Ad
Ad
Ad
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Bottom of Page
Print
Author Topic: Which flaws did you notice in 1.1?  (Read 12205 times)
The View
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 999


« on: July 06, 2007, 03:35:20 PM »
ReplyReply

1.1 has certain problems, that I hope will be fixed in a 1.2 follow-up.


1. Speed. 1.1 is noticeably slower than 1.0. This is a major problem if you are working on a G5.

2.. I had the film strip freeze twice, where only one image in the center of the strip displayed a changing row of images, all others stayed frozen. Remedy: quit LIghtroom, and reopen.

3. Healing tool tends to switch to clone when you switch between clone and no-clone tool.

4. Healing tool: spots cannot be enlarged. The marks for increasing the already done corrections appear, but when you want to drag and drop it larger, it does not react. Not even a beach ball. When you let go, the healing spot sometimes disappears, sometimes it stays the same size.

5. Healing tool extremely slow in 1:1 (it is as fast as usual in 3:1)
Logged

Deserts, Cities, Woods, Faces - View of the World.
The View
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 999


« Reply #1 on: July 06, 2007, 04:29:07 PM »
ReplyReply

To be more specific about the slowness: it is about the loading of new images from library into develop.

Not always. But too often. And I can't say yet why or when.

I have the impression, that when I open many photos one after another and compare them, the application gets slower and slower.
Logged

Deserts, Cities, Woods, Faces - View of the World.
macgyver
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 510


« Reply #2 on: July 06, 2007, 05:13:10 PM »
ReplyReply

1. Differing image quality.  See other thread.

2. Speed.

Other than that, great stuffs, the sharpening is great!
Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2226



WWW
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2007, 05:43:18 PM »
ReplyReply

I don't notice any speed difference so far.  Overclocked 6700.
Logged

seamus finn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801


« Reply #4 on: July 06, 2007, 06:02:33 PM »
ReplyReply

Yep, me too.  LR 1.1 is going along fine, working beautifully for maybe thirty minutes or so, and then it's like a cork being tossed on a rough sea. Everything stops, the computer goes into a riff, with much huffing and puffing, the hourglass comes up on the skreen, so you go for a cuppa and come back later. After several minutes, everything settles down, LR returns to normal, and then the same performance happens again after another similar interval. It's as if the programme has run out of breath and needs to catch up on itself.
Another nuisance: it takes ages to export files into PS3. A lot more huffing and puffing, and sometimes crashes. I'm a PC user - is that part of the problem? My machine is relatively new, with loads of ram and disk space, not to mention two external hard drives with plenty of capacity. CS3 and Bridge run seamlessly with no problem, but I am very attracted to LR and want it to deliver what it says on the tin. So far, it hasn't - by a good mile.
It's very frustraing because the programme is a brilliant concept - sharpening vastly improved, clarity a fantastic tool, and so on. But bugs and many other issues reported here and elsewhere, particularly on the Adobe User to User Forum are really another disaster in the making as far as a smooth workflow is concerned. Hopefully, the Adobe creative team will get on top of the situation soon and put a lot of well disposed users out of their misery.

Seamus Finn
Logged

Mort54
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 590


WWW
« Reply #5 on: July 06, 2007, 08:48:59 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
1.1 has certain problems, that I hope will be fixed in a 1.2 follow-up.
1. Speed. 1.1 is noticeably slower than 1.0. This is a major problem if you are working on a G5.

2.. I had the film strip freeze twice, where only one image in the center of the strip displayed a changing row of images, all others stayed frozen. Remedy: quit LIghtroom, and reopen.

3. Healing tool tends to switch to clone when you switch between clone and no-clone tool.

4. Healing tool: spots cannot be enlarged. The marks for increasing the already done corrections appear, but when you want to drag and drop it larger, it does not react. Not even a beach ball. When you let go, the healing spot sometimes disappears, sometimes it stays the same size.

5. Healing tool extremely slow in 1:1 (it is as fast as usual in 3:1)
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=126885\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]
1. Speed - 1.1 is at least as fast as 1.0 was on my Mac Pro. That's just gut feel. I haven't done any formal speed tests.

2. Film Strip Freeze - No problems here. The only problem I had in 1.0, where I wasn't able to export my changes to an XMP file, now seems to be fixed. So hooray for 1.1.

3. Healing Tool Problems - Seems to work OK for me.

4. Healing Tool Speed - I haven't noticed any slow down.

All in all, I was happy with 1.0, and I'm equally happy with 1.1. But I guess Lightroom isn't the first tool to have differences across platforms, so I'm guessing that's what happening here.
Logged

I Reject Your Reality And Substitute My Own
Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #6 on: July 07, 2007, 03:33:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Mostly I see little difference between the two versions.

Speed seems to be quicker, particularly getting started.  Can't see why it should be slower but I'll bet there is a preference setting that has been changed.  If Lightroom runs slow, it can be vastly sped up by using 1:2 instead of 1:1 in the loupe view.  When you start working a number of photos, there is a lot of processing going on and this eases the load heaps.  Use Apple+ and Apple- on a Mac to push this to 1:1 for the odd photo where 1:2 is not enough.  Dead quick.

I found a very odd flaw today.  Trying to print a custom size off a roll of canvas, the print screen fragmented.  The ruler grid stayed put even when I moved to Library, Develop and Slide, even after I quit and reopened.  It needed a very unMac-like reboot to fix this.  But it did fix and it did my 17x14 print fine!

Otherwise, all the above mentioned improvements are great.

Don.
Logged

Don
X-Re
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 143


« Reply #7 on: July 07, 2007, 10:27:25 AM »
ReplyReply

Here's a good one for you.... I found some History weirdness. I'm not sure how to word this, so I'll describe how to reproduce it...

In Develop module, pull up a photo to work on. Make a couple of changes so you have some history - for instance, adjust the Exposure and Clarity. Now, pick an adjustment that's been changed - say, Clarity. Click on the number on the right side of the adjustment, as if you were going to change the number by hand. It should change to an editable field with the existing setting highlighted. Now, while that number is highlighted, change something else in a way that won't un-highlight the setting you selected above - for instance, double-click the word Exposure to set Exposure back to its default. The highlighted setting should still be highlighted. Now hit Enter to accept that setting and save it.

Ok - what you've just done, in my example, is adjust Clarity and Exposure. Both settings should have been made and you should see their effects on the picture. BUT - you'll only have a history change for the Clarity adjustment!

There's also the weird alt-click on adjustments behavior I noted in another thread. I've seen more weirdness with other files on this. The short form is that, when adjusting sharpness settings at 1:1 magnification, if I alt-click any of the four sliders, I sometimes don't see the display at all - the normal image remains, or sometimes see an all white screen. In all cases, the adjustments still work - just that the alt-click display doesn't. I haven't gotten enough of a handle on this to file a well described bug, at this point....

Edit to add - 1.1 seems to be less stable for me, and is definitely slower than 1.0 on my system (Athlon64 3200+ w/ 2GB RAM, running XP). However, I can't say this is an apples to apples comparison - I didn't have anywhere near the number of photos in the library as I have after doing the upgrade.
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 10:31:00 AM by X-Re » Logged

damien
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 111


WWW
« Reply #8 on: July 07, 2007, 04:58:48 PM »
ReplyReply

I found that DNG's tweaked in Lightroom 1.1 dont open in Photoshop CS3 with the Lightroom ajustments. Not great if you ask me.

Damien.
PS: Same thing on an Intel mac and a G5 mac.
Logged

www.lovegroveportraits.com
www.lovegroveweddings.com
www.lovegroveconsulting.com
H1/P25 -35mm,80mm,100mm,210mm
Nikon D200 - 17-35,28-70,70-200VR all at f2.8
Canon 5D - 16-35,24-70,70-200IS all at f2.8
Ex Rollei 6008 kit, Hass V kit, Mamiya 645 pro TL kit.
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5469


WWW
« Reply #9 on: July 07, 2007, 05:49:58 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
I found that DNG's tweaked in Lightroom 1.1 dont open in Photoshop CS3 with the Lightroom ajustments. Not great if you ask me.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127038\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


User error. . .how are you opening them? If you haven't synced the settings, Bridge/Camera Raw and Photoshop won't know the settings, of course.
Logged
ranjans
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 76


« Reply #10 on: July 07, 2007, 09:13:26 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
User error. . .how are you opening them? If you haven't synced the settings, Bridge/Camera Raw and Photoshop won't know the settings, of course.
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127044\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

Oh, doesn't the embedded metadata within dng gets saved when you close LR?
Why do we need manual sync, must be some reason.

Would it be not better to have it saved on exiting LR & then DNG if ever open in photoshop or other application that can read dng  & its metadata  they can process it.
Logged
Schewe
Sr. Member
****
Online Online

Posts: 5469


WWW
« Reply #11 on: July 07, 2007, 11:31:04 PM »
ReplyReply

Quote
Oh, doesn't the embedded metadata within dng gets saved when you close LR?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127057\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]

No, unless you have write metadata on in the background...personally, I rarely need to bounce back and forth so I turn the option off and only worry about updating on an image by image or folder by folder basis...

And here's another real good reason you don't want to be writing updates unless you need to. Writing the change changes the modification date on the file which means it will get picked up in any date/time backup process. So even if you change ONE little setting, it's a whole new file that must get backed up.

That's one of the real benefits of using a database...
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 11:32:27 PM by Schewe » Logged
Littlefield
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 35


« Reply #12 on: July 07, 2007, 11:53:28 PM »
ReplyReply

All in all LR is better with the sharpening ,clarity is great. I do not understand why the sliders on the sharpening drag though . The others are smoother then Ver 1.

What kills me in the clone and healing tool . I just send it to PSE3 to do so much easier. I mean the LR spots in those tools  looks like damn planes on a air traffic controller's screen in LaGuardia Airport . Why do they have all the old ones all clumped up like that . I just hope the fixes remain  free . I know a lot to ask !
Don
« Last Edit: July 07, 2007, 11:54:12 PM by Littlefield » Logged
kaelaria
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2226



WWW
« Reply #13 on: July 08, 2007, 01:00:17 AM »
ReplyReply

The sliders drag because you don't have enough CPU power to keep up.  I'm fine at home buy my older work system isn't enough.
Logged

seamus finn
Sr. Member
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 801


« Reply #14 on: July 10, 2007, 08:36:26 AM »
ReplyReply

What kind of PC power woud you need to run LR smoothly?
Logged

freelancer
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 5


« Reply #15 on: July 10, 2007, 07:56:03 PM »
ReplyReply

Two LR 1.1 bugs that I encountered,

1.  File export just stopped creating images mid-way.

Exported three separate collections output "thread" at the same time, the first with 1,100 images, second 500 images and the third 100 images.  

The third thread never did generated a single completed image, in the target folder a partial work-in-progress file was shown.  It then showed an output error.  Re-started the third thread another two times and it gave the same error.

The first thread generated around 200 images and the second thread less than 20 images.  Left the XP machine (3.2Ghz, 2GB ram) running for a few hours before I noticed that it was not really outputting anything after the first 30 minutes perhaps.

My guess is that the program got itself locked out by the first and second output threads perhaps holding onto some common system resource or database table.  There is no other reason I can think of for causing this strange behaviour as running a single thread with 1,000+ images previously was fine (or had another second output thread with a small set of images running in parallel was ok too).

2.  LR exited by itself and needed to be re-launched.

Was doing a quick image adjustment and output a single image after each adjustment before moving onto the next image (for a 1,000 images collection).  Perhaps for most images spending less than 5 seconds each.  Switching frequently between the image browser and the develop menu.  All image adjustments were done in the develop menu.  

After a couple of hundred image edit, LR suddenly exit by itself.  Re-launched LR and checked the last few image adjustment settings.  Nothing was lost but surprised that a program just exited without any error message.

This is the first time I am seeing stability issues with LR for large amount of images processed.  Wondering if anyone else had tested LR through 'stress loads' and see if the program runs smoothly.  Other than these "speed bumps", I am very happy with LR on the whole  

regards,
Vic
Logged
iancl
Jr. Member
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 99



WWW
« Reply #16 on: July 11, 2007, 03:12:21 AM »
ReplyReply

Quote
What kind of PC power woud you need to run LR smoothly?
[a href=\"index.php?act=findpost&pid=127429\"][{POST_SNAPBACK}][/a]


Well, it runs smoothly (in every respect -- all sliders, changing modules, etc...) on my machine.

Athlon 64X2 Dual Core 4400 2.21GHZ
2 GB RAM

My only glitch so far is a large number of files being labeled with warnings that I have edited them externally -- but, I haven't. Hmmm....
Logged

Deep
Full Member
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 174


« Reply #17 on: July 11, 2007, 03:20:29 AM »
ReplyReply

Not sure why anyone should have smoothness issues.  I only have a 1.67 G4 Mac with a gig of RAM and Lightroom runs very smoothly.  That was not the case with Aperture, which made Lightroom an easy choice.  I do have to wait with a large file sometimes if I enlarge to full size but it doesn't jam anything while I wait.

Don.
Logged

Don
DaHen
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 31


« Reply #18 on: July 11, 2007, 06:19:15 AM »
ReplyReply

LR 1.1 runs smooth here with a Pentium 4, 3.20GHz and 2GB of RAM.

 
Logged

My System: Windows8. Intel Core i7-3770 CPU 3.40GHz 8GB Ram
C Drive: WD SATA 1TB. and an external WD USB 640GB.
LR 4.2 & 5.2 & CS6
Epson R220, HP 7960 Printer
osbornej
Newbie
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 4


« Reply #19 on: July 14, 2007, 09:03:22 AM »
ReplyReply

1. Slow export & opening in CS3 - am using quad core Mac with 3Gb RAM
1a. Sometimes the .PSD is locked once it is opened in CS3, have to Save As..
2. No proper network access. Eg can't run Library from a server
3. Multi photographer workflow. It is impossible for 2 photographers to work on the same Library at the same time, related to the above.
4. Web gallery is useless to me, since it can't handle custom watermark. Having a little bit of text on the bottom of the image is not good enough.
« Last Edit: July 14, 2007, 09:04:21 AM by osbornej » Logged
Pages: [1] 2 3 »   Top of Page
Print
Jump to:  

Ad
Ad
Ad