Photo AI works very slowly compared to DeNoise on my computer. I have also had instances where Photo AI changes the color saturation. To me, sharpening looks better on DeNoise, as well. So, for now anyway, I'm sticking with DeNoise. Good video, thanks.
I have actually tried matching Denoise results in LR6. I found I had to make other adjustments to get the match, & saturation was one of them. It has been a while since I did this & if remembered correctly, (I'm getting old) had to bump exposure a little bit also.
I've been amazed by Topaz Photo AI since it came out. It does a phenomenal job on clearing up faces in the image, with the only downside that it's a little TOO clean and plasticky when you pixel peep. We just need a strength slider for Photo AI and it'll be perfect! But I'm happy enough with it that I'm not going to spend anymore money upgrading PureRAW.
I agree with David Ligon. I think Denoise AI more often provides better results than Photo AI. I thought so even in the examples Matt was showing, until he got to the final two. Most of the Photo AI shots were too crunchy and the edges had distracting artifacts. They looked oversharpened. Granted, that was at 200% or 300% magnification, but that's what pixel peeping is all about. I have Denoise and Photo AI on my Mac, but I think DxO PureRaw beats them both for accuracy with no grittiness or waxiness when I photograph wildlife with a Sony a6300 with a variety of E-mount lenses up to 600mm full frame. I agree with Matt that Denoise is dead, but not for the same reasons. Mad respect to Matt's noise reduction workflow, though.
The Photo AI seems to add a halo around edges. Of course I'm sure if you adjusted the sliders a bit, this might go away, but I'd almost say at least in the case of the purple flower and the bird, DeNoise does a better job regarding halo suppression around contrasting edges.
I do a lot of very high ISO stage work. Until recently my workflow was to export from LR or PS to deNoise, then finish in LR. However, after testing on a variety of differing high ISO images, I’m now starting by importing the original RAW files directly into deNoise and using the RAW model. This consistently yields the better results than the other models. I rarely upscale images (and PS ‘does’ do a good job when I do) and I have used Sharpen AI to rescue photos, so not planning to give that up for Photo AI. They may be ‘failures’ but in the real world, sometimes you just have to rescue those. Good to know that Topaz is pretty much done developing the standalone version (I can stop paying for the annual updates!) :-) Another great video. Thanks Matt!
Great video, I find when using denoise AI that you get those scraggily jagged detail edges here and there and photo AI emphasizes them even more, I then use the blending tool in PS around 5% to tone down those jagged edges and it looks so much better and you don’t lose a lot of details.
Great timing. With Adobe's release today of their own AI Denoise, it'd be interesting to extend this video to include it and compare. Adobe's seems promising, but can create very fake artifacts in multiple situations, is all-or-nothing (ie, doesn't work with masks), and has trouble with "softer" edges (eg, icebergs floating in choppy seas at twilight). Regardless, these tools are breathing new life into old, or challenging noisey images! Thanks for your continued work and sharing Matt!
Adobe's AI Denoise is a big game changer and will save me some money on buy any topaz junk anymore.Was happy when I first got it years ago but not now.
I use Topaz Photo AI every day. Mostly gives good results, although Recover Faces is sometimes a bit weird. I'm not a Pro, so nothing's critical. I own Denoise/Sharpen/Gigapixel/Mask, but now rarely use them. But I also work on a lot of old photos - scanned negatives, prints & transparencies (slides). Topaz AI would be a great one-stop shop .... if I didn't also use Lightroom, Photoshop, ON1 Photo Raw & Luminar Neo!! Cheers all.
Thanks for the video - I have had very mixed results with Photo AI and find better results on Denoise but it is really dependant on the photo composition. I often find that AI creates really weird background artifacts. This usually is resolved by masking the subject but again find that the masking is not quite there in photo ai (at least compared to Lightroom) Finally i often find that photo aI gets rid of details (looks like you used the smudge tool in PS) I think that its like many things - a tool bag full of tools is always better than one tool.
Thanks Matt, this is pretty much where I ended up a month or so ago. Haven’t repeated the test edits with this weeks photo ai update but I find the program gets better results every week. All that being said, I still use Ps for all but the initial adjustments in LrC then off to Ps and Topaz for the heavy lifting as/if required.
Unfortunately, Topaz Photo Ai consistently fails on my RAW Fall Adirondack landscape images - turns distant fall foliage and printed signs to mud, while the stand alone version does a decent job. Right now, DxO and Luminar Neo I think are better at this. I noticed most of the reviewers select images like the above. I would like to see how they handle wide landscape shots with fine detailed leaves, and with text on a written sign. At this point, for me, the individual Topaz plug-ins are still better for RAW Landscapes.
Thanks for the video, Matt! Your excellent review of Denoise AI as well as recommendations of a couple of friends, prompted me to purchase this stand alone version. I quite like it, actually, and it’s now part of my workflow. Consequently, I’m sorry to hear Topaz will not be doing anything further with this stand alone version. It sounds to me like it’s more of a money grab than anything else as Photo AI is more than twice the cost.
Topaz is super-reliable for charging you full price, waiting a year, then charging a pretty penny again for a .1 upgrade of the exact same program. I'm not surprised that they're abandoning one of their products after selling a ton of them for a few years.
Denoise is still my default choice unless I've had to crop the image substantially, in which case I find Photo AI's pilot choice of upsizing is good and removes most of the noise without the need for specifically selecting the denoise function. If it automatically selects denoise or sharpen functions then I usually turn these off as I find they make the image look unnatural. If I use Denoise AI, then I take off any default sharpening in Lightroom before I export the image to Denoise AI as, otherwise, I find that the resulting image looks overly sharp. In contrast, if I take a heavily cropped image into Photo AI, I leave the Lightroom default sharpening in place before exporting. I agree with your comments about sharpening unsharp images - if the image is not sharp to begin with then it's never going to be sharp to my satisfaction.
I really wish there was a coupon on topaz denoise. I would get it instantly. It's great for all those difficult shots where you have to choose noise against actually getting a shot.
Comparing LRC's new raw denoize with Topaz Photo AI today, I conclude that LRC has a bit more work to do before it is as good as Topaz. I expect that won't be long though.
Around the one minute mark you mention not going first into Photo Ai. I agree but more over I am now going back more to Denoise where you can compare four options. Then Gigapixel if I want at the end. I seldom use the stand alone Sharpen app. As a bird shooter I find direct Raw into Photo Ai often overdoes the subject and loses detail. Beaks with more than one colour often look terrible. I must admit I am probably not starting with a great image as a hobbyist.
I like Photo AI as well because I seem to get better results from it (I don't often need the sharpening or upsizing so those parts of it are usually unused). But more times than not, the default settings don't work for me. I find that my best results come from a very low denoise amount (usually a setting of 1, even on an image shot at 52,000 ISO) and with the detail slider up between 20 - 40 depending on the image. If the denoise slider is too high and the detail too low, that's why you lose detail, and the default settings will cause that loss of detail. I wish Topaz would include the ability to customize the default settings so I don't have to adjust those denoise and detail sliders every single time.
I've assumed that viewing an image at 100% in LR/PS/ACR pretty much aligned image pixels with display pixels. At higher magnifications, these apps must be interpolating pixels, otherwise there would be pixel-level gaps on-screen. Above 100%, you must be looking at image effects of both the de-noise software AND the interpolation process. How can you differentiate software sharpening effects from interpolation effects? My thinking is that comparing images at 100% provides the best way to evaluate only the denoise settings.
Thanks Matt for the video. I am still a user of Denoise and perhaps it is time to make the switch to Photo AI. You mentioned you prefer Photoshop vs Gigapixel to upscale. What feature do you use in Photoshop? Preserve Details 2.0? Thanks again!
I'm still waiting for the Topaz Denoise low-light model to be added to Photo AI! That still gives me better results on night time images with stars in the sky. Other than that, I do not use Denoise a lot anymore. But this was the reason why I wanted to keep my older Denoise license current and upgraded, even after I had already bought a license for Photo AI!
I don’t think you’ll see that. Topaz doesn’t seem on the path of adding more adjustments to Photo Ai. It seems it was created for the exact opposite. You open it, let it do it’s thing and move on.
@@MattKloskowski Hm, I do typically still tweak settings in Photo AI as well. And I really do find that the low light model in Denoise gives me better results than the models now available in Photo AI! BTW looking now for the models I noticed that Photo AI doesn't offer a choice of models when you open RAW files, only when opening TIFF or JPEG files. (I usually let it work on TIFF files instead of my RAW files so I had not noticed that before).
Hi Matt. I'm a new subscriber. I was interested to hear you say you think Photoshop is the best app for upsizing. If you could do a video of how you use Photoshop to upsize images, that would be great!
Hi Richard. I already have but long story, short… go to Image > Image Size and use the default setting. Nice and simple and looks bad good or better to me. Thanks
Photo AI also makes it sharper and sometimes a lot. On the other hand I think Gigapixel AI, Denoise AI, Sharpen AI are dead because Topaz is now only concentrating on Photo AI, so I'm surprised why they keep asking for so much money for the Image Quality Bundle. For my part, I continue to use Gigapixel because it is not so aggressive in sharpening.
Hi… So you thought since it was one app, not 3 that it would be cheaper? Doesn’t make very good business sense if you’re topaz. You can’t combine your top 3 selling apps into 1, make it cheaper and stay in business.
@@MattKloskowski I mean that Gigapixel, Denoise and Sharpen AI, will follow the path of Topaz Studio or Mask AI that are no longer offered for sale, because they are no longer being updated, that's why the so-called Image Quality Bundle seems too expensive 200 $ ("reduced" from $260), when Photo AI costs $160 (reduced from $200)
@@MattKloskowski I was also listening to that but if you want to buy the Image Quality Bundle, Photo AI does not appear there. Image Quality Bundle × 1 $199.99 × DeNoise AI Gigapixel AI Sharpen AI Photo Upgrade Plan (prorated) So "Photo Upgrade Plan" means you get also Photo AI ? Interesting 🤔
And I wish they’d just give up on working with raw images. The raw converters with all of these third part software (besides phase one) just can’t ever compete in the color department.
DeNoise looks way better… of course you get bad results when trying to fix bad pictures by overdoing it. Also denoise is to be used with sharpen ai which has the Stabilize sub function to bid those motion blurry shots. I think on is worst served to use this content as any sort of guide. Misleading at best.
When I send Raw files to Photo AI from LR using the Files > Plug-In Extras > Process with Topaz Photo AI method, the process fails every time ... I get an error message and the resulting DNG has random large white squares in the image. I can't find anyone talking about this, but I can't be the only one.
I also have issues sending raw files from capture one to denoise or photo ai. (from sony cameras) The topaz products work fine, but the image that comes back into capture one gets really messed up, so as to be unusable. Not sure f this is a capture one issue or a topaz one. Usually the color balance is changed to like +100 (max) on magenta, and it cannot be adjusted without making the photo look like neon lights. I use to get lots of large squares artifacts but this no longer is an issue. I gave up on trying to use a raw image, and always convert to 16 bit tiff when sending across which round trips perfectly.
where was we before this? ... is Ai making photography better? when we talk about pixel peakers your doing it right now. so my way of thinking is any photo enhancer is making us look for noise and pixels hence destroying photography. My God lets get back to the Norm, take a good photo and throw away the shit. I believe in a little de noise and sharpen but AI is OTT, taking the fun out of getting it right.
Using AI for noise reduction has absolutely nothing to do with getting it right in camera. Photography is still plenty of fun for me… and in fact more so for many now that we can photograph fast moving subjects in low light and come away with very usable and zoom worthy photos that wouldn’t have existed 10 years ago.
So Matt, I keep wondering if you brought a lot of K/One viewers to your channel by the way you defend your presentations? As a long time viewer from both areas, why do that? I think your above and beyond defending your videos.
Hi Dave. I left K1 almost a decade ago so I'm not sure what you mean. I do answer some questions ahead of time because I know they'll get asked and I'd rather see the comments stay on target. Things like "Why don't you compare other software" and "Why just wildlife images", are common and legit questions and I thought answering them ahead would help people, so as to not ask the same questions over and over again in the comments. Not a defense... but rather understanding the audience and the questions they'll ask. Thx.
Photo AI works very slowly compared to DeNoise on my computer. I have also had instances where Photo AI changes the color saturation. To me, sharpening looks better on DeNoise, as well. So, for now anyway, I'm sticking with DeNoise. Good video, thanks.
I have actually tried matching Denoise results in LR6. I found I had to make other adjustments to get the match, & saturation was one of them. It has been a while since I did this & if remembered correctly, (I'm getting old) had to bump exposure a little bit also.
I've been amazed by Topaz Photo AI since it came out. It does a phenomenal job on clearing up faces in the image, with the only downside that it's a little TOO clean and plasticky when you pixel peep. We just need a strength slider for Photo AI and it'll be perfect! But I'm happy enough with it that I'm not going to spend anymore money upgrading PureRAW.
I agree with David Ligon. I think Denoise AI more often provides better results than Photo AI. I thought so even in the examples Matt was showing, until he got to the final two. Most of the Photo AI shots were too crunchy and the edges had distracting artifacts. They looked oversharpened. Granted, that was at 200% or 300% magnification, but that's what pixel peeping is all about. I have Denoise and Photo AI on my Mac, but I think DxO PureRaw beats them both for accuracy with no grittiness or waxiness when I photograph wildlife with a Sony a6300 with a variety of E-mount lenses up to 600mm full frame. I agree with Matt that Denoise is dead, but not for the same reasons. Mad respect to Matt's noise reduction workflow, though.
The Photo AI seems to add a halo around edges. Of course I'm sure if you adjusted the sliders a bit, this might go away, but I'd almost say at least in the case of the purple flower and the bird, DeNoise does a better job regarding halo suppression around contrasting edges.
I do a lot of very high ISO stage work. Until recently my workflow was to export from LR or PS to deNoise, then finish in LR. However, after testing on a variety of differing high ISO images, I’m now starting by importing the original RAW files directly into deNoise and using the RAW model. This consistently yields the better results than the other models. I rarely upscale images (and PS ‘does’ do a good job when I do) and I have used Sharpen AI to rescue photos, so not planning to give that up for Photo AI. They may be ‘failures’ but in the real world, sometimes you just have to rescue those. Good to know that Topaz is pretty much done developing the standalone version (I can stop paying for the annual updates!) :-)
Another great video. Thanks Matt!
Great video, I find when using denoise AI that you get those scraggily jagged detail edges here and there and photo AI emphasizes them even more, I then use the blending tool in PS around 5% to tone down those jagged edges and it looks so much better and you don’t lose a lot of details.
Great timing. With Adobe's release today of their own AI Denoise, it'd be interesting to extend this video to include it and compare. Adobe's seems promising, but can create very fake artifacts in multiple situations, is all-or-nothing (ie, doesn't work with masks), and has trouble with "softer" edges (eg, icebergs floating in choppy seas at twilight). Regardless, these tools are breathing new life into old, or challenging noisey images! Thanks for your continued work and sharing Matt!
Will be very interested in Matt's thoughts on the new adobe denoise feature
Adobe's AI Denoise is a big game changer and will save me some money on buy any topaz junk anymore.Was happy when I first got it years ago but not now.
I use Topaz Photo AI every day. Mostly gives good results, although Recover Faces is sometimes a bit weird. I'm not a Pro, so nothing's critical. I own Denoise/Sharpen/Gigapixel/Mask, but now rarely use them. But I also work on a lot of old photos - scanned negatives, prints & transparencies (slides). Topaz AI would be a great one-stop shop .... if I didn't also use Lightroom, Photoshop, ON1 Photo Raw & Luminar Neo!! Cheers all.
Thanks for the video - I have had very mixed results with Photo AI and find better results on Denoise but it is really dependant on the photo composition. I often find that AI creates really weird background artifacts. This usually is resolved by masking the subject but again find that the masking is not quite there in photo ai (at least compared to Lightroom) Finally i often find that photo aI gets rid of details (looks like you used the smudge tool in PS)
I think that its like many things - a tool bag full of tools is always better than one tool.
Thanks Matt, this is pretty much where I ended up a month or so ago. Haven’t repeated the test edits with this weeks photo ai update but I find the program gets better results every week. All that being said, I still use Ps for all but the initial adjustments in LrC then off to Ps and Topaz for the heavy lifting as/if required.
Unfortunately, Topaz Photo Ai consistently fails on my RAW Fall Adirondack landscape images - turns distant fall foliage and printed signs to mud, while the stand alone version does a decent job. Right now, DxO and Luminar Neo I think are better at this. I noticed most of the reviewers select images like the above. I would like to see how they handle wide landscape shots with fine detailed leaves, and with text on a written sign. At this point, for me, the individual Topaz plug-ins are still better for RAW Landscapes.
Thanks for the video, Matt! Your excellent review of Denoise AI as well as recommendations of a couple of friends, prompted me to purchase this stand alone version. I quite like it, actually, and it’s now part of my workflow. Consequently, I’m sorry to hear Topaz will not be doing anything further with this stand alone version. It sounds to me like it’s more of a money grab than anything else as Photo AI is more than twice the cost.
Topaz is super-reliable for charging you full price, waiting a year, then charging a pretty penny again for a .1 upgrade of the exact same program. I'm not surprised that they're abandoning one of their products after selling a ton of them for a few years.
Denoise is still my default choice unless I've had to crop the image substantially, in which case I find Photo AI's pilot choice of upsizing is good and removes most of the noise without the need for specifically selecting the denoise function. If it automatically selects denoise or sharpen functions then I usually turn these off as I find they make the image look unnatural. If I use Denoise AI, then I take off any default sharpening in Lightroom before I export the image to Denoise AI as, otherwise, I find that the resulting image looks overly sharp. In contrast, if I take a heavily cropped image into Photo AI, I leave the Lightroom default sharpening in place before exporting. I agree with your comments about sharpening unsharp images - if the image is not sharp to begin with then it's never going to be sharp to my satisfaction.
Thanks Matt, great comparison and explanation!
I really wish there was a coupon on topaz denoise. I would get it instantly. It's great for all those difficult shots where you have to choose noise against actually getting a shot.
Comparing LRC's new raw denoize with Topaz Photo AI today, I conclude that LRC has a bit more work to do before it is as good as Topaz. I expect that won't be long though.
I agree with your conclusion. Thx 🙏
Though now, my workflow includes DxO PureRAW3 and/or Topas Photo AI.
Thanks Matt, really helpful demo. If I decide on AI i’ll use your link
Thanks Matt! I was wondering about that, but I'm too lazy to test it for myself.
Around the one minute mark you mention not going first into Photo Ai. I agree but more over I am now going back more to Denoise where you can compare four options. Then Gigapixel if I want at the end. I seldom use the stand alone Sharpen app. As a bird shooter I find direct Raw into Photo Ai often overdoes the subject and loses detail. Beaks with more than one colour often look terrible. I must admit I am probably not starting with a great image as a hobbyist.
I like Photo AI as well because I seem to get better results from it (I don't often need the sharpening or upsizing so those parts of it are usually unused). But more times than not, the default settings don't work for me. I find that my best results come from a very low denoise amount (usually a setting of 1, even on an image shot at 52,000 ISO) and with the detail slider up between 20 - 40 depending on the image. If the denoise slider is too high and the detail too low, that's why you lose detail, and the default settings will cause that loss of detail. I wish Topaz would include the ability to customize the default settings so I don't have to adjust those denoise and detail sliders every single time.
Thank you very much, Matt! Lately I'm using only Topaz Photo Ai and it is good enough for me.
I find it's a complete lottery between DenoiseAI, PhotoAI and DxO2. It doesn't make the workflow any easier!
I've assumed that viewing an image at 100% in LR/PS/ACR pretty much aligned image pixels with display pixels. At higher magnifications, these apps must be interpolating pixels, otherwise there would be pixel-level gaps on-screen. Above 100%, you must be looking at image effects of both the de-noise software AND the interpolation process. How can you differentiate software sharpening effects from interpolation effects? My thinking is that comparing images at 100% provides the best way to evaluate only the denoise settings.
With high resolution screens you’re usually not seeing one to one pixels even at 100% anymore I don’t think.
I checked out the new PS denoise and find that the Topaz denoise is much, much better.
Thanks for keeping it real Matt, amazing bird photos.
Thanks, Martin.
Thanks Matt for the video. I am still a user of Denoise and perhaps it is time to make the switch to Photo AI. You mentioned you prefer Photoshop vs Gigapixel to upscale. What feature do you use in Photoshop? Preserve Details 2.0? Thanks again!
Thanks for the instructions
I'm still waiting for the Topaz Denoise low-light model to be added to Photo AI!
That still gives me better results on night time images with stars in the sky.
Other than that, I do not use Denoise a lot anymore. But this was the reason why I wanted to keep my older Denoise license current and upgraded, even after I had already bought a license for Photo AI!
I don’t think you’ll see that. Topaz doesn’t seem on the path of adding more adjustments to Photo Ai. It seems it was created for the exact opposite. You open it, let it do it’s thing and move on.
@@MattKloskowski Hm, I do typically still tweak settings in Photo AI as well.
And I really do find that the low light model in Denoise gives me better results than the models now available in Photo AI!
BTW looking now for the models I noticed that Photo AI doesn't offer a choice of models when you open RAW files, only when opening TIFF or JPEG files. (I usually let it work on TIFF files instead of my RAW files so I had not noticed that before).
Since both Photo AI and DeNoise are able to be tweaked, the differences are negligible. Photo AI will save you time.
I keep hearing about DeNoise's ability to mask areas to be processed. My DeNoise doesn't have this function. Why not? I have version 3.7.2
Hi Matt. I'm a new subscriber. I was interested to hear you say you think Photoshop is the best app for upsizing. If you could do a video of how you use Photoshop to upsize images, that would be great!
Hi Richard. I already have but long story, short… go to Image > Image Size and use the default setting. Nice and simple and looks bad good or better to me. Thanks
Photo AI also makes it sharper and sometimes a lot. On the other hand I think Gigapixel AI, Denoise AI, Sharpen AI are dead because Topaz is now only concentrating on Photo AI, so I'm surprised why they keep asking for so much money for the Image Quality Bundle.
For my part, I continue to use Gigapixel because it is not so aggressive in sharpening.
Hi… So you thought since it was one app, not 3 that it would be cheaper? Doesn’t make very good business sense if you’re topaz. You can’t combine your top 3 selling apps into 1, make it cheaper and stay in business.
@@MattKloskowski I mean that Gigapixel, Denoise and Sharpen AI, will follow the path of Topaz Studio or Mask AI that are no longer offered for sale, because they are no longer being updated, that's why the so-called Image Quality Bundle seems too expensive 200 $ ("reduced" from $260), when Photo AI costs $160 (reduced from $200)
You get Photo AI as part of the bundle because topaz has said it will be their future.
@@MattKloskowski I was also listening to that but if you want to buy the Image Quality Bundle, Photo AI does not appear there.
Image Quality Bundle × 1 $199.99 ×
DeNoise AI
Gigapixel AI
Sharpen AI
Photo Upgrade Plan (prorated)
So "Photo Upgrade Plan" means you get also Photo AI ?
Interesting 🤔
And I wish they’d just give up on working with raw images. The raw converters with all of these third part software (besides phase one) just can’t ever compete in the color department.
Agree on that point. They’re not a raw editor so why would I trust my first touch point on a photo to them.
I hope that they don't abandon Denoise because there is no batch processing in Photo AI.
You can batch in photo so by using the apply auto to all option in the drop-down list
I uses it and it is amazing
What about the new DXO raw 3 compared to Topaz Denoise?
Covered it at 6:15 - czcams.com/video/93QpA9WBGWQ/video.html
You must not have watched the video. He addressed this at 6:16.
Excellent video Matt. Do you have a video on your upscaling process in Photoshop? If not, I would love to see how you do it. Thanks.
Hi. I just go to Image > image Size and use the default setting for upsizing. I wish I could make it more complex for a tutorial but that’s it.
Matt is this your preferred method over using something like topaz gigapixel AI?
DeNoise looks way better… of course you get bad results when trying to fix bad pictures by overdoing it. Also denoise is to be used with sharpen ai which has the Stabilize sub function to bid those motion blurry shots. I think on is worst served to use this content as any sort of guide. Misleading at best.
I think photo ai is the way to go.
Photo AI seems to be a 'work in progress.' Topaz current version is v1.30. May I ask which version you used in this review? 🤔
The latest version on their site.
Would Photo AI perform the same with all camera brand files such as Canon or Sony?
Best to download the trial and give it a go to see. Every photo and every camera is different.
Well I have denoise and sharpening from Topaz. If they take them back and they give me one single program , why not … I mean with a huge discount. ;)
When I send Raw files to Photo AI from LR using the Files > Plug-In Extras > Process with Topaz Photo AI method, the process fails every time ... I get an error message and the resulting DNG has random large white squares in the image. I can't find anyone talking about this, but I can't be the only one.
I would contact Topaz if you’re having issues
I also have issues sending raw files from capture one to denoise or photo ai. (from sony cameras) The topaz products work fine, but the image that comes back into capture one gets really messed up, so as to be unusable. Not sure f this is a capture one issue or a topaz one. Usually the color balance is changed to like +100 (max) on magenta, and it cannot be adjusted without making the photo look like neon lights. I use to get lots of large squares artifacts but this no longer is an issue. I gave up on trying to use a raw image, and always convert to 16 bit tiff when sending across which round trips perfectly.
They just want to make an all-in-one app instead of 3.
Yes. Which is what everyone asked for to begin with.
when you say upscale in photoshop works best - is that comparing it to gigapixel ai ?
Yep.
I’ve been using gigapixel for a year and upscaling is always better based onmy experience
So far I prefer DeNoise.
where was we before this? ... is Ai making photography better? when we talk about pixel peakers your doing it right now. so my way of thinking is any photo enhancer is making us look for noise and pixels hence destroying photography. My God lets get back to the Norm, take a good photo and throw away the shit. I believe in a little de noise and sharpen but AI is OTT, taking the fun out of getting it right.
Using AI for noise reduction has absolutely nothing to do with getting it right in camera. Photography is still plenty of fun for me… and in fact more so for many now that we can photograph fast moving subjects in low light and come away with very usable and zoom worthy photos that wouldn’t have existed 10 years ago.
So Matt, I keep wondering if you brought a lot of K/One viewers to your channel by the way you defend your presentations? As a long time viewer from both areas, why do that? I think your above and beyond defending your videos.
Hi Dave. I left K1 almost a decade ago so I'm not sure what you mean. I do answer some questions ahead of time because I know they'll get asked and I'd rather see the comments stay on target. Things like "Why don't you compare other software" and "Why just wildlife images", are common and legit questions and I thought answering them ahead would help people, so as to not ask the same questions over and over again in the comments. Not a defense... but rather understanding the audience and the questions they'll ask. Thx.
@@MattKloskowski You would know and thanks for the answer. How time ✈ ✈