I think it started out the other way round. The old Gigapixel AI died, but was then relaunched, based on Photo AI. But Topaz seems to want to take it further, and has recently added new features not in Photo AI. It’s also selling it as a professional subscription service, running in the cloud.
Yes, Photo AI does allow upscaling, but Gigapixel adds some extra capabilities. Personally, I find the results look the same.
There's no requirement to feed Photo AI RAW files. Feed it your processed TIFFs instead if they need the kind of treatment it offers.
Photo AI's adjustments for RAW files are inadequate for all but the simplest uses, and Autopilot is never reliable for anything, despite the stated goal being 'automatic' optimization of photos.
That's the wrong conclusion. Many Photo AI users are very demanding. But they use it for what it can do well: reducing noise and improving sharpness and - most of all, IMO - face recovery in RGB files that have already been edited, but still can use some polishing. (Also the object removal feature, but that can usually be done better with the Adobe products.)
I think you'll have a long wait if you want Photo AI to substitute for a full-featured RAW converter/editor.
Awesome work in showing this. ThanksI did a simple test to find out whether I'd stay with Topaz Sharpen AI $or renew my Topaz Photo AI licence (and upgrade from v3.2.2 to v3.3.3), because there's one thing that's been bothering me: from Lr, Photo AI opens the RAW file (i.e. without any post-processing) whereas Sharpen AI creates a TIFF file before editing. So I was wondering how Photo AI would handle an underexposed subject in a backlit photo?
By chance I had the perfect photo, including moving blur, for this test :
RAW file imported in Lr
In Lr, I can simply post-treat that way:
After a simple post-treatment in Lr
Then with Sharpen AI I get this result, which I found really acceptable :
[ATTACH alt="Sharpening with Topaz Sharpen AI in "Motion Blur - Very Noisy" mode"]3532158[/ATTACH]
Sharpening with Topaz Sharpen AI in "Motion Blur - Very Noisy" mode
A little zoom shows clearly the improvements in terms of sharpening while managing the noise :
Sharpening comparison with Topaz Sharpen AI
Now if I use Autopilot in Topas Photo AI, here is what I get !
From Lr to Topaz Photo AI with AutoPilot and Lightning on Subject only
So, clearly this is a complete another story ! Not only does Topaz Photo AI fail to manage lightning correctly, it also adds white aberrations around the edges, a sign of poor lighting management, which is clearly visible when the lighting is turned up to maximum intensity.
From Lr to Topaz Photo AI with AutoPilot
Conclusion : as far as I'm concerned, this version of Topaz Photo AI is aimed at the general public, who aren't very demanding. So before giving any more $$ to TopazLabs, I'm going to wait for a more advanced version that really lets you get convincing results simply, while leaving you the freedom to adjust the settings more finely.
So, as you can see, it's not worth it for me at the moment, even though (and I still don't understand why, as it worked without a hitch before) my version of Topaz Sharpen AI has been having problems with flickering on the screen since the last update to 4.1.0
Topaz is not as useful to me as previously was because PL8 is getting so good with XD2s, making Denoise redundant, and I am now getting "generally sharp enough" images that I do not really need Sharpen. And while Enhance do enhance the resolution, I do not have a lot of images that need it. I am considering not to renew my license next year.
Yes, fully agreed!
I have worked with Photo AI from the beginning and the present version is marvelous.
It's much quicker, easier and produces better results to just use PhotoLab. And the whole process from raw to final JPEG is non-destructive, so you can re-visit any image and just change any step(s) in the edit process without having to repeat any other steps. No intermediate TIFFs/DNGs are needed.
While true I get better results processing my RAWs using DXO Photo Lab than Topaz. If I believe the DXO PL results need further refinement, then I can save the DXO processed files as TIFFs and process further in Photo AI.
My process is the opposite of yours but if it works for you, I won't suggest you change. Part of the difference I believe, based on reviews, is DXO Photo Lab is a better RAW processor that Affinity.
--
What do you mean by "Enhance" Annie? I thought that's the name for Adobe 2x enlargements: Enhance Details.
Yup.
I have DxO Photolab 8 and it's a good app but I do not find it quicker or easier or producing better results than Photo AI which is also non destructive. I cannot imagine outputting a final jpg for publishing on the web straight from Photolab 8 and would like to see your results where you have done that. How about a link?
I think you are missing a chance to improve your portfolio of results. But I will withhold Judgement until I have checked yours out. I invite you to use the link in my signature to see if we are in the same ballpark.
Why is that hard to imagine? People do it frequently, and other people do it frequently from other similar apps.
Are you asking for a link to a photo published directly from PhotoLab? Many such photos have been posted in this forum for years.
Why couldn't these photos be published on the web. I would say they are more than good enough.
In the first place, I asked a specific person to put up or shut up. Not directed at you at all.
Then what was the purpose of this comment from you?
