new Lightroom 6 on iMac 5k: SPEED SPEED SPEED

[odedia]

I took a look at this comparison chart and was blown away!

The biggest performance boost is on the iMac 5k, and I think that's on the standard entry level GPU. On the 295x it might be even better.

Downloading right now and will report back.

I didn't like Photos app so much, mainly due to endless bugs, but I LOVED the speed. It made Lightroom feel like a turtle. Hopefully now they'll be on par with each other.

 

[aevan]

I'm seeing a DRAMATIC speed increase on my base model iMac 5K in new Lightroom's Develop. Moving all sliders is perfectly smooth (it was really struggling in Lightroom 5).

I imported around 200 NEW (RAW) 10Mp photographs to test it and manipulating them is a real pleasure. Scrolling the thumbnails is also smooth.

This proves the iMac 5K is a great, photographer's tool.

BTW, the M290X is handling everything great. It just proves the stories of this card being somehow underpowered for 5K have been greatly exaggerated. Adobe recommends 2Gb VRAM or more for 4K and 5K screens, and the card flies in Lightroom. Previous versions just used the CPU, so more developers should use the GPU for 5K stuff. Just shows what little optimisation can do.

 

[fathergll]

Great news. I have a M290x and think I might take the LR6 plunge. I don't like the CC subscription idea so I'm thinking LR6 for photo and Final Cut X for video.

 

[odedia]

Great news. I have a M290x and think I might take the LR6 plunge. I don't like the CC subscription idea so I'm thinking LR6 for photo and Final Cut X for video.

Not crazy about subscription either but Lightroom mobile is REALLY a lot of fun and syncs perfectly back to my computer. I wish Apple could learn a trick or two with this implementation.

 

[sunlit]

I'm seeing a DRAMATIC speed increase on my base model iMac 5K in new Lightroom's Develop. Moving all sliders is perfectly smooth (it was really struggling in Lightroom 5).

I imported around 200 NEW (RAW) 10Mp

I do not advise to get all carried away here: first load a real library like of 100+ thousand images, not 10mp, but 24-36Mpix, and with good amount of Develop history in the catalog, and you will see that LR is still pretty slow. There are improvements in the Develop module, since it is now video-card accelerated, but the Loop view, and Grid view seem not to be accelerated at all. zooming in/out is still jerky (smooth now in Develop, but often there is a wait before image gets crisp, since the zooming effect is drawn in small resolution). Also preview creating on Retina iMac takes forever, and I mean it: its' third day and counting, mac is on 24 hours a day, Lightroom churning out previews for 115 thousand images. It used to be faster before, I swear.

 

[alexxk]

4 year old MacBook Pro, yet my 2011 with Intel HD3000 is not supported

 

[aevan]

I do not advise to get all carried away here: first load a real library like of 100+ thousand images, not 10mp, but 24-36Mpix, and with good amount of Develop history in the catalog, and you will see that LR is still pretty slow. There are improvements in the Develop module, since it is now video-card accelerated, but the Loop view, and Grid view seem not to be accelerated at all. zooming in/out is still jerky (smooth now in Develop, but often there is a wait before image gets crisp, since the zooming effect is drawn in small resolution). Also preview creating on Retina iMac takes forever, and I mean it: its' third day and counting, mac is on 24 hours a day, Lightroom churning out previews for 115 thousand images. It used to be faster before, I swear.

Does loading a real library of 100+ thousand 24-36Mpix images work fast on a non-retina iMac? Or on any computer for that matter? Just asking, but it seems quite normal that something as demanding takes time to complete.

For me - I just know that my humble library of hundreds of 10Mpix photos used to drag and lag in Develop while doing simple tasks and now it flies. I should've put a disclaimer that I don't know how it will work with hundreds of thousands photos. To be honest, I never even saw hundreds of thousands photos in one place in my life.

Again, I would like to know if such a demanding task works fast and smooth on any Mac? Honestly asking, I'm not presuming anything.

 

[roadkill401]

I do not advise to get all carried away here: first load a real library like of 100+ thousand images, not 10mp, but 24-36Mpix, and with good amount of Develop history in the catalog, and you will see that LR is still pretty slow.

ROTFL - I guess you must be one of those mystic self important type that feel access to your lifes work at your fingertip is a must to have. BTW: Ever heard of ARCHIVING? At roughly 30mb per 36mp raw file, you have close to 3TB of photographs sitting in your catalogue. I don't know of many photographers that would be actively working on that many photographs.

An average wedding photographer will take between 250-900 shots, with the mean average showing around 500. So to get to your number of shots inside your library, you would be looking to catalog some 200 weddings. Now there are 52 weeks in a year and I will suppose that you are an awesome photographer who managers to land 2 weddings a week. That would still be 2 years worth of work.

Have you ever thought that if you break your catalog down to smaller chunks, like quarterly, you would only need to catalog 1/8 the number of photo's and it would work that much better.

Just a thought to put out there.

 

[BJB Productions]

How is it preforming for everyone else? I'm a wedding photographer and usually process 500-700 images per wedding. I shoot on the 5D Mark III so each raw image is about 40mb per image.

 

[WilliamG]

How is it preforming for everyone else? I'm a wedding photographer and usually process 500-700 images per wedding. I shoot on the 5D Mark III so each raw image is about 40mb per image.

I shoot a 5D MKIII as well, and I'm pretty happy. The new HDR merge is also superb.

 

[yjchua95]

How is it preforming for everyone else? I'm a wedding photographer and usually process 500-700 images per wedding. I shoot on the 5D Mark III so each raw image is about 40mb per image.

I used to shoot with a 7D Mk1, then preordered a 5DS R. RAW sizes on my 7D are about 20-30MB per image.

I wonder how large will a RAW image be on the 5DS R.

 

[Wahlstrm]

4 year old MacBook Pro, yet my 2011 with Intel HD3000 is not supported

Neither is my HD4000..
But Lightroom seems to forget that when I boot it up, and uses the card anyway..

 

[lsquare]

Not crazy about subscription either but Lightroom mobile is REALLY a lot of fun and syncs perfectly back to my computer. I wish Apple could learn a trick or two with this implementation.

I still don't see a real purpose of LR Mobile. IIRC, I still can't add keywords in the app.

 

[BJB Productions]

How's LR6 preforming on your 5K iMacs?

 

[GXPvince]

ROTFL - I guess you must be one of those mystic self important type that feel access to your lifes work at your fingertip is a must to have. BTW: Ever heard of ARCHIVING? At roughly 30mb per 36mp raw file, you have close to 3TB of photographs sitting in your catalogue. I don't know of many photographers that would be actively working on that many photographs.

An average wedding photographer will take between 250-900 shots, with the mean average showing around 500. So to get to your number of shots inside your library, you would be looking to catalog some 200 weddings. Now there are 52 weeks in a year and I will suppose that you are an awesome photographer who managers to land 2 weddings a week. That would still be 2 years worth of work.

Have you ever thought that if you break your catalog down to smaller chunks, like quarterly, you would only need to catalog 1/8 the number of photo's and it would work that much better.

Just a thought to put out there.

Just another thought to put out there. The average wedding photographer does NOT only take 250-900 shots at a wedding. I know many photographers that exceed 4-5k on a 8-10hr wedding. It may be a phrasing issue on your end (processed images) even then you are likely looking at the larger end of that.

 

[N2bnfunn]

Just another thought to put out there. The average wedding photographer does NOT only take 250-900 shots at a wedding. I know many photographers that exceed 4-5k on a 8-10hr wedding. It may be a phrasing issue on your end (processed images) even then you are likely looking at the larger end of that.

Wrong I never 4-5K of photo's that will only be in a Indian Wedding.. You are right about 250-900 is about right.

 

[coolfactor]

Not crazy about subscription either but Lightroom mobile is REALLY a lot of fun and syncs perfectly back to my computer. I wish Apple could learn a trick or two with this implementation.

As for syncing, iCloud Photo syncing works perfectly for me. No issues whatsoever. Photos appear quickly on all devices.

 

[robgendreau]

As for syncing, iCloud Photo syncing works perfectly for me. No issues whatsoever. Photos appear quickly on all devices.

Yeah, but it's all or nothing. Not very workable for most of us, especially when we DON'T want stuff on all devices. And it's expensive by comparison. Sheesh, Flickr now gives you 1TB free. From Apple it's $120, which is the cost at Adobe of Lr, PS and unlimited storage back and forth to your iOS/Android devices.

 

[CausticPuppy]

4 year old MacBook Pro, yet my 2011 with Intel HD3000 is not supported

Tell me about it. LR6 flies on my 13" rMBP, but on my Mac Mini (2011 quad core, same HD3000 as you) it's completely unusable in the Develop module. LR5 is much better on that system. I unchecked the GPU box too.

EDIT - Actually, this is weird. Panning around at 100% zoom is extremely laggy in LR6 (with GPU disabled) if I'm using the 2-finger drag gesture. But if I click the trackpad and drag user the pointer, it's fine. With the GPU turned off, LR6 works fine on my older Mac, about like LR5 does- but there must be a bug with how panning is implemented?

 

[thedeske]

Does loading a real library of 100+ thousand 24-36Mpix images work fast on a non-retina iMac? Or on any computer for that matter? Just asking

Agree - dems a bokoo of a cat file there bub. Try not to turn on Faces with that file - you'll have to take a vacation

 

[loekf]

Not crazy about subscription either but Lightroom mobile is REALLY a lot of fun and syncs perfectly back to my computer. I wish Apple could learn a trick or two with this implementation.

I surrendered after using Adobe software for years for.. ehh.. free let's say. Totally fed up with the "incomplete workarounds". 129 euro incl VAT per year is not a bad deal for LR and Photoshop, so the Photographers CC package. 129 euro is for the english only package, the initial quote is for the multi-language one.