Now convert your JPEGs to RAW!

petersmart

petersmart

Messages
5,001
Edit My Images
Yes
Last edited:
They've got an AI algorithm that "guesses" whats missing? Yeah right.:oops: :$
 
Cockney said:
They've got an AI algorithm that "guesses" whats missing? Yeah right.:oops: :$
Click to expand...
Which is what Gigapixel does and it is brilliant!
But I'm going to give this new program a try before I say it's no good.
 
Well I've actually just tried it and the difference is very good:

ScreenHunter_1.jpg
The original enlarged from my 1Ds MkII

ScreenHunter_2.jpg

After processing in Topaz with Blur and Noise reduction set to high.

The difference is obvious and that's without any further processing.

So I would say at first glance that it is another triumph for AI and would certainly be a boon for any photographer!
 
Cockney said:
Still not raw.:rolleyes:
Click to expand...

Well I guess it was easier to say RAW than "Can improve JPEGs a lot"!

And since it works so well I for one really don't care.
 
You can open a jpeg in Photoshop as a Raw file and have been able to for years!
 
Frankly I couldn't care less what they call it since it works so well.

I've just put a few through it after putting them through Gigapixel with moderate noise reduction and a 2x upscaling saved as JPEGs then put the resulting JPEGs through this new program then through EasyHDR3 and the results are a vast improvement on the originals - no noise and no artefacts - exactly as Topaz said.

But as usual with Gigapixel, cropping beforehand is a definite necessary if you don't want them to take hours.

Even with my new (S/H) GPU it still takes a while in Gigapixel even though much faster than even using all 12 cores.

So I can definitely see this program being another great seller regardless of the nay sayers.

Who said exactly the same thing about Gigapixel when it first came out.

And were proved totally wrong.
 
With a camera with 2 cards no need to do a convert, one card jpeg other for RAW
 
Tell you what. Convert a jpg with blown highlights, the see if you can recover theM or convert a jpg that's under exposed and try recovering the shadows.

The example you've provided looks like you've just put it through any noise reduction software.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for the heads up Peter, an interesting piece of software, I will be able to improve the shots of my departed parents taken digitally at a time RAW wasn't an option :)
 
It's not raw. It can't put back information that isn't there, it's still a compressed jpeg. I gave up halfway through reading the sponsored article on PetaPixel yesterday, it all seems like smoke and mirrors to me.
 
ecoleman said:
Tell you what. Convert a jpg with blown highlights, the see if you can recover theM or convert a jpg that's under exposed and try recovering the shadows.

The example you've provided looks like you've just put it through any noise reduction software.
Click to expand...

This - it would be interesting to see how it copes with this.
 
A few years ago I went to Duxworth and took some shots there with my 40D at 3200 iso
I shot in RAW.

This is a section of one of those shots converted in Canon's DPP to a JPEG:

1.jpg

This is that same JPEG put through the new Topaz program exactly as it was produced:

3.jpg

There seems to be a slight improvement Byker.

These are both 100% crops.
 
Last edited:
petersmart said:
A few years ago I went to Duxworth and took some shots there with my 40D at 3200 iso
I shot in RAW.

This is a section of one of those shots converted in Canon's DPP to a JPEG:

View attachment 236304

This is that same JPEG put through the new Topaz program exactly as it was produced:

View attachment 236305

There seems to be a slight improvement Byker.

These are both 100% crops.
Click to expand...

Can you do the following:-

a) process that original Canon JPG with a decent noise reduction software and show the results?

and

b) recrop the RAW output image shown above to show the blown white area around the doors at the bottom of the image (on original crop but not on converted crop)

I work in Machine vision (automated image processing), and and genuinely interested in the answers to the above two questions.
 
I'm interested to try out AI Gigapixel and Jpeg to RAW but I'm confused as to how to use it in my workflow from LR.
I shoot in jpeg then sharpen etc. and crop in LR. Where in the workflow could you use this? Can you only use it when enlarging or can it be used to process an already cropped image which will be used at the same size?
 
Last edited:
why not just take raw pictures to start with !!!!
as you can convert them ti j peg
 
I wonder what's next on the list, converting a film photo into a negative? :D
 
Mr Perceptive said:
Can you do the following:-

a) process that original Canon JPG with a decent noise reduction software and show the results?

and

b) recrop the RAW output image shown above to show the blown white area around the doors at the bottom of the image (on original crop but not on converted crop)

I work in Machine vision (automated image processing), and and genuinely interested in the answers to the above two questions.
Click to expand...

This was the image processed in Neat Image V8 - up until now my preferred NR software:

3833ni.jpg

This shows the blown highlights (from the pic you asked for):

3833 blown.jpg

Bear in mind that I was exposing for the plane not the highlights.

Because of the interest in it I have now put the entire RAW file on WeTransfer so anyone who wants can download it and work on it:

https://we.tl/t-I6nP3ccFtC

Good luck and I look forward to the results.
 
drounding said:
I'm interested to try out AI Gigapixel and Jpeg to RAW but I'm confused as to how to use it in my workflow from LR.
I shoot in jpeg then sharpen etc. and crop in LR. Where in the workflow could you use this? Can you only use it when enlarging or can it be used to process an already cropped image which will be used at the same size?
Click to expand...

The program is a standalone program so you would probably have to use it first.
It is computer intensive so you would probably need a good Graphics card but it is free to try so you've nothing to lose by trying it
NOTE: it downloads about 1GB.

Good luck.
 
petersmart said:
This was the image processed in Neat Image V8 - up until now my preferred NR software:

View attachment 236306

This shows the blown highlights (from the pic you asked for):

View attachment 236307

Bear in mind that I was exposing for the plane not the highlights.

Because of the interest in it I have now put the entire RAW file on WeTransfer so anyone who wants can download it and work on it:

https://we.tl/t-I6nP3ccFtC

Good luck and I look forward to the results.
Click to expand...

Thanks

I realise that you were exposing for the plane, I just wanted to see what was done with the highlights, it certainly has made the doors look better, but as I suspected once blown, it stays blown (whereas there may have been recoverable detail in the original RAW), I suspect the same applies to crushed blacks as well. That said it does a pretty good job, but like all interpretative software has limitations.

And its also cleaned up the JPG more than the NR software has.

There is some clever stuff out being developed in software at the moment, I think on sensor digital image stabilisation software is possibly the most interesting - this is in very early days, but this Topaz software (esp Gigapixel) has certainly sparked some interest.
 
Last edited:
Well I've only just started playing with it and just happened to have the Duxworth photos to hand.
And I will certainly be trying it with better JPEGs to see what kind of results I can get.
But it does seem that more and more programs using AI are being developed and since this is really early days I think the future looks quite exciting.
And I do like the fact that it can clear noise up so well, whereas with Neat Image I have to create profiles for each camera and each ISO.
And with Gigapixel working so well and being improved all the time I think the same will apply to this one.
 
I wonder what the ASA say about them using the word Raw? Technically it's not raw, it cant be because it's not the raw data produced by the camera and extrapolating the original however good just isn't the same. Your not getting the scene refered WB data because it just doesn't haveit. It's their best guess at what it thinks it should be.
From what I'm hearing it's actually producing more of a Tiff. Which photoshop can do from a jpeg anyway.
 
Semantics of what this is called aside, I find it very interesting and I think most people on here and generally vastly underestimate the capability of AI these days. It is a subject that makes some very interesting reading in a more general sense.
 
I tried it and it just made the image smaller.

Couldn't see any significant settings to avoid this, am I missing something?
 
Craigus said:
Semantics of what this is called aside, I find it very interesting and I think most people on here and generally vastly underestimate the capability of AI these days. It is a subject that makes some very interesting reading in a more general sense.
Click to expand...
It's not semantics, it's total misrepresentation.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top