I did a bit of research on how to get it to boot in 64 bit mode and found this
link, but haven't tried it yet:
http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html
On May 31, 2012, at 7:03 AM, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Charles,
How much RAM do you have? and which version of the OS?
LR4 is
On Jun 1, 2012, at 3:41, Larry Colen wrote:
I did a bit of research on how to get it to boot in 64 bit mode and found
this link, but haven't tried it yet:
http://macperformanceguide.com/SnowLeopard-64bit.html
My Macbook3,1 WILL NOT boot in 64-bit mode no matter what I try. It seems I'm
For anyone following the saga, an update from the thread starter:
well, so far, so good.
I installed 4.1RC2, played with it a bit--seemed okay. The very next
day Adobe released 4.1 Final, so I installed *that* and have been
working with it since. The huge delays are gone, thank goodness. I'm
On Jun 1, 2012, at 9:37 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
For anyone following the saga, an update from the thread starter:
well, so far, so good.
I installed 4.1RC2, played with it a bit--seemed okay. The very next
day Adobe released 4.1 Final, so I installed *that* and have been
I had downloaded
Thanks for posting this, Bruce. Maybe I will upgrade over the weekend.
Cheers, Christine
On Jun 1, 2012, at 11:37 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
For anyone following the saga, an update from the thread starter:
well, so far, so good.
I installed 4.1RC2, played with it
I have a late-2006 iMac with 2.16 GHz Intel Core 2 Duo, 2 gb memory. Before I
bought this machine, I had for years used a Powerbook as my only computer, but
I needed to upgrade in order to handle LR and the like. I understand that newer
better (?) program versions are going to use more code,
Charles,
How much RAM do you have? and which version of the OS?
LR4 is a 64bit implementation. It runs best on Lion, and runs best on
Snow Leopard when you have Snow Leopard set to boot up with the 64-bit
kernel (it's set to the 32bit kernel by default).
4G is enough RAM as long as most other
Been testing it since it released.
Seems much improved performance, certainly over the original LR4
release, but also over the LR4.1RC2 version. The interface seems to
smoothly and without the momentary hesitations that I was seeing with
RC2.
I'll be beating up the book module this evening.
G
On May 30, 2012, at 10:43, Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote:
Been testing it since it released.
Seems much improved performance, certainly over the original LR4
release, but also over the LR4.1RC2 version. The interface seems to
smoothly and without the momentary hesitations that I was seeing with
That sounds like the .LRCAT file needs to be cleaned up or the
.LRPDATA repository needs to be regenerated.
My working catalog now manages 96,000 image files, mostly raw data,
with good performance.
Godfrey
On Wed, May 30, 2012 at 9:03 AM, Charles Robinson charl...@visi.com wrote:
On May 30,
[mailto:pdml-boun...@pdml.net] On Behalf Of
Bruce Walker
Sent: 29 May 2012 02:11
To: Pentax Discuss Mailing List
Subject: OT on Lr 4 being unusably slow
I don't understand why nobody has posted here about Lightroom 4 being
so dog-slow.
I upgraded on the weekend, went through the process
Geez, that's bad. I upgraded to LR4 about same time as going to Win7
64bit, so there wasn't much of a speed hump. More memory definitely
helps, but a fast disk for the lightroom catalog zips things along too.
I know you are a heavy user of PS. What are the incompatibilities? I'm
still on
I wish it were so simple, Tim.
Yes, I'm using an older machine: a 2008 iMac, 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. But
it has 6 Gig RAM, and I was running Lr with no other apps up (not even
a browser), and I was watching the Activity monitor. There was plenty
of RAM, the disks weren't all that busy, my catalog is
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
Yes, I'm using an older machine: a 2008 iMac, 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. But
it has 6 Gig RAM, and I was running Lr with no other apps up (not even
a browser), and I was watching the Activity monitor. There was plenty
of RAM,
When I select an image and choose Edit in Ps CS5 it pops up a
warning that I need to upgrade Camera RAW to 7.0. Choices are Edit
Anyway, Let Lr Render or cancel. Googling this topic suggests that
colour shifts were occurring when using this, so I'm very wary.
Right now I'm testing out one of my
Mat, I'm still running 10.6.8. I enabled 64-bits for Ps CS5 and Lr 3
and got a noticeable speed improvement back in the day.
But you might be right; Lion may help. I know I need it for a couple
of other things.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 8:10 AM, Mat Maessen tomatoe...@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue,
You and me both, Derby! :-)
And It's going to be location stuff for a while anyway until I can get
settled into a studio space. I'm working on that.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 5:39 AM, Derby Chang der...@iinet.net.au wrote:
Hope you can get back to some real studio work soon.
--
-bmw
--
PDML
Looks like I'll have to add some memory to my iMac before upgrading. I have 4
gigs of ram--probably upgrade to 8 just to be on the safe side. Thanks for
mentioning this, Bruce. Cheers, Christine
On May 28, 2012, at 8:15 PM, Tim Bray wrote:
I upgraded to a slightly-faster computer with
Hmmm, I have Lion version 10.7.4, 2.5 GHz Core i5. Wonder if I'd be ok
without a memory upgrade given your comments about RAM. Cheers, Christine
On May 29, 2012, at 7:21 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
Mat, I'm still running 10.6.8. I enabled 64-bits for Ps CS5 and Lr 3
and got a noticeable
Bruce, no problems here. iMac 21.5
Dave
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 9:11 PM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com wrote:
I don't understand why nobody has posted here about Lightroom 4 being
so dog-slow.
Fairly pissed at Adobe right now.
--
-bmw
--
PDML Pentax-Discuss Mail List
Are you running Lightroom 4.0 or Lightroom 4.1RC2? Adobe has issued
two candidate upgrades to Lr4 so far, to address performance issues
and bug reports. Lr4.1 is due for final release pretty soon, I
suspect.
I'm running 4.0, Godfrey, the current shipping product. Thanks for
pointing out that 4.1RC2 -- I'm going to try it ASAP.
This morning I was editing an image that I had retouched in CS5, I
made a virtual copy and turned that BW. It was all working
flawlessly. I thought maybe I'd done something,
Try it, Christine, but I couldn't live without 6GB now, and I'd rather
have 8GB if my (older) iMac would accept it.
On Tue, May 29, 2012 at 9:54 AM, Christine Aguila christ...@caguila.com wrote:
Hmmm, I have Lion version 10.7.4, 2.5 GHz Core i5. Wonder if I'd be ok
without a memory upgrade
I've done all my photo work in 4.1RC2 for several weeks now. It's much
more responsive than 4.0. Still not quite at LR3 level on some things,
but there's a lot of debug code in it still.
(It's long since my software development engineering days, nowadays I
just document development tools. I have
On May 29, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
I wish it were so simple, Tim.
Yes, I'm using an older machine: a 2008 iMac, 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. But
it has 6 Gig RAM, and I was running Lr with no other apps up (not even
That sounds very much like my machine.
a browser), and I was
On May 29, 2012, at 4:43 PM, Larry Colen wrote:
On May 29, 2012, at 5:08 AM, Bruce Walker wrote:
I wish it were so simple, Tim.
Yes, I'm using an older machine: a 2008 iMac, 2.4 GHz Core 2 Duo. But
it has 6 Gig RAM, and I was running Lr with no other apps up (not even
That sounds
on 2012-05-29 9:38 Godfrey DiGiorgi wrote
Lr4.1 is due for final release pretty soon, I
suspect.
good guess — LR 4.1RC informed me just now that 4.1 final is available; the
release notes are very coy about any possible speed improvements, the only
relevant line being Corrections for issues
I don't understand why nobody has posted here about Lightroom 4 being
so dog-slow.
I upgraded on the weekend, went through the process of familiarizing
myself with the new Develop sliders and became comfortable that its
functionally a Good Thing.
But: good gawd almighty is it slow! Every time I
I upgraded to a slightly-faster computer with 8G of RAM and it was
like night and day. We’ll never go back to the halcyon days of
Lightroom 1 (now *that* was fast), but it’s perfectly acceptable; you
just need more memory. -T
On Mon, May 28, 2012 at 6:11 PM, Bruce Walker bruce.wal...@gmail.com
I just upgraded to a new iMac with 8gb of memory, and it is painful to use the
previous iMac at work (even with an upgraded 3gb of memory).
But don't ever minimize the capacity of software companies to make your brand
new hardware insufficient. Can you imagine if PhotoShop or Lightroom had to
30 matches
Mail list logo
