Photo AI 1.0.7 - is it just me, or are the results vastly improved?

Docno wrote:

Digital Nigel wrote:

Docno wrote:

Digital Nigel wrote:

Zeee wrote:

Docno wrote:

Digital Nigel wrote:

logatom wrote:

Hi,

Great output from DxO, but obviously it's not coming from the RAW files you linked to. Would you please share the correct file, if possible?

Sorry for the incorrect link — this is the correct file:

https://www.dropbox.com/s/sm5eqr025xs9bei/RX604368%20Temple%20of%20Saint%20Sava%2C%20Belgrade.ARW?dl=0

This is what I get. I processed the Raw in the standalone and noticed, with default settings, the output was about the same as what you got. Then I tried it using the Photoshop plugin. Interestingly, Photo AI defaulted to 'Strong' noise reduction, which I think is what was causing the result you got. I switched this to standard (light, or whatever the weaker version is), and I got a much better outcome. I then did a simple (auto) contrast/brighten. What do you think?

This is what I got with Photo AI opened from LrC as a plug-in and edited as RAW.

I've compared these two attempts with PL6 and my original PAI stand-alone:

Four-way comparison: Docno's version is soft and lacking in detail, Zeee's version is over-sharpened and full of ugly artefacts (look at the saints' faces). The three Photo AI versions can't even agree on colour.

Even with the help of PS and/or LR, Photo AI still can't produce the same quality as PL6 does alone, quickly and easily. There's less detail and/or more artefacts in all the Photo AI versions.

Except you’ve zoomed in more on my version which invalidates the comparison. I’m not saying you’re wrong, but you can’t compare image detail at different zoom factors

I didn't zoom in more: your upload was up-sized (why?). All four examples are compared full-size as uploaded.

But the result would be the same even if you hadn't up-sized it: there simply is less detail in the Photo AI results. Zeee tried to compensate by sharpening it, but that added ugly artefacts, not detail.

I didn’t upsize. It saved out at 999 pixels wide, the same as your jpeg that I downloaded from here.

You should simply have processed the raw and uploaded the full JPEG image, full-size. No cropping, no re-sizing. I did that with each of the 20mp samples, so why not do the same?

I simply embedded directly from my computer. And yes, upsizing and presenting side by side will reduce apparent detail.

So why did you re-size it?

But it makes no difference: Photo AI is incapable of recovering the full detail from raw files. It doesn't matter what post-processing you do afterwards: if it's gone, it's gone. You can't make up for a really poor raw developer in post-processing.