Thus, denoising from RAW is much more efficient than denoising from TIFF in Topaz. The TIFF output was further corrected in DxO PL 6 the same as crop 2 in the above post)īottom: processed from RAW in Topaz v 3.7.0 Low Light (default settings). Top: processed from RAW in DxO PL 6 and denoised with DeepPRIME XD (i.e. ILCE-1 E 35-150mm F2.0-F2.8 A058 lens 150mm f/2.8 1/100s 12800 ISO 0.0 EVġst crop (from the top): denoised using DxO DeepPRIME 2nd crop: denoised using DxO DeepPRIME XDģrd crop: denoising turned off in DxO PL 6, the output TIFF file was run through Topaz v 3.7.0 Low Light (default settings) 4th crop: denoising turned off in DxO PL 6, the output TIFF file was run through Topaz v 3.7.0 Severe Noise (default settings) The differences are as follows:ġst crop (from the top): denoised using DxO DeepPRIMEĢnd crop: denoised using DxO DeepPRIME XDģrd crop: denoising turned off in DxO PL 6, the output TIFF file was run through Topaz v 3.7.0 Low Light (default settings)Ĥth crop: denoising turned off in DxO PL 6, the output TIFF file was run through Topaz v 3.7.0 Severe Noise (default settings). The next two uploads are 2MP crops from the 50MP image.Īll corrections were done in DxO Photolab 6. PureRaw’s cycle does not match PL and most others that upgrade every October. If I get a DXO product 6 months into annual upgrade cycle I only get 6 months of support for that version. If I get Topaz I get for a year from date of purchase. DXO provides free updates until the next version is released. The price you pay includes free updates for a year. Topaz isn’t giving you anything more than anyone else. Topaz Labs is the exact opposite with their customers and provides frequent free upgrades to their software. I see the latest update to NoNoise 2022 claims to give improved color handling of non-raw filesĪnd the non-raw warning does not come up any more.ĭxO is the most expensive to maintain over time. The kicker is that NoNoise specifically says results will be better when working on it as a RAW. It's a little slow but it processes each adjustment separately by the looks of it. So far I like what I'm seeing with Photo AI. I've got PureRaw as well which I do like. I'm going to work with Photo AI, use the individual apps as needed. We all see it differently and there is no right or wrong. However, this may just be differences in how we like our images to look rather than either being right or wrong. This could be just the sharpening setting rather than the noise processing, but I suspect it is both. But: in the original comparison I find the DXO shot to be much more natural and realistic-the fur is more as I see squirrels with my own eyes And the same is true in even the smallest cardinal shot-to my eyes, the white in the feathers, as with the fur of the Topaz squirrel, stands out with too much sharpness and hard edges, not as the animals appear in nature. I say this with respect, because both of you have post-processing skills that significantly exceed my own. Some of the differences in which people think is best may just come down to taste and aesthetic preferences.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |