choosing between topaz denoise and dxo optics elite

Started 10 months ago | Discussions thread
myotisone Senior Member • Posts: 1,189
Re: choosing between topaz denoise and dxo optics elite

SMC Natural History wrote:

Can't decide! I know topaz denoise allows for the addition of detail lost while using the algorithm. DxO I'm assuming must have something similar as a raw converter/editor. What are your favorite pros/cons of each program?

The big advantage of DXO is that can consistently give very good results with very little effort.  I never got on with Topaz denoise, but even though the other programs I use have some form of automatically building noise profiles (Noiseware and Neat Image) they still need work on every image to bring out the best results.

I only use DXO for noise reduction, saving the files form DXO as DNGs to edit in Capture One.

Which makes for a complicated decision as I don't find DXO is as good at demosaicing as Capture one gives more detail (e.g. in bird feathers), and overall I just prefer the quality and workflow of C1 to DXO

But with Nikon 1 files at 2500 and 3200, DXO gives less noisy and sharper results than Capture one, even though you can see the C1 files have more detail.

You can see this in the shapes  of patterns on feathers, where C1 retains the distinct shapes of the patterns, but with blurry/noisy edges, while DXO smooths out these shapes, but gives them sharp edges.  You only see this at high magnifications.

Using C1 to demosiac and then using its native noise reduction tools, or Noiseware or Neat Image, I "think" gives an overall more pleasing result than DXO, but with a lot more effort.

Take this with a pinch of salt, as I am still experimenting, but if I was processing large numbers of photographs I would use DXO. If I was producing small numbers of photographs where I could afford to spend more time on each image, I would go the Neat image/Noiseware route, or indeed Topaz Denoise, for although, I couldn't get on with it. lots of people like it.

My workflow at the moment is that FF and cropped sensor files are fully processed in C1,  and if need be, and only occasionally, get some additional noise reduction from Noiseware or NeatImage.  Nikon 1 files get put through DXO prime, before being loaded as DNGs into C1 for processing (actually, I run DXO from Capture One, so everything starts off in C1).   But I am currently undecided on whether this DXO stage is worth it, even though the DXO files are definitely a bit sharper and less noisy than I can get with C1.

You will gather, I have not found deciding on how to deal with noise to be easy !

I don't think you can go wrong with DXO, and it serves as a useful benchmark to compare other options against.



Keyboard shortcuts:
FForum PPrevious NNext WNext unread UUpvote SSubscribe RReply QQuote BBookmark MMy threads
Color scheme? Blue / Yellow