LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

From RAW conversion to image editing and printing
User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Fri May 08, 2015 11:17 am

This has some good info:

Lightroom CC/6 Myths & Confusion

http://www.lightroomqueen.com/lightroom-cc6-myths-confusion/

Andy, I was running LR 5 (and 4 before that) on my 17.3", Win8.1, i7 cpu, 8gb ram, 256gb ssd, 1tb hd laptop. The ssd has my LR catalog and previews, but the photo files are all on the hd. I left that computer in Japan though so before coming to Spain I bought a compromise laptop to use with LR: 14.1", Win7 pro, i5 cpu, 4gb ram, 750gb hd. I needed something smaller than the 17.3" for this sort of extended travel so looked at 15.6", 14.1", and 13.3" laptops. Naturally, while not using it I would like something the size of an iphone, but when using it I would like something the size of an 27" imac. :lol: Life is full of compromises though so I decided that the 15.6" was too big for this trip and the 13.3" was too small. The 14.1" is still usable with LR, but is small enough that it isn't too much of burden for the trip. While in Europe we each have a small, carry-on style rolling bag (in 2001 on our 4 month travels in Europe we each had backpacks) so the laptop fits easily into my rolling bag.

The 4gb is enough to use LR + have Firefox open with several tabs + Notepad, Windows File Explorer, etc.. Usually LR never uses more than about 2-2.5gb from what I have seen, and usually less, for the last couple of years. That is processing 16mp and sometimes 18mp raw files. Maybe if I was processing 36mp raw files it would use much more.

I will probably wait until LR 6.1 before upgrading. That is what I usually do. Let them fix some of the early bugs that are found. :lol: It would be nice though if Adobe has been able to reduce memory usage with 6. As soon as I noticed that the recommended ram was 4gb I had to go back and check earlier versions because I thought I remembered that for 5 they recommended 8gb. Turns out I was right.

User avatar
ValeryD
Viceroy
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 2:25 pm
Location: Winnipeg
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby ValeryD » Fri May 08, 2015 2:43 pm

Hi! I have as main desktop:
i5-3.6, 8 gb RAM, 120 Samsung SSD drive + 1tb storage drive and two 27" monitors .
For traveling and a work out of the house:
Thinkpad (12") x201 (i5) with 8gb RAM, 120 SSD drive + plus removable 500GB HDD in the DVD bay. The notebook does have the dock station and at home connect to one off my monitors. :)
Back to LR 6.0 -
1 - Problem with the presets - batch preset doesn't work right. :(
2 - slow file transfer from flash cards, I don't know why, 2 times slower (i tried in both computers.)
The first problem is a major problem for me. As I know Adobe it's not last "bug" in new LR 6.0 release. I tried LR 5.x on the MAC computer (CPU, RAM ... = PC computer) It's make no difference compared to a Windows or Linux machine. In some operation (file transfer, editing) even slower than on Windows PC.
Everything in the life unusual!

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Sun May 10, 2015 12:16 pm

Why Your Lightroom CC May Actually Be Slower with the New GPU Acceleration

http://petapixel.com/2015/05/08/why-your-lightroom-cc-may-actually-be-slower-with-the-new-gpu-acceleration/

User avatar
mikeriach
Imperial Ambassador
Posts: 647
Joined: Sat Feb 02, 2008 11:29 am
Location: Aberdeen

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby mikeriach » Mon May 11, 2015 12:46 pm

I didnt notice much if any difference with LR6. A bit slower to load it seems but similar lags in generating the previews etc.

Mike
Some Sony stuff and now some Nikon stuff (shock horror). Sony cannot supply what I want so rightly or wrongly I'm branching out to someone who does.

User avatar
bfitzgerald
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 3572
Joined: Fri Sep 26, 2008 10:48 pm

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bfitzgerald » Fri May 15, 2015 1:34 pm

Part of the problem is you really need to have GPU support from the ground up rather than tacking bits of it onto a product. Also support is mixed depending on the graphics card some problems with AMD ones. There are also additional instructions in more recent processors that are not being used to their full potential.

I probably might pass on this for a while I see nothing urgently improved over LR5 to warrant an upgrade.

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Sat May 16, 2015 6:12 am

A friend in France updated from LR 4 to LR 6 and sent this comment to me:

"I just benchmarked the export speed using 84 (Canon 5DII) raw files. Using LR4 it took 5 min 41 sec whereas LR6 took 4 min 33 sec. That's quite a good news!"

His computer is an i5, 16gb, Win7 with AMD 5450 chipset so he has turned off LR's use of the gpu until a later LR version fixes the problem. He says: " I still noticed LR6 is faster than LR4 is many aspects."

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Mon May 25, 2015 1:15 pm

Good write-up about GPU use and issues in LR 6 by Eric Chan, Adobe Camera Raw Engineer:

https://forums.adobe.com/message/7480830#7480830

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:51 am

bakubo wrote:This is what Adobe recommends for RAM for LR 6, 5, and 4:

LR 6: 2GB of RAM (4GB recommended)
LR 5: 2GB of RAM (8GB recommended)
LR 4: 2GB of RAM

They are recommending 4gb instead of 8gb now. It isn't common for a new version to use less ram than before. I hope it isn't a typo.


I notice that Adobe has updated the LR 6 system requirements and now they say that 8gb is recommended. Maybe they saw my post here and realized they had a typo. :)

User avatar
Birma
Tower of Babel
Posts: 6679
Joined: Sun Jun 29, 2008 3:10 pm

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby Birma » Thu Jun 25, 2015 1:29 pm

I would hope it is required reading for everyone at Adobe ;)

8gb has made LR and PS much more useable for me.
Nex 5, Nex 6 (IR), A7M2, A99 and a bunch of lenses.

User avatar
ValeryD
Viceroy
Posts: 735
Joined: Thu Mar 08, 2012 2:25 pm
Location: Winnipeg
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby ValeryD » Thu Jun 25, 2015 3:17 pm

bakubo wrote:
bakubo wrote:This is what Adobe recommends for RAM for LR 6, 5, and 4:

LR 6: 2GB of RAM (4GB recommended)
LR 5: 2GB of RAM (8GB recommended)
LR 4: 2GB of RAM

They are recommending 4gb instead of 8gb now. It isn't common for a new version to use less ram than before. I hope it isn't a typo.


I notice that Adobe has updated the LR 6 system requirements and now they say that 8gb is recommended. Maybe they saw my post here and realized they had a typo. :)

Please, don't say we need 16 gb RAM for LR.... :lol:
Everything in the life unusual!

User avatar
bakubo
Subsuming Vortex of Brilliance
Posts: 5632
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 7:55 am
Location: Hawaii
Contact:

Re: LR5 v. LR4 - anyone tried the new version?

Unread postby bakubo » Thu Jun 25, 2015 10:24 pm

Birma wrote:I would hope it is required reading for everyone at Adobe ;)

8gb has made LR and PS much more useable for me.


Yeah, I went to 8gb with my previous computer when I was using LR 4. While away from Japan for 10 weeks though I bought a 14.1" laptop to take that had 4gb. I used LR on it while we were traveling and it worked okay, but I had to be more careful about what other programs were taking up memory. With my regular computer with 8gb it is more comfortable.

I am still using LR 5.7 since I haven't really seen much to get me to go to 6. The performance improvements from using a GPU seem to be a mixed bag and mostly help people with very high res screens (Retina, etc.) and high end video cards. For most people, from what I have read, using the GPU actually slows things down so for them Adobe recommends turning off GPU use in LR. I think there are a few other performance improvements, but nothing big. LR CC has this new haze filter. LR 6 standalone doesn't get the haze filter slider control, but the functionality is there. You have to use presets to make use of it though. From examples I have seen of its use though it can help sometimes, but it isn't a miracle. Some photos I have seen look a bit better, but some look worse. I think many of the examples I have seen look worse because people cranked it up too much and the result, as one would expect, is over the top.


Return to “Digital Workflow and PP”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests