB, low-spec cables will degrade speed to USB2 levels. Also, whether the RAID enclosure supports UASP (SCSI over USB3) makes a huge difference in performance.

There is hope on the horizon:

http://www.imaging-resource.com/new...room-competitor-chances-are-looking-very-good
 
What numbers from blackmagic would be considered good? I just migrated over to a brand new maxed out imac. It's faster than the mac pro I had, but still slow compared to Photos.

Navigating from image to image will show "loading" after about 5-6 images. Again, what on earth is LR doing? Why is it struggling in rendering Jpegs??
That's my point over all the arguments, which seems to be being overlooked. We've been dealing with JPEGs for a coupe of decades now, and I've never seen an app struggle as much as LR does with a JPEG preview, even cutting them down in size makes no difference.
 
Late 2015 27" iMac with 8GBs of RAM takes an acceptable 2 seconds to render previews on a 5k screen in Lightroon 5 (so no GPU acceleration). Photo files are kept on a 1TB Fusion drive. Catalog, application, and OS reside on a fairly slow SSD (290 write/380 read). I don't consider this a problem.
 
Late 2015 27" iMac with 8GBs of RAM takes an acceptable 2 seconds to render previews on a 5k screen in Lightroon 5 (so no GPU acceleration). Photo files are kept on a 1TB Fusion drive. Catalog, application, and OS reside on a fairly slow SSD (290 write/380 read). I don't consider this a problem.
A state of the art computer, taking 2 seconds to rend a jpeg file on screen and you dont think there's a problem?
 
Late 2015 27" iMac with 8GBs of RAM takes an acceptable 2 seconds to render previews on a 5k screen in Lightroon 5 (so no GPU acceleration). Photo files are kept on a 1TB Fusion drive. Catalog, application, and OS reside on a fairly slow SSD (290 write/380 read). I don't consider this a problem.
A state of the art computer, taking 2 seconds to rend a jpeg file on screen and you dont think there's a problem?
This is in Develop mode, so Lightrom is also loading all the adjustment I have made. I am fine with that. When I am viewing from the Library, previews are more or less instantaneous. Sometimes it seems to need to rebuild previews in Library mode, but that might be because I have cleared the cache. Not sure what it is doing there. Anyway, it quick enough for me.
 

Keyboard shortcuts

Back
Top