Anyone Else Tried Topaz Photo AI?

russellsnr

russellsnr

Messages
2,702
Name
Russell
Edit My Images
Yes
Hi, Only just found out about this new offering from Topaz Labs. It is still in the early stages but if you own Topaz Gigapixel AI, Sharpen AI and Denoise AI you can download it for free.
community.topazlabs.com

Releases

All Photo AI release notes will be posted in this section of the forum.
community.topazlabs.com community.topazlabs.com
Only downloaded it this morning and first impression is it looks quite good.
Russ.
 
Thanks for the heads up. This is the first I have heard of it. I do use Noise AI and Sharpen AI.
Be interested to see what people think. TBH, I am not a fan of total automation of the post-processing steps, but let's see what people think.
 
I expect these features will become mainstream within a few years.
 
wornish said:
Thanks for the heads up. This is the first I have heard of it. I do use Noise AI and Sharpen AI.
Be interested to see what people think. TBH, I am not a fan of total automation of the post-processing steps, but let's see what people think.
Click to expand...
' not a fan of total automation ' It allows manual PP if not happy with auto results.
 
I own the other Topaz products, but seldom use them. I've downloaded this as well...

I'll be curious as to how the professional community comes to accept AI... in a way, it's not much different from choosing different picture profiles/styles and recording jpegs. But currently there are organizations/competitions that prohibit/discourage the use of AI software; I guess because it can generate details that did not actually exist/were not recorded.
 
sk66 said:
I own the other Topaz products, but seldom use them. I've downloaded this as well...

I'll be curious as to how the professional community comes to accept AI... in a way, it's not much different from choosing different picture profiles/styles and recording jpegs. But currently there are organizations/competitions that prohibit/discourage the use of AI software; I guess because it can generate details that did not actually exist/were not recorded.
Click to expand...
Isn't it though a case of 'inserting' detail that came from a 'library' of similar details and that was not actually a part of the image at all?
Picture profiles actually use the detail captured, just manipulating it to mono/contrast tweak etc, not using other detail from a 'library'.
 
If I understand this correctly this combines the three apps into one, which is amazing news. I often have to scratch my head and choose between Sharpen and Denoise as usually one is better than other, and sometimes you really want both because individually they lack functionality of the other. I tend to not use Gigapixel that much but again, a combination would be much more powerful.

Not all my apps are up to date so they won't let me in. I think I'm OK for now; can manage till Black Friday.

sk66 said:
I'll be curious as to how the professional community comes to accept AI... in a way, it's not much different from choosing different picture profiles/styles and recording jpegs. But currently there are organizations/competitions that prohibit/discourage the use of AI software; I guess because it can generate details that did not actually exist/were not recorded.
Click to expand...
If you have to go that far that you have obvious AI generated details then maybe that file is just not very good. Personally, it is just great when I need to raise exposure in post beyond +1 and some noise creeps in, or there is say 1% defocus or ominidirectional minor shake. At 50MP it is pretty damn impossible to avoid these if you try to take frame handheld without cable release.
 
gramps said:
Isn't it though a case of 'inserting' detail that came from a 'library' of similar details and that was not actually a part of the image at all?
Picture profiles actually use the detail captured, just manipulating it to mono/contrast tweak etc, not using other detail from a 'library'.
Click to expand...
Basically, yes.
 
LongLensPhotography said:
If you have to go that far that you have obvious AI generated details then maybe that file is just not very good.
Click to expand...
Hopefully it isn't "obvious"... that would be about useless; and that's not really the point/issue.

Let's take it a little farther; we have wildlife photographer of the year who used a remote trail camera to capture the image using automatic settings... other than setting it up there is/was no user input as to the results. And now that image *is then processed by AI w/o user intervention... which could include any number of AI/"neural filter" type adjustments.

(*I'm not saying the image was edited using AI, just that it could have been)
 
sk66 said:
Hopefully it isn't "obvious"... that would be about useless; and that's not really the point/issue.
Click to expand...
Not necessarily. You could land with less than perfect file that then becomes legible in some way, or say make it acceptably printable up to certain size even if looks s*** on screen at 100%. In particular forensics should be pretty interested in that.
Smartphone cam users usually settle for a lot less.

sk66 said:
Let's take it a little farther; we have wildlife photographer of the year who used a remote trail camera to capture the image using automatic settings... other than setting it up there is/was no user input as to the results. And now that image *is then processed by AI w/o user intervention... which could include any number of AI/"neural filter" type adjustments.
Click to expand...
I'm not into competitions - that sounds like a whole different skill of setting trap cameras in right places and perhaps should be separate category. My measure of success is customer paying the bill. If there was some key wedding moment that say got blurry due to shake and high ISO noise and AI fixed 95% with imperfections I will take it any day over nothing. I basically call it a cheap insurance policy when you need to save your ass.

My typical use is some higher noise or 1-2% shake or focus blur fix.
 
Thanks for the heads up, Russell, I've just downloaded it and will check it out over the next few days (y)
 
I saw this mentioned (somewhere?) a few days back.

I have the trinity of Topaz individual applications and my CPU & GPU are ok.......but thought I read that this new "Photo AI" is especially demanding on hardware!

I might have to try it and see :thinking:
 
Thanks for the heads up - I will have a look at this.
I mainly use deepprime with PL4 for all Nikon 1 ( 1 inch ) as well as aps-c and some m43.
There was a comparison of Topaz and Deepprime somewhere I came across on another forum but I couldn't see to much of a difference.
AI NR is not something I like in principle but it does seem pretty essential for small sensor cameras.
 
piper said:
AI NR is not something I like in principle but it does seem pretty essential for small sensor cameras.
Click to expand...
Personally I don't think so.
'Small' sensor cameras have been producing excellent images for years and in fact, with the recent introduction of AI, many images have taken on an unnatural appearance, (true mainly through over-use). Personally I find that PL5 with its Deep Prime is excellent.
 
russellsnr said:
Hi, Only just found out about this new offering from Topaz Labs. It is still in the early stages but if you own Topaz Gigapixel AI, Sharpen AI and Denoise AI you can download it for free.
community.topazlabs.com

Releases

All Photo AI release notes will be posted in this section of the forum.
community.topazlabs.com community.topazlabs.com
Only downloaded it this morning and first impression is it looks quite good.
Russ.
Click to expand...
I have downloaded and tried this. I have become happy with selecting Topaz Denoise AI or Sharpen AI or even occasionally both so not sure I needed Photo AI to make these decisions. The first few images I processed it identified a person (it was a portrait) and that all these 3 images were in focus and low noise so did not tell me anything that I did not know. When I processed one image and compared with a previous edit without Photos AI but using Denoise and or Sharpen AI as I judged appropriate, I could not see any difference. Photo AI runs slow but my PC is due an upgrade. I cannot afford the time to process each image in Photo AI and not to compare so hope to see other helpful comments.

Dave
 
gramps said:
Isn't it though a case of 'inserting' detail that came from a 'library' of similar details and that was not actually a part of the image at all?
Picture profiles actually use the detail captured, just manipulating it to mono/contrast tweak etc, not using other detail from a 'library'.
Click to expand...
That is not what TOPAZ say. They say they use the library of images to recognise the problems and then apply Topaz Denoise AI, Topaz Sharpen AI, Topaz Gigapixel AI as required. They do imply that it is just a means of applying these more easily but doing the same and accept that in some cases an photo editor may prefer to apply these functions themselves. It seemed that if you had a poorly focussed noisy image which also needs enlarging then Topaz Photo AI will be ideal but I do not have such images as I would have deleted them if they were that bad.

Dave
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top