![]() I hate the way Photoshop does masks, it’s horrible. At least I’m using masks now, even if it’s not very good, or very efficient lol. I’ve tried the quick selection tool, but personally find it horrible to use. I’ve been sometimes using Topaz at the end of my workflow, and I’m now learning about masks, so sometimes I’m painting out the effects of Topaz on the bird where I feel that it’s way over sharpened the birds feather detail. I guess if you have a newer camera with much better high ISO performance than my 60D, ymmv.ĭo that, it is the only way to fine tune for your work flow. I have found DXO and Topaz to work well together and compliment each other very well. I do a minimal amount of sharpening in Lightroom too (+20). Interesting on the halos - I have noticed some halos on my images, and I do use the lens correction enable profile corrections option in Lightroom. I would make a decision which program to use for noise reduction on a given file, not both. If I used noise reduction in DXO PureRAW I would not use Topaz Denoise. It is generally used to get the best RAW file (DNG here) before final edits in a photo editor like PS or Affinity Photo. ![]() If you use optical corrections, noise reduction or sharpening in DXO PureRAW, best to avoid adding more in the photo editor, or you will get ugly halos from over sharpening and too much noise reduction. Unfortunately the full version of DxO4 with their AI denoise is 160€, which is too much to buy that one too just for testing.It does a very good job of RAW conversion to DNG, optical corrections, noise reduction and sharpening. This is, however, all it does unlike DxO and you always need to process Denoise DNG files with something else and Topaz will mess up colours and exposure which need to be re-adjusted. I have posted few ISO 25600 samples on Topaz thread and the bottom line is that when everything else in m4/3 RAW image is spot on and the only problem is ISO noise, Topaz will provide amazing results especially on Low Light mode when settings are fine-tuned manually. I have been using Topaz (latest version 2.3.2) exactly the other way around: first denoise and sharpen camera RAW (panny RW2, Canon CR2 and even DNG from my Samsung mobile) with Denoise AI, save results as DNG and then do the rest of processing with Darktable which seems to be only editing SW I have that can actually work perfectly with Topaz DNG files (which end up being enormous aka 23MB -> 128MB and are not even recognized as RAW by Darktable). If you don’t shoot RAW, then Topaz is still the better noise reduction program. We sometimes introduce noise during post processing, and Topaz is the best tool for removing that. I don’t think DxO DeepPRIME noise reduction makes Topaz DeNoise AI redundant. DxO has to use its regular HQ noise reduction on JPEGs and TIFs and Topaz is better than DxO HQ. ![]() " However, DxO’s DeepPrime noise reduction only works on RAW files. ![]() But the last time I tested it, Topaz was better… " As noise removal is best done during RAW conversion, it should be advantage DxO. DxO is a RAW converter but Topaz is a post processing tool. I'm sort of lost with this test setup: " Technically, this is not a fair test.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Details
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |