Luminar 3.1.1.3300 - Performance and Issues still not resolved

Comments

12 comments

  • Avatar
    Jean-Christophe Dichant

    Windows 10 needs at least 16 Gb to run at a correct speed. When you use a post-processing software, the amount of memory needed is more important, 32 Gb is a good choice.

    An SSD disk is necessary too to have good performances.

    This is true for all softwares, including Luminar.

    With a 2 years old W10 computer, 32 Gb and SSD, I can use Luminar at a correct speed to process 45 Mb RAW files. Luminar is still slower than Lightroom but really usable.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Edwin Izelaar

    @Jean-Christophe Dichant, thank you for your comment. I get what you are saying and I absolutely agree on your recommended hardware specifications. Let's see what the Skylum team has to say to this. 

    What I do not understand ist the dramatic decrease of performance when I switched from Luminar 2018 to Luminar 3. I was a happy Luminar 2018 user, it was all not super fast, but very acceptable without program freezes and unexpected program closings.

    What I also do not understand is the fact that it took a half year to resolve a large amount of issues. A list of issues which is still not solved completely.

    And I installed other, more or less similar software. It is not running blasting fast, but much faster compared to Luminar and without program freezes and exits.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Martial Fournier

    Tout le monde ne peut pas changer sont Pc pour Luminar 3 , j'ai 16 Gb et un ssd  et je m'en sors suffisamment bien

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Martial Fournier

    Cela n'explique pas les divergences entre PC & Mac, alors que nous avons payé le même prix !

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Jean-Christophe Dichant

    PC vs. Mac c'est l'éternel débat. Lightroom fonctionne mieux sur PC que sur Mac, beaucoup de logiciels sont comme ça et pour d'autres c'est l'inverse. L'éditeur du logiciel ne peut pas compenser les manques (ou forces) du système d’exploitation.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Kate Williams

    Hi Edwin,

    Indeed, your software meets our minimum tech requirements. Yet, as Jean-Christophe, has pointed out the more RAM, the better. A CPU with more threads and faster clock speed + SSD would be an overkill. 

    Still, I'd like to assure you that we are constantly improving the performance of the application, so that it could handle big galleries smoother even with the minimum hardware specs. 

    Currently, the speed of the app depends on the number of photos you have in your catalog, their format (it can take a bit more time to load RAW or TIFF files), your hardware configuration, and the place where you store your photos (it works faster when the photos are located on an internal drive).

    Thus, I'd advise you to divide your Gallery between several catalogs containing fewer photos. To create a new catalog, click File > Catalog > New. To switch between catalogs, click File > Catalog > Open. 

     

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Jean-Christophe Dichant

    As an additional information, I currently have 55.000 pictures in a single catalog using the above configuration.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Edwin Izelaar

    @Kate Williams, thanks for your reply. Another 8Gb of RAM I have ordered and we will see what that means for the general performance. I will give it a try. For me that seems a reasonable upgrade anyway. The max. RAM for my machine is 16 Gb.

    The catalog you say should be divided into more catalogs? But I have only 7.300 files in my catalog. Is it really a reccommendation from Skylum team? What should I think about? Max. 2.500 files in one catalog, or what do you mean exactly?

    What is your response to the other issues I have? I assume you are not relating all my issues to the fact that my machine only meets your minimum system requirements? Or do you? It sounds a bit weird if Skylum would say: Ok your system meets our minimum system requirements, but unfortunately in that case, the application is terribly slow, will have frreezes, unexpected closings, and some functions are not working properly. That would mean the minimum system requirements you communicate to your (potential) customers has to be rewritten? Hopefully I am wrong?

    Thanks for your feedback.

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Vance Zachary

    @ Edwin I agree! With 16 gig of RAM you should run faster and it may not be necessary to divide your catalog. I think Kate was in general mentioning things that may make Luminar run faster and not necessarily making suggestions for you specifically to make.

    I have 16,000 images in 1 catalog, 32 gig of RAM and a solid state drive Windows 10 i7 core and run my RAW images from an external hard drive and everything runs reasonably fast. Not as fast as Lightroom but fairly close (not saying much as Lightroom classic CC is slow).

    So let's hope the changes you are making to your machine will be all that will be necessary! Good luck!

    1
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Edwin Izelaar

    I now have started a comparison with other RAW editors like ON1 and Capture One. I simply cannot believe Luminar is using up-to-date or correct techniques or engines - it is unacceptable, waiting a half a year now for the program to become useable.

    Luminar 3.1.1.3300 vs ON1 latest version: ON1 is much faster, but also freezes sometimes!

    Luminar 3.1.1.3300 vs Capture One latest version: Capture One is incredibly fast, I am very surprised, The application does not freeze, no CPU, RAM and HDD at 100%, no unexpected program exits.

    So, what is Luminar doing different here?

    I will wait for my extra 8 Gb of RAM to be delivered and give it a last try because in fact I like the way Luminar 3 is thought out to be. I never ever had so much patience!

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Joe Psioda

    If I am using Lightroom as a catalog and I process using HDR 19... I get WIN 10 event log errors which implicate Luminar 3.  Have others used this configuration and seen this behavior?

    0
    Comment actions Permalink
  • Avatar
    Joe Psioda

    Have others seen Luminar 3 clashing with Lightroom leading to Win 10 errors ?  Now I’ve read that Luminar Flex is somehow designed to better enable Luminar as a Plug-in....  l’m beginning to think that I must uninstall Luminar to prevent errors and even blue screen crashes...  any others here to support my issue(s).  I assure you my PC very much exceeds the minimum specifications required... and I have cleaned registers and reinstalled HDR 19.

    0
    Comment actions Permalink

Please sign in to leave a comment.