Starting Luminar very slow

Comments

15 comments

  • Avatar
    Dave Cox

    Rob my own experience would suggest that this is more a function of the number of photo's in your L3 library. I don't even use NAS storage, but as soon as my library got to be more than about 200 photo's L3 went from a slow (20-30 second launch) to over 2 minutes 30 seconds. By comparison Lightroom with the same photo's cataloged plus a lot more launches in about 20 seconds, and ON1 RAW 2019 only takes 12 seconds to launch, again with way more photo's cataloged. The slow launch speed is for me a significant reason to drop Luminar at least until it is addressed.

  • Avatar
    Rob van Praat

    That could be the case as well. Because the folder on my NAS contains a few thousand photos from one trip. Lightroom was much faster. On the other hand I prefer to edit in Luminar.

    I could remove the folder from the catalog. But then I lose my adjustments. Or is there a way to prevent this?

  • Avatar
    Kert

    Luminar 3 is currently unusable as soon as you have more than few hundred photos (i.e., any kind of real life scenario where one might need a digital asset manager).

     

    They will, supposedly, fix it late Janurary or early February. Maybe.

  • Avatar
    Rob van Praat

    That's very disappointing indeed. If you only have a few hundred foto's you don't need a DAM. This is something that could have easily tested. But I'll just have to wait.

  • Avatar
    Anna Veres

    Luminar 3 is our first attempt of implementing Photo Libraries functionality.

    It doesn't work perfectly and we're aware of the performance issues.

    Please accept our apologies for the inconvenience caused. 

    We will release an update to resolve these issues at the end of January - beginning of February.

    For now, I can recommend you to have your images on the Internal HD and try to minimize the number of images in your Catalog. 

    Hope for your understanding. 

     

  • Avatar
    Rob van Praat

    Thanks for your reply Anna.

    However, in my view Luminar 3 wasn't promoted as 'a first attempt' with poor performance. The promotional video even had text that is was super fast and fluent. I was pursuaded to buy a copy and so I did. I appreciate that all software has bugs and expect them to be fixed.

    This performance issue and the other things I read aren't bugs in my view. The issues are to fundamental that could have been known upfront with minimal testing. Also the capabilities of the DAM module is very limited (of course I understand that it won't be able to compete with Lightroom from the start, but now it's very basis and honestly not enough). This should have been told upfront. I did postpone my photo editing and now I have to postpone even more.

    I really feel like I paid for a beta product when I purchased Luminar 2018 with the upgrade to Luminar 3. I would have been fine with a beta version if I was told upfront, as in that case I could have planned better

    Fortunately I'm only an amateur photographer, so I'm not dependent on my software for my income and I do have some patience.

  • Avatar
    Marco Foresti

    @ Rob van Praat

     

    "The issues are to fundamental that could have been known upfront with minimal testing" /// I agree, it's the main reason why I can't figure what's in Skylum mind ... and when I read of their "first attempt" ... well, usually I don't ask my custemers to pay for my attempts.

    "Also the capabilities of the DAM module is very limited (of course I understand that it won't be able to compete with Lightroom from the start, ..." /// why not? On1 Photo Raw 2019 does it!

    "I really feel like I paid for a beta product ..." /// I feel I paid for an alpha-stage product :-(

    "Fortunately I'm only an amateur photographer ..." /// Unfortunately I'm not an amateur, but fortunately I do not rely on L3 for running my business. This is reason why I'm patient and keep on waiting for the next release. In the worst case I lost some Euro. I will survive.

     

  • Avatar
    Rob van Praat

    Well, I can live with a bit less functionality within DAM compared to Lightroom, but it should be limited and being improved (preferably succeed Lightroom). The difference is much too big. The DAM capabilities of Luminar feel like 10% compared to Lightroom. Skylum has a comparison on their own website, comparing Luminar with Lightroom. That's asking people to compare the products.

    But there's no reason for me not checking out On1 Photo Raw. I'll download the trail version and see where that brings me. It's a bit unfortunate that I already bought Luminar based on the expectations set by Skylum, but to be honest I also got some extra's (Smugmug access for example) that make it well worth the investment.

  • Avatar
    Dave Cox

    I am in the fortunate position of having LR6 to fall back on as a DAM. I wasn't particularly fussed if Luminar had a full suite of DAM features, but was looking forward to a more streamlined workflow, where I could select images edit them and move on to the next all within Luminar, a bit like what they showed us in there previews, and webinars. But what they have given us is totally dysfunctional. Like you Rob I have gone looking elsewhere. So far I'm impressed with On1, it has many useful to me features like panorama stitching, layers, a very Lightroom like DAM (even picks up my tags/keywords). I still really like Luminar 2018 as an editor, but for the sake of having something that works right now and gives me reasonable workflows, I may end up moving elsewhere. I am only an amateur/hobbyist and would rather spend my hard earned on lenses etc, than yet more software but, even at my level something that actually works is the basic requirement.

    @Anna, to say it doesn't work perfectly, is like saying that Titanic had a few buoyancy issues. It barely functions at all, and then is very slow, and buggy. Skylum need to take ownership of this mess, repeatedly people are asked about machine specs, latest patch etc. In my own case, in spite of detailing my machine specs/free space etc. multiple times, I got several messages back asking me to check what I had already told Skylum. 

  • Avatar
    Dave Cox

    A breakthrough of sorts. Over this weekend I have done some work on my laptop. It started out as a gaming laptop with a 128gb SSD as my C drive and a 1tb mechanical D drive. Today I replaced the D drive with an SSD. At the same time I uninstalled several programs, including Luminar3 and reinstalled them on the new D drive, which also contains my main photo collections. Even before shifting L3 to the same drive as my photo's I noticed a marked increase in speed. Once I had finished, migrating software etc. I tried each of the programs on my computer, to ensure they all worked. Luminar 3 pre changes took over 2 and a half minutes to boot. It now takes under 30 seconds, it also seems to be more stable.

    Early days yet, but with the old installation,only had a library of around 900 photo's, the new has a library of over 11000. Purely coincidence that for unrelated reasons I decided to upgrade my storage drive, but it seems to have worked wonders with speed. 

    I appreciate that it's not a path  that most can use, but in the interests of getting as much information out as possible, it seemed worthwhile to let the community know.

  • Avatar
    Kert

    Putting images on an SSD is relatively expensive if you have enough of them to actually need a digital asset manager. An 1 TB SSD is roughly the same price as a Lightroom subscription for a year. At which point you might as well use the Lightroom.

     

    So that is not really a rational solution. It's more of an workaround to get the current build somewhat functional for people who have few enough images to probably would not need the digital asset management aspect of the Luminar 3 really.

  • Avatar
    Dave Cox

    As I said at the close of my post, It's not a path for most, indeed it's not even a solution. The purpose of my post was to highlight something that had helped bring Luminar 3 into the almost usable realm. It still has a long way to go. In my own case, the move to SSD storage was prompted by factors entirely unrelated to Luminar, and the opportunity to take advantage of a good deal on the price. Even as a hobbyist photographer the 11000+ images now looked at by Luminar represents only a couple of years, and falls well short of what is needed. By comparison On1 with keywords is not as intuitive to use, but can see 40,000+ images  with keywords, and manages a launch in just over 8 seconds. It also doesn't seem as unstable.

  • Avatar
    Rob van Praat

    In my brand new laptop I only have a (fast) SSD drive. Still it's takes too long. So to me it seems more related to the re-install.

    With re-installing, didn't you loose all your settings/edits?

  • Avatar
    Dave Cox

    I did but because Luminar 3 was so dysfunctional prior to this, I only lost 4 or 5 photo's that I'd attempted to use L3 on. The rest of my work so far this year has been on other software. It's ironic that I adopted Luminar as my main editor because I could do most of my most frequent tasks so simply and easily. But by releasing this piece of garbage, I have become interested in exploring alternatives, the longer the fix takes the less likely it is that Luminar will see much if any use by me. I have found that my workflow in other software is nearly as quick in editing as Luminar, but with functional DAM's and having things like photo stitching for panoramas, watermarking, keywords, etc. my main goal is already being met. That is, I'm spending more time with my camera, and less on the computer.

  • Avatar
    Marco Foresti

    @Dave Cox " That is, I'm spending more time with my camera, and less on the computer."

    You are absolutely right. I need my time for customers, not for being the nurse of a capricious piece of software. We need software that works, not that may work after some voodoo rite and in limited enviroments. I really can't figure what was in Skylum mind when they decided to release L3.

     

Please sign in to leave a comment.