- DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE INSTALL
- DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE FULL
- DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE SOFTWARE
- DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE ISO
- DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE WINDOWS
If this guy in the video was genuine I would advise him to visit a doctor and check his eyes. The comparison shows that Deep Prime is still the superior product. Noise reduction is not just about “removing noise” (something that can be done with any software), it’s about removing noise while still leaving sharpness and DETAIL. I think you should change the title, because it’s deceiving like the video you are referring to, which is a prime example of a disgusting shill at work. Jump to 14 min to see the comparison of Topaz vs Deep Prime in Pure Raw (I guess Deep PRIME in PL5 could remove more noise ) Have to admit, I could hardly believe what I saw. Colour was good, too: not without some aliasing but only on close inspection. The images look like they’d be useable for modest-sized prints. Noise remained but it could be further reduced by the “high quality” setting in DXO PL (the image is now a TIFF, so DeepPrime won’t work).ĭXO DeepPrime alone did a superior – surprisingly good – job of minimising noise with only slight smearing and a good level of fine detail. Topaz AI (stand-alone) did a better job using the less aggressive “standard” model. But the details were all smeared as if rendered in oils with a trowel – or perhaps like a quick run from a low-end DALL-E implementation. Noise artefacts were gone and colours were more or less uniform. So when I downloaded Photo AI they were the first images I tested: the results were disappointing. The images are like a messy painting by Seurat.
DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE ISO
I recently made an inadvertent experiment with my OM-1: I set it to ISO 80,000 (twiddling controls in the sunlight without my spectacles) and took several indoor shots. It has fewer options than the three separate products and (still in beta?) gives unimpressive results when noise levels are high. I think that the market for Photo AI is the smart phone/social media crowd. But it varies, and PureRAW2 has given new life to files I could only take so far previously. To be safe, I sometimes process RAW files through both PureRAW2 and Iridient X-Transformer because sometimes there is just too much of a mess left behind with PureRAW2. I think that the market for Photo AI is the smart phone/social media crowd.Īnd as a point of comparison, I got PureRAW2 when DXO was finally able to handle Fujifilm X-Trans files. I ran Photo AI on a some files, and I just couldn’t see the advantage for my workflow, and figured my best course of action was to uninstall the software.
I wouldn’t be surprised if Photo AI changes those file associations every time there is an update. I could see no method of changing that in the Photo AI menus.
DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE WINDOWS
I don’t recall being asked, and I didn’t feel like I should have to go into Windows and change it back. First thing I noticed after I installed it was my file association for JPEGs shifted to Photo AI.
DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE INSTALL
I was offered an install of Photo AI when I renewed my Topaz support (I let it expire and was just waiting around for the inevitable “discount”).
DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE SOFTWARE
Photo AI combines the Topaz AI Triad (Gigapixel, Sharpen, and DeNoise), so the software gives you several variables for which you don’t have the same level of control that you do when using them individually. DeNoise AI can work for you, but I don’t trust it enough to just let it loose on automatic. Face melt on distant humans, and leaves turned into globs are also not uncommon. Things like communications towers, open stairway structures, strong rectangular architectural details (several stories of windows), and close parallel lines can all end up distorted. DeNoise has a habit of doing strange stuff with straight lines. While I’ve had some great results from DeNoise AI, I’ve also had some dreadful results. Remember DeepPRIME is applied as part of DxO’s superior demosaicing. It is also sharper with more vibrant colors.
DXO PURERAW VS TOPAZ DENOISE FULL
Although it is zoomed out the superior retention of fine detail in DxO’s version on the right is very obvious even in this screen grab when you view it at full resolution. Here is his side by side comparison between the Topaz version and the PureRaw version zoomed out. To me, loss of fine detail in pursuit of low noise is unacceptable… And remember he was comparing the two images at 400%. I looked very carefully at his comparison on my 28inch 4K monitor and there was significantly less fine detail in the Topaz version. It is similar to a magician’s redirection so you only focus on what he wants you to see. In his so called comparison with Pureraw’s version of DeepPRIME, it is true that Topaz appears to have removed more noise, but it also removed more fine detail which he failed to mention. It may well be superior in some circumstances, but the guy presenting the video is schilling for the company since he makes a profit on the sale of Topaz products, so whatever he says or shows has to be taken with a grain of salt.
0 kommentar(er)
