jhapeman Offline Upload & Sell: On
|
Zenon Char wrote:
I just tried it in both heal and clone. I did about dozen of each one and it was instant. I'm using an 8 year old iMac, specs below. I am getting a new iMac in a few weeks.
Just curious. Have you seen this before? I'm pretty much set mine up following this.
https://helpx.adobe.com/lightroom-classic/kb/optimize-performance-lightroom.html
Is your history extensive? Are you doing a lot of heavy editing besides the spot removal? Since the adjustments to your images are saved as parametric data, as a recipe if you will, with every single change to the image, the entire recipe has to be 're-cooked'.
In a pixel based editor, once the changes are made, they're made for good. In the Post Processing world, this is called 'baked-in'. If you do a lot of editing it is recommended to use PS. ...Show more →
LR runs lighting fast for me for everything EXCEPT the clone/healing brush, and again, once I change the file from RAW/DNG to TIFF, even that tool works fine. It was also fine before the most recent updates, even on my older machines. The overall problem with just the clone/healing brush is a well-known one, and suggesting that we just flip back and forth to PS to deal with one item is untenable and quite frankly just a dumb solution. Clearly there is something odd about how that particular tool is implemented in LR such that it's the only tool that seems to show this problem, broadly across both machines and operating systems.
The point of my post was that simply changing the file into a TIFF completely resolves the speed issue, at least on my computers. I haven't seen that posted or mentioned anywhere as a potential solution to the issue, so I wanted to share it here for others. Apparently I wasn't clear enough.
|