Every situation is different...I shoot a lot action shots of boats, more specifically antique & classic speedboats. The hulls of many of these boats are fairly dark, and especially dark depending on orientation to the sun and time of day. No matter how much you coach the captains, they tend to run wherever they want. In my experience with DeNoise, it best for me to do so minor edits in LRC first. I often have to lift shadows on the hulls significantly. If I raise the shadows alot, then use DeNoise, the detail gets too washed out. If I raise the shadows a small bit, then run through DeNoise, then back in LRC raise the shadows more, I get a cleaner more detailed image. So for me, noise reduction early on works best. I hadn't thought of layering the original file with the DeNoised file in PS and playing with opacity, so thanks for that idea, definitely gives more control to the noise reduction effect. Last comment, I also find the default sharpening in DeNoise to be too much so I often set it at a number close to the noise reduction number and selectively sharpen later if needed.
Such a timely topic Matt as a friend and I were talking about when Denoise was best used. I don’t use it often but had been using it at the end of processing then heard/read it should be at the start so I changed my workflow and thought the results were a bit flat. Thanks for your time and thoughtful experimentation.
I just picked up the bundle and used your link, Matt. I use my photos/photoshoots for painting reference, and since I'm using a crop sensor Canon M50, I get more noise than I'd like. This will help me to clean up those noisy images so they're as good as I need them to be. Thanks for your channel and for sharing your expertise. I remember watching you way back in the day with Scott Kelby on Photoshop TV!?!
Always enjoy your videos. Enjoy your style of teaching compared to many of these other “experts” that always seem to come across as so arrogant. Be humble and keep it simple, thanks again Matt.
Thank you! I was looking for confirmation of how I do my Topaz Denoise and this was it. I like it last too! Thanks for your videos. They are very informative.
Matt: Always great to see comparison of various denoise and sharpening methods. I do my denoise just as you do in the final stage. The new photo Ai is definitely in growth stages. I see many different handling issues when doing wildlife feather and fur versus Sports with manmade fabrics and background. The auto settings will most of the time require tweaking as it tends to make blotchy adjustments in both scenarios. I do groups of images and do not wish to reedit each image. For the time being very light usage of Topaz for only the best final image if posting. We all know that even reasonably done images will look good in social media (not pixel peepers) but prints always show the real story. Thank you for your expert review.
Hi Larry. It definitely differs per image. Luckily 99.9999% of photos are posted online vs. Print so not many people have to worry about that part. Thanks!
As someone else mentioned, there seems to be an opportunity for Adobe. Any time you're seeing 3rd party apps coming into the market, that's a signal that there is an opportunity to modify the existing LR & PS products to add value to a subscription service. Noise reduction is a pretty 'basic' need - it's just that the existing tools need to be improved. A lot.
Agree with you, Matt, that the DNGs produced by these noise reduction programs are unpredictable and cause needless extra work to fix the odd colors and such. For me it’s always the raw converter first, either Adobe or DxO depending on the camera body. Any plugin gets a TIFF to deal with and I tend to do noise reduction early if the image is noisy, as I don’t want that noise to get exaggerated by further processing.
In the "old" days, noise reduction would have to be done toward the end, as the traditional methods tend to smooth away detail. But, the new nonparametric filters do an excellent good job of preserving edges and the finest detail, at least to a point. I have switched to doing noise reduction early, as many image enhancement steps increase the noise visibility, requiring "stronger" NR reduction which does degrade detail.
And sharpening? I tend to save that for last. DN, = depends on the photo, quality of sharpness, etc.& amount of noise & what I feel like doing that day. Sometimes I just use LR & I'm still using LR6.14 & AP 1.8 something or other.
I use Topaz Denoise at the end of my workflow because I often use Nik Color Efex Pro which tends to make the image noisier. Denoise's sharpening also seems sufficient too so I have all sharpening turned off in ACR
I’m kinda late to the comments but I just purchased Photo AI during their Black Friday promotion and was looking for a recommendation on when to use it in my ACR-Photoshop workflow. I tried it on a RAW file yesterday, creating a DNG file and it felt too complicated. Like you, if I can’t see a significant difference, I prefer to use Photo AI at the end. Thanks for your candid and always down-to-earth advice!
I use Topaz Denoise AI. My normal workflow is to do my basic Lightroom Tone adjustments (Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks) first. This might include those settings within a mask. My reason for this is that these adjustments often reveal noise that you wouldn't see otherwise. Then, I send the image as a TIF to Denoise AI as a plugin. For HIGH ISO images (typically 6400 and above), I often use the Denoise AI RAW Model which requires you to use Denoise as a stand alone app BEFORE you begin processing in Lightroom. I don't like this workflow (or the file sizes it creates), so I use it sparingly.
It would be nice if Photoshop/Lightroom, being one the top photo editing suites, would have it's own decent noise reduction capability. Maybe in the future.
Your wish is Adobe's command! The latest up-date adds Ai Powered denoise to the ever growing arsenal of tools. I've just played with it and it looks great. Cheers.
DeNoise, Photo AI, DxO, Lightroom NR? First or last? Yes. It depends. I tend to use DeNoise AI and use it last. But, sometimes I am not satisfied with DeNoise, so try DxO first and re-edit. Sometimes using NR in Lightroom Classic is satisfying and sufficient. I usually use Photo AI to noise reduce and upscale old jpegs x2, where better is good enough and the reduced number of controls is welcome. I never pixel peep past 200%, and when 200% feels frustrating, I drop to 100% and decide, that looks fine. Yes, with nothing to compare it to, whoever I might show the image to won't know. It is what it is. Besides, composition is much more important than a little bit of noise. NR will not compensate for a poor composition.
I was struggling with when to use DeNoise AI vs. Photo AI. It is really useful to see this comparison, thanks. I am liking Photo AI more and more with their frequent updates, and I use it at the end of my workflow.
Hi. You won't really have to struggle for long. DeNoise is pretty much done and all development efforts are going to Photo AI. So at some point, Photo Ai will have everything and more and DeNoise will no longer see any development. (this is from Topaz's FAQ on their site)
I have been using DXO for a while now and it has been an interesting change to do the noise reduction first. You definitely have a lot less control using DXO but I found a little more consistent than topaz so it makes up for it. It does slightly change the colours converting it to DNG which is annoying. For me personally Topaz takes me longer because I spent a lot of time masking, fine tuning and opacity level but it does end up in a better final image.
Hi Matt, I’m a new user of Topaz products, having recently purchased Photo AI. Is there, from your perspective, any real need to invest in the rest of the Topaz product line up? BTW, tried my own experiment and got better results on a high ISO file but applying Photo AI initially on the raw file and starting the rest of my edits on the resulting dng file.
Was surprised to see you use the “clear” model. I don’t think I’ve ever been happy with that. I typically use Standard or Low light. Then again, I’m usually shooting ISO 8-10 k.
Hi Matt, I have a question about this... I also find that the workflow is much easier if the image is sent to Photo AI after processing in LRC. But let's assume that you really want to get the most out of it and send the image as RAW to Photo AI first. Then finished the editing in LRC and also cropped the image. How would you increase the resolution again? Send it back to Photo AI, or rather go to Gigapixel and disable everything there except upscaling? LG Udo
Thank you Matt. I was curious if you printed both the de-noise on the raw file and the noise reduction after you processed the image? Is there a difference or do they both print with the equivalent quality?
Thanks for making this video. There is another CZcamsr who believes if do noise reduction in the end, you should set all Lightroom sliders affecting sharpness (texture, sharpness, clarity, etc) completely to the left (including Lightroom's own noise reduction slider but not the color noise slider) so that the TIF file that goes to Topaz has less noise baked in thus making it easier for Topaz to clean it up. Then you can use those Lightroom sliders once Topaz returns the file to Lightroom. Clearly, he believes by using those sharpening sliders that you're unnecessarily making the noise worse prior to actually trying to get rid of it, making it harder for Topaz to do its thing. My theory is that perhaps Topaz will be able to "see" the noise easier by using Lightroom sharpness sliders and thus allow it to better target the noise. Your thoughts on this conundrum?
I’d give them both a try Larry, and see what you come up with. For me, I just don’t think about it that much and am not that technical. I just edit. If the sliders have some default settings on them, it’s definitely not something I pay attention to. In the end, nobody that sees your photo would be able to tell either way so it’s all a personal choice. Thanks.
Two months later and 8 or 9 updates to Topaz Photo AI and processing a raw straight into Topaz Photo AI and then processing the DNG back in Lr you are now getting a better result than processing the original raw in Lr and then converting to a tiff and cleaning it up in Topaz Photo AI
Hi Matt, just finished your course on Topaz. Do you ever fine it better to open your file in Photoshop as a smart object and then apply the Denoise or AI Sharpen ? Thanks Rick
Matt - Do you have any advice for a workflow with DeNoise or Photo AI and Lightroom for sports photographers? I shoot a few thousand initial images and try to clean up and publish ~150. The volume of images is a challenge.
So if you are using Denoise at the end of the process I assume that you are doing all of your sharpening 1st in LR or PS and then allowing Denoise to add more sharpening if u use the Auto settings? Is that correct?
Hi Tim. DeNoise does the sharpening for me. LR sharpening, like noise reduction, is pretty useless. And honestly, if the photo isn't sharp to start with, no amount of sharpening really helps. Thanks.
I find Topaz creates too many artefacts on fine feather detail so I only use it on EXTREMELY noisy images and even then I mask it so that it's only working on the background. I love to zoom in and look at magnified detail and I've also had the artefacts visible in large prints. We pay for this expensive gear to have the ability to reproduce fine details accurately and then we butcher them with A I programs that work on a superficial level. Just my 2 cents worth. Enjoyed the vid.
I upgraded to the full the suite today during the Black Friday sale, and admittedly only tried the various AI programs on one image, but I found the standalone DeNoise AI (which I have used for over a year) was better than Photo AI. Matt, your video seemed to imply the same thing. So I'm wondering: is there an advantage in Photo AI? Should I ask for my suite upgrade money back and just resume using DeNoise AI exclusively?
Hi Karl. I found different. I found Photo AI in this case to be better as I showed at the end. DeNoise will not continue to get updates and Photo AI will so that’s where I’d put my money and time.
@@MattKloskowski Thanks for taking the time to reply. I clearly need to try some more images to see what works best. My first try with Photo AI on an unsharp Pika resulted in some weird artifacts and crunchy blocks of hair on the animal's back.
I wish you compared this to using ON1 PR 2023. Rather than using a plug in, ON1 has everything in one package. NoNoise and AI Sharpening is a great way to reduce noise and add detail.
I did that comparison a year ago if you want to look back. The only way you get all of those to work seamlessly is by using ON1 Photo Raw as a whole. For the vast majority of us that is a deal breaker because we user LR and PS and don’t want to use ON1. But if you do, by all means skip this video since your apps are different.
I just downloaded my copy of Topaz Photo AI and when I used it my usual way (right click and choose Topaz Photo AI) a help window opened to tell me that I could process the raw photo by selecting File>Plug in Extras>Topaz Photo AI. First I finished and wound up with the usual .tiff file. Then I went back to my original .orf file in lightroom. Ran it through the File>Plug in Extras method. I was surprised to see the .dng file show up next to my .orf and.tiff files in Lightroom! I compared the .dng with the .tiff and the .dng was better when I pixel peeped. Hmm. All within Lightroom, so it won't disturb my workflow! Now what do I do? Can you add a little postscript to this video about this?
I tried the dng method a few more times, and sometimes I like the results and sometimes not at all. So I agree, best to continue with denoise and wait for Photo AI to mature.
I now use Topaz AI about a third of the time I use any Topaz product. It helps a lot when I have a distant bird and want to crop quite a bit--then I can denoise, sharpen, and enlarge all in one program. Very nice!! If my need for denoise is borderline, however, I right-click and use the plugin on my edited file. Best of both worlds!
Dumb comment probably...but I have to admit I got a bit confused when you kept referring to the Denoise RAW vs Denoise non RAW images....and then there's the Denoise AI RAW vs the Denoise AI non raw! What type of file are you referring to when you say non-RAW? .... Sigh.... I tend to shoot ballet rehearsals in low light and often have to use ISO 6400 or even 10000! typically have 1000 per rehearsal and then have to whittle it down to 40-50. It's laborious. I wasn't able to find a batch processing feature... could you direct me to that? I have a Sony A7RIV and also use my husband's A9...which actually gives me less noise than the RIV. I use Topaz Denoise AI Clear but often end up with artifacts particularly on the skin. Not sure if Topaz plans to address that. Thank you for your continued support with all the educational help you provide us. Cheers!
Towards the end of this video, when you explain why you don't like using Topaz at the beginning of your workflow, you say that you don't like how the .dng file looks coming back. I don't understand what you mean by that. Are we looking at .dng files that have come back from Topaz in your video?
Yes Topaz renders your raw file and leaves you with a DNG if you open the raw file into it first. I don’t care for the DNG they leave you with so I send an already edited raw file (from adobe) to topaz
I suspect the choices will change again when Adobe finally brings out their Neural noise reduction filter that’s on the Photoshop neural filter Wish List. What’s keeping them I wonder? Hopefully, it’s to bring out something that works even better than the third party programs. Even better would be for Adobe to improve the noise reduction in Camera Raw & Lightroom with some AI Sensei technology. Then there would be no question about applying NR to Raws early in the workflow, as it would be so much easier than bouncing in and out of other programs, which is messy as you point out, and produces DNGs that always look a little off.
Every situation is different...I shoot a lot action shots of boats, more specifically antique & classic speedboats. The hulls of many of these boats are fairly dark, and especially dark depending on orientation to the sun and time of day. No matter how much you coach the captains, they tend to run wherever they want. In my experience with DeNoise, it best for me to do so minor edits in LRC first. I often have to lift shadows on the hulls significantly. If I raise the shadows alot, then use DeNoise, the detail gets too washed out. If I raise the shadows a small bit, then run through DeNoise, then back in LRC raise the shadows more, I get a cleaner more detailed image. So for me, noise reduction early on works best. I hadn't thought of layering the original file with the DeNoised file in PS and playing with opacity, so thanks for that idea, definitely gives more control to the noise reduction effect. Last comment, I also find the default sharpening in DeNoise to be too much so I often set it at a number close to the noise reduction number and selectively sharpen later if needed.
Such a timely topic Matt as a friend and I were talking about when Denoise was best used. I don’t use it often but had been using it at the end of processing then heard/read it should be at the start so I changed my workflow and thought the results were a bit flat. Thanks for your time and thoughtful experimentation.
I just picked up the bundle and used your link, Matt. I use my photos/photoshoots for painting reference, and since I'm using a crop sensor Canon M50, I get more noise than I'd like. This will help me to clean up those noisy images so they're as good as I need them to be. Thanks for your channel and for sharing your expertise. I remember watching you way back in the day with Scott Kelby on Photoshop TV!?!
Always enjoy your videos. Enjoy your style of teaching compared to many of these other “experts” that always seem to come across as so arrogant. Be humble and keep it simple, thanks again Matt.
Thanks Matt, using Photo AI as well and waiting until the end to do it...appreciate you doing the work to show us RAW versus non for those...
Thank you for the advice...always questioned which is best first....
Thank you! I was looking for confirmation of how I do my Topaz Denoise and this was it. I like it last too! Thanks for your videos. They are very informative.
Matt: Always great to see comparison of various denoise and sharpening methods. I do my denoise just as you do in the final stage. The new photo Ai is definitely in growth stages. I see many different handling issues when doing wildlife feather and fur versus Sports with manmade fabrics and background. The auto settings will most of the time require tweaking as it tends to make blotchy adjustments in both scenarios. I do groups of images and do not wish to reedit each image. For the time being very light usage of Topaz for only the best final image if posting. We all know that even reasonably done images will look good in social media (not pixel peepers) but prints always show the real story. Thank you for your expert review.
Hi Larry. It definitely differs per image. Luckily 99.9999% of photos are posted online vs. Print so not many people have to worry about that part. Thanks!
As someone else mentioned, there seems to be an opportunity for Adobe. Any time you're seeing 3rd party apps coming into the market, that's a signal that there is an opportunity to modify the existing LR & PS products to add value to a subscription service. Noise reduction is a pretty 'basic' need - it's just that the existing tools need to be improved. A lot.
Agree with you, Matt, that the DNGs produced by these noise reduction programs are unpredictable and cause needless extra work to fix the odd colors and such. For me it’s always the raw converter first, either Adobe or DxO depending on the camera body. Any plugin gets a TIFF to deal with and I tend to do noise reduction early if the image is noisy, as I don’t want that noise to get exaggerated by further processing.
In the "old" days, noise reduction would have to be done toward the end, as the traditional methods tend to smooth away detail. But, the new nonparametric filters do an excellent good job of preserving edges and the finest detail, at least to a point. I have switched to doing noise reduction early, as many image enhancement steps increase the noise visibility, requiring "stronger" NR reduction which does degrade detail.
And sharpening? I tend to save that for last. DN, = depends on the photo, quality of sharpness, etc.& amount of noise & what I feel like doing that day. Sometimes I just use LR & I'm still using LR6.14 & AP 1.8 something or other.
Thank you Matt. I always use denoise last, but this was quite interesting.
Thank you, Matt. This was very helpful.
I use Topaz Denoise at the end of my workflow because I often use Nik Color Efex Pro which tends to make the image noisier. Denoise's sharpening also seems sufficient too so I have all sharpening turned off in ACR
Thanks Matt, as always honest and practical advice
I’m kinda late to the comments but I just purchased Photo AI during their Black Friday promotion and was looking for a recommendation on when to use it in my ACR-Photoshop workflow. I tried it on a RAW file yesterday, creating a DNG file and it felt too complicated. Like you, if I can’t see a significant difference, I prefer to use Photo AI at the end. Thanks for your candid and always down-to-earth advice!
I use Topaz Denoise AI. My normal workflow is to do my basic Lightroom Tone adjustments (Exposure, Highlights, Shadows, Whites, Blacks) first. This might include those settings within a mask. My reason for this is that these adjustments often reveal noise that you wouldn't see otherwise. Then, I send the image as a TIF to Denoise AI as a plugin.
For HIGH ISO images (typically 6400 and above), I often use the Denoise AI RAW Model which requires you to use Denoise as a stand alone app BEFORE you begin processing in Lightroom. I don't like this workflow (or the file sizes it creates), so I use it sparingly.
It would be nice if Photoshop/Lightroom, being one the top photo editing suites, would have it's own decent noise reduction capability. Maybe in the future.
yeah - its weird and shocking how weak it is
Yes, it's always been mediocre. Topaz, Luminar ON1 et al, all kick PS/LR's ass. I don't get it. But I'm used to plug-in hopping now.
Your wish is Adobe's command! The latest up-date adds Ai Powered denoise to the ever growing arsenal of tools. I've just played with it and it looks great. Cheers.
@Bill Adam Fantastic, will check this out. Thank you.
DeNoise, Photo AI, DxO, Lightroom NR? First or last? Yes. It depends. I tend to use DeNoise AI and use it last. But, sometimes I am not satisfied with DeNoise, so try DxO first and re-edit. Sometimes using NR in Lightroom Classic is satisfying and sufficient. I usually use Photo AI to noise reduce and upscale old jpegs x2, where better is good enough and the reduced number of controls is welcome. I never pixel peep past 200%, and when 200% feels frustrating, I drop to 100% and decide, that looks fine. Yes, with nothing to compare it to, whoever I might show the image to won't know. It is what it is. Besides, composition is much more important than a little bit of noise. NR will not compensate for a poor composition.
You are so right! 👍
I was struggling with when to use DeNoise AI vs. Photo AI. It is really useful to see this comparison, thanks. I am liking Photo AI more and more with their frequent updates, and I use it at the end of my workflow.
Hi. You won't really have to struggle for long. DeNoise is pretty much done and all development efforts are going to Photo AI. So at some point, Photo Ai will have everything and more and DeNoise will no longer see any development. (this is from Topaz's FAQ on their site)
@@MattKloskowski Thanks Matt. Maybe "struggle" was too strong a word, as I am generally getting great results with Photo AI.
Thank you for the video. I use Photo AI at the end as it does remove noise, sharpens and enhances the size.
I have been using DXO for a while now and it has been an interesting change to do the noise reduction first. You definitely have a lot less control using DXO but I found a little more consistent than topaz so it makes up for it. It does slightly change the colours converting it to DNG which is annoying.
For me personally Topaz takes me longer because I spent a lot of time masking, fine tuning and opacity level but it does end up in a better final image.
Compared to the old days, they're all great.
Hi Matt, I’m a new user of Topaz products, having recently purchased Photo AI. Is there, from your perspective, any real need to invest in the rest of the Topaz product line up?
BTW, tried my own experiment and got better results on a high ISO file but applying Photo AI initially on the raw file and starting the rest of my edits on the resulting dng file.
Totally agree I tend to prefer DxO but Topaz Ai is better regarding sharpening adjustments
Was surprised to see you use the “clear” model. I don’t think I’ve ever been happy with that. I typically use Standard or Low light. Then again, I’m usually shooting ISO 8-10 k.
Hi Matt, I have a question about this...
I also find that the workflow is much easier if the image is sent to Photo AI after processing in LRC. But let's assume that you really want to get the most out of it and send the image as RAW to Photo AI first. Then finished the editing in LRC and also cropped the image. How would you increase the resolution again? Send it back to Photo AI, or rather go to Gigapixel and disable everything there except upscaling?
LG Udo
Your comparison between Topaz DeNoise and Photo AI was great, but how would you compare Topaz Sharpen with Photo AI? Would you still use Photo AI?
Thank you Matt. I was curious if you printed both the de-noise on the raw file and the noise reduction after you processed the image? Is there a difference or do they both print with the equivalent quality?
Hi… When they’re printed and hanging on the wall I’d challenge anyone to spot a difference from a normal viewing distance :-)
Thanks for making this video. There is another CZcamsr who believes if do noise reduction in the end, you should set all Lightroom sliders affecting sharpness (texture, sharpness, clarity, etc) completely to the left (including Lightroom's own noise reduction slider but not the color noise slider) so that the TIF file that goes to Topaz has less noise baked in thus making it easier for Topaz to clean it up. Then you can use those Lightroom sliders once Topaz returns the file to Lightroom. Clearly, he believes by using those sharpening sliders that you're unnecessarily making the noise worse prior to actually trying to get rid of it, making it harder for Topaz to do its thing. My theory is that perhaps Topaz will be able to "see" the noise easier by using Lightroom sharpness sliders and thus allow it to better target the noise. Your thoughts on this conundrum?
I’d give them both a try Larry, and see what you come up with. For me, I just don’t think about it that much and am not that technical. I just edit. If the sliders have some default settings on them, it’s definitely not something I pay attention to. In the end, nobody that sees your photo would be able to tell either way so it’s all a personal choice. Thanks.
Two months later and 8 or 9 updates to Topaz Photo AI and processing a raw straight into Topaz Photo AI and then processing the DNG back in Lr you are now getting a better result than processing the original raw in Lr and then converting to a tiff and cleaning it up in Topaz Photo AI
I agree with you! I do the easiest way possible 😊
Hi Matt, just finished your course on Topaz. Do you ever fine it better to open your file in Photoshop as a smart object and then apply the Denoise or AI Sharpen ? Thanks Rick
Hi. Nope and it wont’ make a difference whether it’s a smart object or not. Thanks.
I was under the impression that the idea of opening as a smart object in photoshop was that you are working with the raw file.
Matt - Do you have any advice for a workflow with DeNoise or Photo AI and Lightroom for sports photographers? I shoot a few thousand initial images and try to clean up and publish ~150. The volume of images is a challenge.
Only suggestion would be to use their Batch Processing feature.
So if you are using Denoise at the end of the process I assume that you are doing all of your sharpening 1st in LR or PS and then allowing Denoise to add more sharpening if u use the Auto settings? Is that correct?
Hi Tim. DeNoise does the sharpening for me. LR sharpening, like noise reduction, is pretty useless. And honestly, if the photo isn't sharp to start with, no amount of sharpening really helps. Thanks.
nice review. what about the latest version of ON1 denoise+sharpen which, now, apply also on tif exported from LRC ?
Hi Marc. I don’t use ON1 and don’t plan to use it. But feel free to do a comparison and let us know. Thanks.
I find Topaz creates too many artefacts on fine feather detail so I only use it on EXTREMELY noisy images and even then I mask it so that it's only working on the background. I love to zoom in and look at magnified detail and I've also had the artefacts visible in large prints. We pay for this expensive gear to have the ability to reproduce fine details accurately and then we butcher them with A I programs that work on a superficial level. Just my 2 cents worth. Enjoyed the vid.
Hi Matt
After RAW demonising in Topaz openDNG in LRC apply white balance “as shot” it’s much better colour
Thanks for your tutorials
James Hogg
I upgraded to the full the suite today during the Black Friday sale, and admittedly only tried the various AI programs on one image, but I found the standalone DeNoise AI (which I have used for over a year) was better than Photo AI. Matt, your video seemed to imply the same thing. So I'm wondering: is there an advantage in Photo AI? Should I ask for my suite upgrade money back and just resume using DeNoise AI exclusively?
Hi Karl. I found different. I found Photo AI in this case to be better as I showed at the end. DeNoise will not continue to get updates and Photo AI will so that’s where I’d put my money and time.
@@MattKloskowski Thanks for taking the time to reply. I clearly need to try some more images to see what works best. My first try with Photo AI on an unsharp Pika resulted in some weird artifacts and crunchy blocks of hair on the animal's back.
I wish you compared this to using ON1 PR 2023. Rather than using a plug in, ON1 has everything in one package. NoNoise and AI Sharpening is a great way to reduce noise and add detail.
I did that comparison a year ago if you want to look back. The only way you get all of those to work seamlessly is by using ON1 Photo Raw as a whole. For the vast majority of us that is a deal breaker because we user LR and PS and don’t want to use ON1. But if you do, by all means skip this video since your apps are different.
@@MattKloskowski Can't someone using LR or PS get ON1 NoNoise as a plug-in like the others that you mentioned.
I just downloaded my copy of Topaz Photo AI and when I used it my usual way (right click and choose Topaz Photo AI) a help window opened to tell me that I could process the raw photo by selecting File>Plug in Extras>Topaz Photo AI. First I finished and wound up with the usual .tiff file. Then I went back to my original .orf file in lightroom. Ran it through the File>Plug in Extras method. I was surprised to see the .dng file show up next to my .orf and.tiff files in Lightroom! I compared the .dng with the .tiff and the .dng was better when I pixel peeped. Hmm. All within Lightroom, so it won't disturb my workflow! Now what do I do? Can you add a little postscript to this video about this?
I tried the dng method a few more times, and sometimes I like the results and sometimes not at all. So I agree, best to continue with denoise and wait for Photo AI to mature.
I now use Topaz AI about a third of the time I use any Topaz product. It helps a lot when I have a distant bird and want to crop quite a bit--then I can denoise, sharpen, and enlarge all in one program. Very nice!! If my need for denoise is borderline, however, I right-click and use the plugin on my edited file. Best of both worlds!
Dumb comment probably...but I have to admit I got a bit confused when you kept referring to the Denoise RAW vs Denoise non RAW images....and then there's the Denoise AI RAW vs the Denoise AI non raw! What type of file are you referring to when you say non-RAW? .... Sigh.... I tend to shoot ballet rehearsals in low light and often have to use ISO 6400 or even 10000! typically have 1000 per rehearsal and then have to whittle it down to 40-50. It's laborious. I wasn't able to find a batch processing feature... could you direct me to that? I have a Sony A7RIV and also use my husband's A9...which actually gives me less noise than the RIV. I use Topaz Denoise AI Clear but often end up with artifacts particularly on the skin. Not sure if Topaz plans to address that. Thank you for your continued support with all the educational help you provide us. Cheers!
Have you found any good workflow for bulk images? Or even auto methods to cull photos?
What would your workflow be using Denoise, sharpen AI and gigapixel on one photo? Have you ever needed all 3 on one photo?
Hi. Use Photo AI. It does all 3.
@@MattKloskowski thanks. I haven't downloaded it yet but I will.
Towards the end of this video, when you explain why you don't like using Topaz at the beginning of your workflow, you say that you don't like how the .dng file looks coming back. I don't understand what you mean by that. Are we looking at .dng files that have come back from Topaz in your video?
Yes Topaz renders your raw file and leaves you with a DNG if you open the raw file into it first. I don’t care for the DNG they leave you with so I send an already edited raw file (from adobe) to topaz
I don't like to edit a noisy image, so I do it first and sharpen last. Your milage may vary...
I suspect the choices will change again when Adobe finally brings out their Neural noise reduction filter that’s on the Photoshop neural filter Wish List. What’s keeping them I wonder? Hopefully, it’s to bring out something that works even better than the third party programs.
Even better would be for Adobe to improve the noise reduction in Camera Raw & Lightroom with some AI Sensei technology. Then there would be no question about applying NR to Raws early in the workflow, as it would be so much easier than bouncing in and out of other programs, which is messy as you point out, and produces DNGs that always look a little off.