Topaz

I’m really impressed with the Topaz suite of tools. I posted this in the Helicopters in Flight thread. The first is unsharpened and the second run through Sharpen AI.

Photo from Phoenixuk's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1114954)

Photo from Phoenixuk's gallery.
Image hosted by forum (1113796)

Phoenixuk wrote in post #19281483
I’m really impressed with the Topaz suite of tools. I posted this in the Helicopters in Flight thread. The first is unsharpened and the second run through Sharpen AI.

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

It does an amazing job.

Phoenixuk wrote in post #19281483
I’m really impressed with the Topaz suite of tools. I posted this in the Helicopters in Flight thread. The first is unsharpened and the second run through Sharpen AI.

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

Thanks for the example! I appreciate it.

Phoenixuk wrote in post #19281483
I’m really impressed with the Topaz suite of tools. I posted this in the Helicopters in Flight thread. The first is unsharpened and the second run through Sharpen AI.

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

Gallery photo (hosted):
posted by Phoenixuk originally in forum: Transportation

That's impressive.

I have used both the DxO denoise product and the Topaz. My only dislike of the DxO was the format of the saved file ... but I didn't spend much time playing with it. Regarding Topaz AI DeNoise (and AI Sharpen), both are very impressive and I often use them in my PS workflow.

My question to the group: HOW LONG DOES IT TAKE TO PROCESS IN TOPAZ?

I use a 5 year old PC with 32gb ram and i7 processor and run up to date Windows 10. My Raw images are about 23mb in size. It takes a while, maybe 2 minutes for denoise to process back to PS. For Topaz Sharpen, it takes several minutes. I am not alone as a buddy of mine has even slower rates. On the other hand, I have a friend using a new top of the line Mac and he claims almost instant processig.

I have a 5 yr old Alienware laptop with a Core i7 and 32GB of ram with a couple of NVME SSDs and it takes maybe 30 seconds +/- for either tool...

Moonshiner wrote in post #19289703
I have a 5 yr old Alienware laptop with a Core i7 and 32GB of ram with a couple of NVME SSDs and it takes maybe 30 seconds +/- for either tool...

Thanks, I'm at about 30 sec for denoise, but much slower for sharpen.

Thanks for this info.

I really like the Sharpen AI, however, Denoise is not something I use much anymore. I have had some problems with colour leaching and bleeding. Here's an example: the left image is the original colour. You can see where it's bled into the surrounding eye area.

I've found Affinity does as good denoising as Topaz, IMO.

greyswan wrote in post #19311680
I really like the Sharpen AI, however, Denoise is not something I use much anymore. I have had some problems with colour leaching and bleeding. Here's an example: the left image is the original colour. You can see where it's bled into the surrounding eye area.

I've found Affinity does as good denoising as Topaz, IMO.

I've found Denoise can put stray artifacts in odd places which is random & highly annoying and I've not worked out how to overcome it.
Other than that I've found it does an excellent job, but would like to be free of the unpredictable

Other annoying feature (if you can call it such) is the plethora of emails advertising their specials!

greyswan wrote in post #19311680
I really like the Sharpen AI, however, Denoise is not something I use much anymore. I have had some problems with colour leaching and bleeding. Here's an example: the left image is the original colour. You can see where it's bled into the surrounding eye area.

I've found Affinity does as good denoising as Topaz, IMO.

My opinion they all have to be used selectively ... as in running the plugin, then applying a black layer mask to hide the effect.
Than selectively paint in where you want the effect to be applied.

Notice the halo on your Sharpen AI image.

Yes indeed, I'm always looking out for halos and other artifacts. The Topaz denoise version was not used in the final iteration.
This wasn't even an extreme ISO - 1600, nor were the settings high. So I'm somewhat disillusioned with Topaz Denoise.

My current impressions. I once used Sharpen AI and it does a very good job with those files slightly OOF from motion blur, etc. I'm not cheap but decided not to renew. As a hobby shooter these days my goal is to start with an in focus shot. I may use it again some day.

For the average file DeNoise does a great job of sharpening so I'm just using that. FYI. If DeNoise is messing around with your colour open preferences and disable Apply RAW color correction. Also if sending as a TIFF from LrC enable "edit a copy with LR adjustments".

Topaz recently came out with a new process so it will open as a DNG and you can still access Adobe and Camera colour profiles when back in LrC. It's a little cumbersome but would be well worth it to me for both the profiles and removing noise at the RAW Level. Only problem is it does not work for Canon files yet. Back in LrC profiles revert to Color and there is no access to Adobe and Canon profiles. I guess Topaz is working on it. It does works for Sony files and I don't know about others.

So I'm back to the old right click and edit in. The extra steps aren't worth the time - for me.

https://www.topazlabs.​com/denoise-ai#tutorial-videos-4

I picked up PureRaw. It under exposes by about ⅓ to ½ stop and messes around with colour. I can live with the under exposure but not the colour shift. It should have an option to disable it's colour interpretation like Topaz does. I need it for NR, not colour. It's a very good product and I got it for 50%. It will come in handy for those very high ISO and problematic files.

I bought Sharpen AI a few months ago. I wasn't convinced it was doing a better job than Lightroom, but I wanted to find out. There are so many positive testimonials by folks I respect.

I did the trial initially, but I found one month isn't long enough to properly evaluate the program.

It's been a while, and I STILL don't know the answer. Most of my slightly blurry pics are high ISO. Sharpen AI doesn't to a good job on those. Too many artifacts. So IMO it needs to be tested on low ISO pics that have a bit of blur. With those, many parts of the photo (like background) get sharpened that shouldn't get sharpened. To fix that, one has to do selective sharpening. That is time-consuming! Worth it, though, for some pics.

Still a bit skeptical and still testing...