Sluggish LR Classic tool function / disfunction: Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing...

Lightbender50 Loc: Santa Rosa, Ca.

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

R.G. Loc: Scotland

I find that things slow down significantly if I do lots of bits and pieces with the adjustments brush or lots of cloning, especially if I'm mixing cloning and adjustments. If you aren't already using at least 16GB of RAM you should make that investment.

If you go to Edit>Preferences>File Handling you can increase the Camera Raw Cache Maximum Size. When I did that I didn't notice much of an improvement, but apparently it can and does help under some circumstances. I have mine set to 40GB.

DWU2 Loc: Phoenix Arizona area

Try comparing performance with and without the graphics processor box being checked.

rgrenaderphoto Loc: Hollywood, CA

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

As others have said, it's the system RAM that matters, and how full your HD is. Assuming it's Windows, right click on the taskbar, open Task Manager\Performance\Open Resource Monitor.
You'll see how much memory is reserved for Hardware, In Use and Free. Then go to crucial.com, look up your system vendor and model # to see what the maximum RAM your mainboard will support. Buy and Install. If it's got an upper limit of 16 Gb, consider upgrading.

mborn Loc: Massachusetts

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

I am sorry that you are having these problems. I have a W10 with 32 gb RAM and do not have any problems. I have an upgraded graphics card with 2 gb RAM

bwana Loc: Bergen, Alberta, Canada

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

Until Adobe started fooling around with LR Classic it performed very well. However, over the past year+/- every release has been noticeably slower and less responsive AND that is after they announced they were supposedly improving its performance!!

I have implemented all of the suggested speed-ups with no real improvement...

Yes, what was once great software has taken a serious hit!

bwa

mwsilvers Loc: Central New Jersey

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

What are the specs of the computer you are using? What processor? How much RAM? what video card? Do you have Open GL turned on in Lightroom?

brucewells Loc: Central Kentucky

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

Performance of any graphics-based software will depend on the various components of the system on which it is running.

-Processor - What is the processor speed
-Drives - SSD or 7200 RPM drives perform much better than the 5400 RPM renditions
-Memory - The more the better. As has been suggested, 16 Gb should be considered the minimum
-Video/Graphics adapter - A dedicated graphics adapter (separate graphics card installed in the system) is much preferred and 2 Gb of VRAM is minimal. Consider 4 or 8.

Additionally, if an external USB drive is employed, USB 3.x is much faster than the older specifications.

I've seen performance improvements in the last 2 or 3 releases of Lightroom Classic.

Revet Loc: Fairview Park, Ohio

I am having the same problem with the following hardware and software:

1) Windows 10 pro 64 bit
2) Intel I7-4770 CPU 3.4GHz
3) 24 GB RAM
4) NVIDIA GeForce GTX 1060 6 GB Graphics Card
5) Camera Raw Cache - 40 GB (target is the SSD drive which has plenty of room)
6) Processor turned off in Performance works a little better but not much
7) I have all my programs on a 512 GB SSD drive, Data on a 2TB internal HDD Drive. I tried putting Raw files from my D500 on the SSD drive for editing and then moving it to the HDD drive for storage. It makes no difference which drive the photos are on, LR Classic is still slow with all brush features.
8) I have checked performance on the task manager and the CPU is usually down at about 6 to 10% depending on what I am doing. The RAM never goes above 40% with multiple programs running; however it seems much of the RAM is dedicated to Cached data and Code that is not actively in use (which may be my problem!!). Anyway to change this????

Any help would be greatly appreciated!!!

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

Lightroom was never intended for local adjustment, which explains why local adjustments are less than optimal. Better to make global, parametric edits - and leave the brushes, spot removal and other adjustments requiring precision to other software. I use Photoshop and On1 for those kinds of things. Just because you "can" make those kinds of adjustments in LR doesn't mean that it is the best tool for the job.

Papa j Loc: Cary NC

R.G. wrote:

I find that things slow down significantly if I do... (show quote)

👍👍👍 I have a MAC Book Pro 2012 and was having the same issue ,very frustrating waiting. I purchased 16 GB of ram 2 8GB sticks from Crucial easy install even for me now I’m good to go much improved efficiency

Joe

Bluzin Loc: Bluffton, SC

I saw a Scott Kelby video a while back that suggested a smaller catalog would speed things up. But personally, I always get mixed up with more than one active catalog.

amfoto1 Loc: San Jose, Calif. USA

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

I find a lot of LR's image editing tools slow to work with and rather crude. It's fine for quick, global adjustments.... and occasionally for something more selective, but relatively minor. For anything more than that I pass images off to Photoshop. It's much, much more precise and controllable.

In other words, I use LR to quickly tweak large numbers of images to "proof" quality. But once selections are made by me or my clients, I use PS for "finished" quality of the individual images.

Tronjo Loc: Canada, BC

Lightbender50 wrote:

Anyone besides me have a frustrating time with the sluggish performance of LR Classic tools? Brush, spot adjustment are disappointing, frustrating and slow with unwanted artifacts appearing as well. I appeal to the experienced and kind hearted Hoogers for your suggestions on improving speed and performance. Adobe tech help is evasive and seemingly unwilling to help.
Most gratefully,
Roger

I was also frustrated and that was one of the reasons I abandoned it. It looks like LR Classic does not use multi-core CPUs to full capacity (old code maybe?). While I was using it though, I found that more memory and using dedicated solid state HD as a scratch improve the performance, particularly the later.

drklrd Loc: Cincinnati Ohio

mwsilvers wrote:

What are the specs of the computer you are using? What processor? How much RAM? what video card? Do you have Open GL turned on in Lightroom?

Thanks for asking the obvious. So many people for get to add the data needed to answer a question that needs more data to answer with. Of course then you have the people who all give many answers supposing they know a lot but do not because they have not been given all of the data to work with.