Luminous Landscape Forum
Raw & Post Processing, Printing => Adobe Lightroom Q&A => Topic started by: John Caldwell on January 27, 2018, 02:33:03 pm
-
The topic of brush lag is addressed on the Adobe Forum (https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1828612), but there aren't many recent responses. No long term solutions are described there.
Prior to the current program version, we've had no problems whatsoever with heavy brushwork. Presently brush lag borders on unusable on two of three of our systems. The system that does not lag is the system where external drives, on which catalog and images reside, is Firewire 800 connected. When the same external drive is USB connected, brush lag is intense. The mouse and Wacom tablets are all USB devices. Eliminating USB hubs makes no difference. I am tempted to wonder if the problem pertains to USB traffic. Photoshop does not exhibit brush lag on any of our systems.
We use all 27" iMac of different years, some 5K, some not, lots of RAM.
Is anyone using the current LR Classic CC program build with a Wacom tablet. If so, what the brush behavior, please?
Many thanks,
John Caldwell
-
The topic of brush lag is addressed on the Adobe Forum (https://forums.adobe.com/thread/1828612), but there aren't many recent responses. No long term solutions are described there.
Prior to the current program version, we've had no problems whatsoever with heavy brushwork. Presently brush lag borders on unusable on two of three of our systems. The system that does not lag is the system where external drives, on which catalog and images reside, is Firewire 800 connected. When the same external drive is USB connected, brush lag is intense. The mouse and Wacom tablets are all USB devices. Eliminating USB hubs makes no difference. I am tempted to wonder if the problem pertains to USB traffic. Photoshop does not exhibit brush lag on any of our systems.
We use all 27" iMac of different years, some 5K, some not, lots of RAM.
Is anyone using the current LR Classic CC program build with a Wacom tablet. If so, what the brush behavior, please?
Many thanks,
John Caldwell
2018 iMac with SSD, 32GB RAM and 4.2GHZ i7 quadcore, with current Wacom pro tablet. No issues with routine processing. Also used this tablet with a 2012 Mac Mini and no problems with routine processing. It is my understanding that Lightroom performance can tend to bog down with a large number of edits, with any system, and that has been my experience generally.
-
David, thank you. If I may, please comment on your images and LR catalog and Previews: Do those assets live on the same or separate drives? If any of those assets are on external drives, is the connectivity USB or something else. Lastly, I'm guessing your Wacom is on USB?
Many thanks, David.
John-
-
David, thank you. If I may, please comment on your images and LR catalog and Previews: Do those assets live on the same or separate drives? If any of those assets are on external drives, is the connectivity USB or something else. Lastly, I'm guessing your Wacom is on USB?
Many thanks, David.
John-
I have the catalog and previews on a fast SSD or NVME drive and I download and process the images on such a drive as well. A times this drive has been external but is currently internal. The processed images are stored on a hard drive raid. The external drives are via Thunderbolt 2. I mostly use the tablet in wireless mode.
-
I have the catalog and previews on a fast SSD or NVME drive and I download and process the images on such a drive as well. A times this drive has been external but is currently internal. The processed images are stored on a hard drive raid. The external drives are via Thunderbolt 2. I mostly use the tablet in wireless mode.
Thank you again. I ask because on one of our systems there is no brush lag. On that system the external drives are FW800 connected while the Wacom is USB of course. The systems with lag connect to the external drives via USB, on which the Wacom is also connected.
So your experience supports, I think, the observation that lag develops when Wacom, images and Catalog share the USB bus. Have you any thoughts on that, David?
I appreciate your comments.
John-
-
Thank you again. I ask because on one of our systems there is no brush lag. On that system the external drives are FW800 connected while the Wacom is USB of course. The systems with lag connect to the external drives via USB, on which the Wacom is also connected.
So your experience supports, I think, the observation that lag develops when Wacom, images and Catalog share the USB bus. Have you any thoughts on that, David?
I appreciate your comments.
John-
Which usb? Usb 3 is faster than FireWire. Usb2 is not. A 5,000k iMac will have usb 3, but that won’t matter if the peripherals are usb 2. You may know all this, but it isn’t clear from your description.
-
Forgot to ask before whether the lag happens only with the machines with 5k monitors or that have GPU acceleration enabled.
-
I get horrible lag with my brushes on my PC (non-5K display). It gets worse and worse the longer I use the program. Eventually, I have to quit LR, then restart -- that's the only solution I've found works. Today it got to the point where the screen would not redraw, and nothing would work properly for a good 30 seconds. I wish I weren't so wedded to LR's workflow and used to the controls. I've use my Capture One more. I also have On1, but I feel it's still inferior and has it's own speed issues, though much improved with 2018.
-
Yes I have been having terrible lag the past three days! To the point where I’m still on the same picture 2 Days now. I have plenty of RAM, 4.2ghz i7 quadcore, 4K display monitor with NVDIA 1070 with Wacom Intous Pro, but running the images off my external hard drive. Although the hubs are 3.0. I was having some lag in photoshop to with masking burshes. I even switched the setting in prenfences to ‘show smart preview instead of original while editing. Before 3 days ago I never once got lag to ever complain about. So I’m trying to figure out a solution to this?
-
I use a Mac Pro 2013, have LR on the SSD boot drive, and my photos on an external drive connected by Thunderbolt. At times I have had severe brush lag and the only fix is to uninstall LR and reinstall it. I haven't had it for the last six months though.
-
It didn't make sense that I was the only one here having the brush lag problem. Funny thing is, that lag does not surface in Photoshop on my systems, near as I can tell.
I'm also confident that brush lag was not a problem on any of our systems, using the same hardware and connectivity, in the day of LR 6. I believe is was the advent of Classic CC that brought the lag problem to the forefront.
John Caldwell
-
Funny thing is, that lag does not surface in Photoshop on my systems, near as I can tell.
I'm also confident that brush lag was not a problem on any of our systems, using the same hardware and connectivity, in the day of LR 6. I believe is was the advent of Classic CC that brought the lag problem to the forefront.
I, too, have no issues, generally with lags and Photoshop. Well, actually, sometimes while masking, but not with any brushes etc. However, for me, the brush lag in LR has existed for at least a couple of years and seems to be getting worse. Funny thing is, if I use the same identical brushes in Camera RAW for a CR2 file, Photoshop has no issues of lag. Strange when you consider they are essentially the same engine. Maybe it has to do with LR journaling all the steps so you can go backward infinitely at any time?
-
Maybe it has to do with LR journaling all the steps so you can go backward infinitely at any time?
It's conceivable, as a difference between ACR and LR, but wouldn't everyone be affected? It's worth mentioning that in 7.0 Adobe began storing history data in a compressed form, though I would expect it to be a background process.
I haven't seen any kind of lag (defined how exactly?), but I routinely use the radial filter in preference to the brush and might not have noticed anything odd. The data for a radial filter is relatively simple compared with recording a brush's movement, so how many brush strokes and how "complicated" are they?
-
It's conceivable, as a difference between ACR and LR, but wouldn't everyone be affected? It's worth mentioning that in 7.0 Adobe began storing history data in a compressed form, though I would expect it to be a background process.
I haven't seen any kind of lag (defined how exactly?), but I routinely use the radial filter in preference to the brush and might not have noticed anything odd. The data for a radial filter is relatively simple compared with recording a brush's movement, so how many brush strokes and how "complicated" are they?
The radial filter causes no lag that I've noticed, John. Brush strokes get in trouble once the number of strokes get's into the dozens, which is hardly unusual. Defining lag isn't difficult once you see it, as it's a deeply unsubtle grinding to a halt, with many seconds of catchup, with each stroke. The more lag there is, the more lag there is.
My workflow has used heavy brush edits for years. What's new is the LR version, I am very tempted to say.
Thanks, John.
John-
-
What would also be different in recent years is the size of the screen, and perhaps the size of the files. Is the GPU enabled, and do you see the spinner towards the bottom right of the central window? Have you tried disabling GPU and restarting LR? I'd also suggest using the radial filter more, if you can, and I know I tend to resort to the brush only after I have decided I can't achieve what I want with a series of radial adjustments.
You also made a point about the catalogue being on an external drive and the lag being worse when the drive is attached by USB. How sure are you about this?
John
-
What would also be different in recent years is the size of the screen, and perhaps the size of the files. Is the GPU enabled, and do you see the spinner towards the bottom right of the central window? Have you tried disabling GPU and restarting LR? I'd also suggest using the radial filter more, if you can, and I know I tend to resort to the brush only after I have decided I can't achieve what I want with a series of radial adjustments.
You also made a point about the catalogue being on an external drive and the lag being worse when the drive is attached by USB. How sure are you about this?
John
John, the GPU enabling or disabling does not have a measurable impact on our systems. The system which shows no lag at all, just like the Old Days, is the system where the external drive is connected by FW800. That external drive, as a reminder, contains LR Catalog and all image files. The systems which exhibit lag connect to that same external drive via USB 2. What I've not yet tried is to copy a test catalog to a USB 3 drive, connect to that drive via USB 3, and observe for lag. The two systems that lag do not offer FW800, or I'd have been using that all along instead of USB 2. Of note, the system which does not lag, is our oldest and least powerful iMac.
Image resolution and screen resolution appear to make no difference.
Thanks for your interest.
John Caldwell
-
Since I store 95% of all my different catalogs on external drives, I can say the brush lag is there regardless, but that it seems as though, as I go along, that LR is constantly writing updates to the disk drive. The drives I use are all USB 3, though some are straight drives while others are RAID, including RAID 5 which is somewhat speedy. I did read that Adobe is basically recommending NOT using Lightroom for many corrections or brush strokes. I do find the more I do in Lightroom, the slower it is and the more lag it displays. I still find it odd that Camera RAW does not display this issue. I think it’s related to LR writing each and every change to the drive every time you do something. Sometimes I sit for a while to wait till all the writing is done and then I see the lag subside. I find it interesting that Capture One 11 does NOt display any sort of brush lag with its layers and brushes. I still prefer LR, including color rendition, but C1 seems to have implemented things pretty well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Since I store 95% of all my different catalogs on external drives, I can say the brush lag is there regardless, but that it seems as though, as I go along, that LR is constantly writing updates to the disk drive. The drives I use are all USB 3, though some are straight drives while others are RAID, including RAID 5 which is somewhat speedy. I did read that Adobe is basically recommending NOT using Lightroom for many corrections or brush strokes. I do find the more I do in Lightroom, the slower it is and the more lag it displays. I still find it odd that Camera RAW does not display this issue. I think it’s related to LR writing each and every change to the drive every time you do something. Sometimes I sit for a while to wait till all the writing is done and then I see the lag subside. I find it interesting that Capture One 11 does NOt display any sort of brush lag with its layers and brushes. I still prefer LR, including color rendition, but C1 seems to have implemented things pretty well.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
My remorse stems from the fact that while my work has always been really brush-intensive, it used to work well. I am a Doubting Thomas that some aspect of the LR architecture didn't change, giving rise the advice to not use the Brush unless you have to.
-
They also recommend doing all the brush/healing work 1st THEN do adjustments. I think it has to do with the fact that after you do the adjustments, every time you use the brush, I think it’s applying all the adjustments to each brush stroke. Sounds f*cked up, but what do I know about writing software?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
They also recommend doing all the brush/healing work 1st THEN do adjustments...
I hadn't thought of that. But again, if you'll pardon the perseveration, nothing is new in the way that I work expect the LR version. Again I'll add though one of our systems shows no lag, with many brush edits, all put in place after global adjustments. I's sure like to know what that system works, as do several of the systems operated by some of the respondents here.
-
I’m working on a new PC (my old one was still pretty burly, but 4+ years old). I’ve alway experiences the lag, at least for the past four years or so. My new computer uses an AMD Ryzen 7 1800x , 32GB RAM, a Samsung 960 m.2 512GB SSD for my C: drive and an NVidia 1080 with 8GB of vram. So, not a weakling, but LR seems to bog it down. And like you, makes no difference whether I have the GPU turned on or off.
I think this will remain the great mystery. Meanwhile, I’ll keep experimenting with other software more.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I really don't think it's helpful to say "I have read whatever" without providing the URL or source. I generally discount such comments, but the data for a brush stroke is considerably more complex than a radial filter. That happens to be why I always use it in preference to the brush, even if I know it shouldn't make a difference in practice - the stroke should update the screen in real time and can be written to the database in the background.
But it would be interesting to see if the same catalogue produced screen redrawing lags differently when on a USB drives but not on FW. I tried adding 50+ brush strokes today on Windows and didn't see any issues.
-
Adobe’s comments on optimization. About halfway down, the limitation of brush strokes as well as order of execution.
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I really don't think it's helpful to say "I have read whatever" without providing the URL or source. I generally discount such comments, but the data for a brush stroke is considerably more complex than a radial filter. That happens to be why I always use it in preference to the brush, even if I know it shouldn't make a difference in practice - the stroke should update the screen in real time and can be written to the database in the background.
But it would be interesting to see if the same catalogue produced screen redrawing lags differently when on a USB drives but not on FW. I tried adding 50+ brush strokes today on Windows and didn't see any issues.
John, I have tested the following:
1) External drive that has previously exhibited brush lag when connected via USB 2 to a 5AK iMac, connected instead by FW800 via TB > FW adapter.
2) Brush lag is bad, although better than when same drive is connected via USB 2 to same iMac.
3) This external drive contains LR Classic CC catalog and images.
4) Identical drive shows no lag when connected to older iMac, via "native" FW800 bus.
4) Both machines run same CC Classic version and OS.
Clear as mud.
John-
-
So John, on the iMac in pts 1-2, what is lag like if the catalogue is on the internal hard drive?
It might also be worth seeing if there is a difference between adding brush strokes with the Wacom and with the mouse.
Also "5AK" - you mean a 5k monitor or is there some significance I am missing in the A? The older iMac mentioned in pt 4 runs what type of monitor?
John
-
So John, on the iMac in pts 1-2, what is lag like if the catalogue is on the internal hard drive?
It might also be worth seeing if there is a difference between adding brush strokes with the Wacom and with the mouse.
Also "5AK" - you mean a 5k monitor or is there some significance I am missing in the A? The older iMac mentioned in pt 4 runs what type of monitor?
John
1) I've not yet tried moving the catalog to an internal drive, but will do so
2) No appreciable difference in lag when brush strokes are made via mouse or via Wacom pen
3) A very clear pattern is that when a catalog is first opened, the first several brush strokes do not lag. As brush strokes pile up on a single image, or even on a new image, the lag grows. Closing and reopening the catalog starts the process over again.
4) 5K iMac is what was meant.
5) The "old" iMac machine run the 2560 x 1440 27" displays.
Thanks, John.
John-
-
I got lag with repeated brush strokes (and spot healing as well) up through the 7.1 version. With the 7.2 update that issue seems to be resolved. I never noticed that GPU acceleration hurt or helped when I tested it previously. I use a wacom tablet in combination with a keyboard.
-
I got lag with repeated brush strokes (and spot healing as well) up through the 7.1 version. With the 7.2 update that issue seems to be resolved. I never noticed that GPU acceleration hurt or helped when I tested it previously. I use a wacom tablet in combination with a keyboard.
7.1 is unusable here once Brush use is heavy. Makes no difference if catalog is small or large, or if catalog and files are on separate drives. Updating to 7.2 now, based on your experience John.
Thanks very much,
John Caldwell
-
7.2 is no better, I'm sad to report, than 7.1. Brush strokes require about 20 seconds, with each stroke, to recover. Unusable is a fair term to use. For now, Photoshop is the only way to do the kind of masked adjustments that have, for years until recently, been possible with LR.
-
7.2 is no better, I'm sad to report, than 7.1. Brush strokes require about 20 seconds, with each stroke, to recover. Unusable is a fair term to use. For now, Photoshop is the only way to do the kind of masked adjustments that have, for years until recently, been possible with LR.
I'm sorry to hear that. The variation in experiences people have is hard for me to understand. Using 7.2 I edited 30 or so shots yesterday, after sorting through 100 or so with basic edits. I never had the slow down.
I wonder if it has anything to do with system set-up/hardware. You have probably mentioned what you are running earlier but I don't recall. I'm running Windows 10, 512GB M2 SSD for the catalog, using a i7-7600 with 32GB of ram. I have a Nvidia GTX 1060 video card. The raw images are stored on a 4 disk array of 7200 rpm WD drives.
-
I'm sorry to hear that. The variation in experiences people have is hard for me to understand. Using 7.2 I edited 30 or so shots yesterday, after sorting through 100 or so with basic edits. I never had the slow down.
I wonder if it has anything to do with system set-up/hardware. You have probably mentioned what you are running earlier but I don't recall. I'm running Windows 10, 512GB M2 SSD for the catalog, using a i7-7600 with 32GB of ram. I have a Nvidia GTX 1060 video card. The raw images are stored on a 4 disk array of 7200 rpm WD drives.
John, How many adjustment brush strokes might you use in a given image? My systems are fine until there are about 10 strokes in an image, after that, no good.
These are iMac systems.
-
John, How many adjustment brush strokes might you use in a given image? My systems are fine until there are about 10 strokes in an image, after that, no good.
These are iMac systems.
Easily more than 10. I just did a rough count on the history of one I edited last night and I had 60ish brush strokes on that one.
-
Yes the inconsistency is puzzling. Even one of our three iMac systems allows heavy adjustment brush without lag. But I’m feeling discouraged. For some time I’ve so enjoyed being able to do all, or most, of my PP with going to Photoshop. The lag we’re discussing here renders PS a necessity most of the time on my laggy systems.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
John just out of curiosity but have you tried wiping the system clean and reinstalling? Operating system and everything?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
I first suffered with major lags in developer over a year ago.
My system is a Windows 10 3.6Ghz Xeon processor with 8 cores, 64GB ram, Samsung 960 1TB m.2 disk
My system is no slouch, But Lightroom just does not take advantage of the cores or the memory.
This got so bad I moved to CaptureOne Pro 9 (now 10) This was ground breaking, Finally I can perform multiple adjustments, edit in PS and come back, skip, skip, skip to the next image is such a breeze.
I have read recently of the performance improvements made in Lightroom, unfortunately for some they are just as bad. The import and export is now quicker but the adjustments tools are still SLOWWW....
They need to rebuild from scratch before they lose it all together.
So many are now fleeing to CaptureOne and I do not blame them.
If you not tried it yet, then download the free trial and best of all if you come from lightroom then there is a setting you can choose which lays everything out to make it look just like lightroom.
You just got to get used to using sessions instead of catalogs.
-
I first suffered with major lags in developer over a year ago.
My system is a Windows 10 3.6Ghz Xeon processor with 8 cores, 64GB ram, Samsung 960 1TB m.2 disk
My system is no slouch, But Lightroom just does not take advantage of the cores or the memory.
This got so bad I moved to CaptureOne Pro 9 (now 10) This was ground breaking, Finally I can perform multiple adjustments, edit in PS and come back, skip, skip, skip to the next image is such a breeze.
I have read recently of the performance improvements made in Lightroom, unfortunately for some they are just as bad. The import and export is now quicker but the adjustments tools are still SLOWWW....
They need to rebuild from scratch before they lose it all together.
So many are now fleeing to CaptureOne and I do not blame them.
If you not tried it yet, then download the free trial and best of all if you come from lightroom then there is a setting you can choose which lays everything out to make it look just like lightroom.
You just got to get used to using sessions instead of catalogs.
I'm terribly reluctant to leave LR, as I depend on LR for many things, foremost of which is image organization. Brush lag has become terrible, as you say, and I've not been able to get to the bottom of the problem. I will say that when brusk strokes are few in number and small in surface area for a given image, the lag is quite manageable. I suspect a reason that some LR users don't experience meaningful lag is their workflow is less adjustment brush dependent than mine has been.
Either way, I do hope that Adobe will address performance in the near future and place that is a high priority.
Thanks to all,
John Caldwell
-
I haven’t noticed any issues, but I just ran a test. A file from my IQ3 100 I added over 100 spot removal locations, some drawn, others simply clicks. While it seemed slightly less responsive by the end, it really was insignificant. I reverted the file, did several global adjustments, as well as add some graduated filters. I again used the spot removal tool to create over 100 locations, again with no perceptible change. I then added some adjustment brushes and created some local adjustments, and even when using the automask function I had no problems at all.
This is on my laptop, after I had been working on several images for the past couple of hours, without relaunching LR. Lightroom, the files, and the catalog all reside on the Laptop’s internal SSD which does offer pretty astounding performance (write speed 1600 MB/s, read speed almost 2000 MB/s).
I do know that if I have done extensive work on a file before I do spot removal that can get laggy. Not uncommon for me since I usually am trying to decide how much time I want to invest in a file so I have several adjustments, some graduated filters, and often two or three extensive brush adjustments. In this case I make a virtual copy, revert the file, do all the spot removal, then sync the spot removal over to the other file.
Your experience that one machine performs better has me curious because it seems this is better than what I’ve seen on my MacPro with 64gigs of ram where I do most of my LR/PS work. I think I’ll test it tonight. The main difference is LR and the files are mounted from my Laptop using target disk mode, with far less speed, but there maybe some underlying differences which is causing such a diverse range of performance for users (which may or may not be something Adobe can actually do something about).
-
I haven’t noticed any issues, but I just ran a test. A file from my IQ3 100 I added over 100 spot removal locations, some drawn, others simply clicks. While it seemed slightly less responsive by the end, it really was insignificant. I reverted the file, did several global adjustments, as well as add some graduated filters. I again used the spot removal tool to create over 100 locations, again with no perceptible change. I then added some adjustment brushes and created some local adjustments, and even when using the automask function I had no problems at all.
This is on my laptop, after I had been working on several images for the past couple of hours, without relaunching LR. Lightroom, the files, and the catalog all reside on the Laptop’s internal SSD which does offer pretty astounding performance (write speed 1600 MB/s, read speed almost 2000 MB/s).
I do know that if I have done extensive work on a file before I do spot removal that can get laggy. Not uncommon for me since I usually am trying to decide how much time I want to invest in a file so I have several adjustments, some graduated filters, and often two or three extensive brush adjustments. In this case I make a virtual copy, revert the file, do all the spot removal, then sync the spot removal over to the other file.
Your experience that one machine performs better has me curious because it seems this is better than what I’ve seen on my MacPro with 64gigs of ram where I do most of my LR/PS work. I think I’ll test it tonight. The main difference is LR and the files are mounted from my Laptop using target disk mode, with far less speed, but there maybe some underlying differences which is causing such a diverse range of performance for users (which may or may not be something Adobe can actually do something about).
Wayne the lag I’m speaking about is quite specific to the Adjustment Brush. Once the number of strokes exceeds about 6, or if a given stroke covers a large surface area, lag is intense. I can still not account for why one of our three systems doesn’t lag.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
-
Wayne the lag I’m speaking about is quite specific to the Adjustment Brush. Once the number of strokes exceeds about 6, or if a given stroke covers a large surface area, lag is intense. I can still not account for why one of our three systems doesn’t lag.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
I wasn't sure which brush, so the second test with the adjustment brush had 4 different "brushes", about 100 strokes total of various sizes. I'm not sure at what point you see to hit "lag". maybe it's more than that.
I will admit that most of my work with adjustment brushes is not "painted" on but is created using the automask option to select various tones and colors. I'm not sure how that works, since in 4 or 5 clicks I may end up with a selection covering 30-50% of the image, but it's only a few clicks. I'm not really sure how adobe is recording and managing adjustment brushes, I assumed it was more like an accumulative mask, but from what you are seeing it's more of a track every click and release point etc. I realize it's metadata so maybe that's the only way it can work.
I just find it odd that if one of 3 systems doesn't lag, and if several others mention they aren't seeing the lag how Adobe could track it down, since it seems to be something outside of their software. obviously some interaction going on. I assume you've tried it with graphics processor off, etc., all the normal things to try, and maybe watched the activity monitor to see if the two machines have something grabbing some processor time that the good machine isn't.
As I mentioned, my laptop seems to perform better than my desktop so I'm going to keep testing.
-
John you may have done this already, but have you examined your processor usage, memory, etc. before and during that times it is "lagging"? I wonder if something may show up there, at least where the bottleneck is.
FWIW I'm still not seeing any lag with the adjustment brush. I DO see some slow down when I have gone through hundreds of images, discarding, re-writing meta-data, etc. I've been going back through my catalog and getting rid of things I know I'm never going to do anything with and I've seen some slow down after doing a LOT of that.
-
I have the latest LR 7.3. I recently upgraded my system from 32GB to 64GB or RAM. I have a Ryzen 1800x CPU and a GTX1080 (8GB). I STILL have massive lag at times, with nothing else running on my system. Last week it was so bad that I finally quit and rebooted. Adobe had promised HUGE performance increase -- I've yet to see them. It's a modicum better with 64GB or RAM, but nothing to write home about.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, Adobe has even said "don't do a lot of adjustments". If you do adjustment brushes, they are supposed to be done BEFORE doing global adjustments etc. Of course, I don't know what I want to do as a local brush until I see what I do overall. Counter intuitive.
The one area that has been improved significantly is the auto-mask function. It used to be that you'd get these funky/grainy edges (let's say when softening skin) where the mask was applied. Very noticeable. That seems to have been rectified.
-
As I mentioned in an earlier post, Adobe has even said "don't do a lot of adjustments". If you do adjustment brushes, they are supposed to be done BEFORE doing global adjustments etc. Of course, I don't know what I want to do as a local brush until I see what I do overall. Counter intuitive.
That has perplexed me ever since I first read it.. How in the world does anyone decide what local edits to do, without first doing global edits?? I keep wondering - does this make sense to ANYone!?!? ??? :o