a lot of hype around Topaz AI products?

[Cliff]

I like many others downloaded the trial of Topaz denoise to give it a whirl and see what all the hype is about - lets be fair a software package that claims to rid images of noise is going to get a fair bit of attention. I did some trials with a few underexposed and low light images and well, tbh, I found the results a bit mixed and a bit MEH, sure it does reduce the luminance and colour noise but despite the claims it did affect the image quality quite significantly introducing smearing , artefacts , well, just like any other noise reduction really, so is it worth spending a £100 or so? my findings indicate it works fine on images that only have low levels of noise anyway, and this can be removed easily in traditional post processing techniques.
so I thought I would post an example of my own techniques for noise removal using photoshop, bear in mind this was a 5 minute exercise to quickly demonstrate my point - have a look at the images below - is it worth a discussion on the merits of noise reduction software ?
the images are self explanatory - the first is the original at ISO 12800 and is a screenshot of Lightroom the second is the edited image and the third a big crop -

 

[ianbarton]

I agree that there are some limitations and some artifacts sometimes, but in general I think it does a good job and since I only paid around $50 USD (on sale plus coupon) so it was worth it in my opinion.

 

[Cliff]

I agree that there are some limitations and some artifacts sometimes, but in general I think it does a good job and since I only paid around $50 USD (on sale plus coupon) so it was worth it in my opinion.

thanks for the input Ian, my intent is not to diss the product or anyones preferences, and workflow etc, but to get an understanding of approaches, and why some folk use noise reduction software, is it ease of use, quick results, are people happy with the results and other options of processing, not forgetting getting exposures set as well as one can in demanding conditions etc - look forward to others thoughts

 

[ianbarton]

thanks for the input Ian, my intent is not to diss the product or anyones preferences, and workflow etc, but to get an understanding of approaches, and why some folk use noise reduction software, is it ease of use, quick results, are people happy with the results and other options of processing, not forgetting getting exposures set as well as one can in demanding conditions etc - look forward to others thoughts

No diss felt on my end

 

[Jane]

I use Topaz DeNoise and find it to work really well. I use it as a plug-in to LR. Typically, DeNoise AI does the trick but I have had a couple of occasions to use the option AI clear. On a clean image, the default settings are sufficient. Otherwise, I check to see what auto will do. Then, I back off the sharpening. The software can create unwanted artifacts so always check over the entire image afterwards. I am delighted they added the mask feature.

 

[GregS]

A little unrelated, but connected. I had really good results with their Gigapixel product to help me enlarge an image captured with my old m 4/3rds system (no flames, I've since grown up...) to 3' x 5' acrylic print.

 

[dragonsdreams]

A1 Denoise is part of my workflow in post now for all my macro work and most of my bird photography. It's an excellent piece of software and used with LR. My settings are usually 20% more than the suggested on auto for sharpening and denoise.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I absolutely love Denoise, it's been a godsend for the higher ISO shots I sometimes have to take, shots that I would never even have bothered with in the past. Even on low ISO shots it adds clarity on RAW files that I can't achieve in PS. I trialled the Sharpen AI as well, but, in the words of Sheryl Crow, that don't impress me much. I persoanlly think Denoise is essential for anyone with the RIV

 

[Clix Pix]

I do my editing in DXO PhotoLab 3 and am pretty happy with their excellent denoise functionality. I also use Topaz Sharpen AI for final sharpening when I feel an image needs just a bit more, and of course that software also does some denoiseing (is that a word?!) as well. Whenever I shoot under less than optimal lighting conditions I tend to feel that an image will benefit from some application of denoise software, but it's not always necessary and sometimes it "smooths out" an image a little too much, removing some of the detail, which can be a problem depending upon the type of subject and image.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I do my editing in DXO PhotoLab 3 and am pretty happy with their excellent denoise functionality. I also use Topaz Sharpen AI for final sharpening when I feel an image needs just a bit more, and of course that software also does some denoiseing (is that a word?!) as well. Whenever I shoot under less than optimal lighting conditions I tend to feel that an image will benefit from some application of denoise software, but it's not always necessary and sometimes it "smooths out" an image a little too much, removing some of the detail, which can be a problem depending upon the type of subject and image.

The smoothing out is something I am very wary of myself, especially for feathered subjects, it can really hurt the fine details.

 

[AHPZuazua]

I'm unfamiliar with Noise software. If you underexpose images, is that the same as shooting it in max or near max ISO of a Sensor.
To the OP that said he did test shits and underexposed his images. Did you shoot at a higher or highest ISO for your tests.
How long doe it take for the AI to do its stuff vs your method.
Can one use Topaz as a starting point before processing on your own.

 

[dragonsdreams]

I'm unfamiliar with Noise software. If you underexpose images, is that the same as shooting it in max or near max ISO of a Sensor.
To the OP that said he did test shits and underexposed his images. Did you shoot at a higher or highest ISO for your tests.
How long doe it take for the AI to do its stuff vs your method.
Can one use Topaz as a starting point before processing on your own.

Not sure about the underexposure question but I sometimes do a -1 if I've got white subjects e.g. seabirds and bright sunlight.
My workflow is using the camera JPEG straight out of camera importing into LR, cropping to suit, usual POST ( reduce highlighting, boost shadows etc) working down the LR menu until I get to sharpening. I stop there and don't use LR for sharpening but branch to Denoise for noise reduction/ sharpening. Then reimport to LR and export as full images and secondly a reduced FB watermarked image.
Preview in Denoise is quick about 15 seconds, final Denoise rendering takes about 1 minute. But remember I'd already had usually cropped the image to a much small size. My PC is a few years old: i7 but 64gb of RAM, average graphics card and SSDs for the processing software and Windows 10.

 

[AHPZuazua]

That's understandable. I unfortunately have files that where not compatability raw files from Leica, Fuji and Hasselblad. Editing a jpg file that's already sharpened and boosted in highlights and contrast wasn't ideally a good starting point for me.
Maybe now with the Sony that I have, I'll reconsider it

 

[Pauline van der Spuy]

I have found Topaz Denoise AI to be one of the better noise reduction programmes. I accept the peogramme’s denoise recommendations but remove their suggested sharpening and I get very good results.

 

[Cliff]

I absolutely love Denoise, it's been a godsend for the higher ISO shots I sometimes have to take, shots that I would never even have bothered with in the past. Even on low ISO shots it adds clarity on RAW files that I can't achieve in PS. I trialled the Sharpen AI as well, but, in the words of Sheryl Crow, that don't impress me much. I persoanlly think Denoise is essential for anyone with the RIV

That’s interesting that You find it essential with A7R4 , at what sort of ISO’s do you start using it, i Only have the A7iii and the images coming out of that are pretty clean to 6400

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

That’s interesting that You find it essential with A7R4 , at what sort of ISO’s do you start using it, i Only have the A7iii and the images coming out of that are pretty clean to 6400

I use it on most images, regardless, but the amount of denoise used is tiny, if at all, it's more for the sharpening at low ISO, which is very good, and much better at it than I am in PS. All RAW need some sharpening, and so I find it very effective. I would say the denoise side starts getting used properly from 500 up, but there is a lot of personal preference in play too. I do like a smooth background.

 

[David dubow]

Adding to the positive comments for Topaz. I’m shouting w an a7iii and Tamron lenses. Mostly landscape and social media posting. Working off a Lenovo laptop wo dedicated graphics card. I use it from LR as a plug-in. I am very pleased with it. I do adjust the sliders as it has a tendency to over sharpen. I’m looking forward to learning low to use it better .

 

[LTS]

thanks for the input Ian, my intent is not to diss the product or anyones preferences, and workflow etc, but to get an understanding of approaches, and why some folk use noise reduction software, is it ease of use, quick results, are people happy with the results and other options of processing, not forgetting getting exposures set as well as one can in demanding conditions etc - look forward to others thoughts

When I used the trial it certainly was an ease of use thing, but my outputs were similar to others. It was great on some and unhelpful on others. It didn't impress me enough to pull the trigger. If I did it would be on DeNoise first. Sharpen was okay, but DeNoise definitely was better... overall.

A little unrelated, but connected. I had really good results with their Gigapixel product to help me enlarge an image captured with my old m 4/3rds system (no flames, I've since grown up...) to 3' x 5' acrylic print.

This is good to know. I should see about that product. I have some older photos from an older camera that simply cannot be blown up all that well. I'm sure it can't work miracles but even a slight bump in the size that could be worth it.

I also wonder if the impact the software makes is dependent upon the camera used. Does the A7iv get more benefit than an A7iii for some reason?

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I also wonder if the impact the software makes is dependent upon the camera used. Does the A7iv get more benefit than an A7iii for some reason?

It probably does a little, just because of the resolution, but I've also used Topaz on some older, already processed jpeg images, and it's added a remarkable level of clarity to them.

 

[LTS]

It probably does a little, just because of the resolution, but I've also used Topaz on some older, already processed jpeg images, and it's added a remarkable level of clarity to them.

Good to know. I might mess around with it more in the future. I suppose I need the time to take more photos first. No sense in having the ability to denoise a photo that does not yet exist!

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

Good to know. I might mess around with it more in the future. I suppose I need the time to take more photos first. No sense in having the ability to denoise a photo that does not yet exist!

Haha, very true

 

[Demasoni]

Anyone use topaz denoise with capture one?

 

[celin]

I use Topaz a lot for denoise and it works really well. It depends on the image. It doesn’t work for every single one but for most. I got it for a good price so I like it

 

[RussAdams]

I like the Topaz suite a lot. I use Denoise AI then Sharpen AI in a normal flow. And Gigapixel AI when I want to enlarge. Attached is a sample of a huge enlargement of an Osprey. Taken with an A7ii before I got my new A7Riv. The first image is the Osprey RAW converted to JPG. The second was Crop, Denoise, Sharpen, Gigapixel and some tinkering. Topaz saves me a lot of time. I'm not a PS expert, but have used it for years, but never got really good enough to beat the Topaz suite. I've read many comments from PS experts that they can bet better images with PS. So if you're great with PS, I'd say don't bother with Topaz. Gigapixel AI perhaps being the exception. HTH, Russ (edit: it made a serviceable 5x7 print for my friend that lives on the lake).

 

[Riverdonkey]

It has glitchy performance issues with Capture One. I cannot download straight to Topaz anymore. Can really work wonders on high noise pics. I guess for a pro it might not be enough but can save pics with sentimental value.

 

[Dylan Burgess]

Anyone use topaz denoise with capture one?

Yes, works well as a plug in

 

[seuadr]

i've been really considering denoise - a lot of times with my amateur wildlife i end up with higher ISO that i would like to keep shutter speed up and it seems pretty effective - thanks for sharing. the facebook posts of course make it look like it can perform miracles so it is nice to see real life reviews.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

i've been really considering denoise - a lot of times with my amateur wildlife i end up with higher ISO that i would like to keep shutter speed up and it seems pretty effective - thanks for sharing. the facebook posts of course make it look like it can perform miracles so it is nice to see real life reviews.

It can

 

[teekay]

I have recently used the trial versions of the Topaz products and I think there is a place for each. I particularly like the A1 sharpen and denoise . I have noticed it is very easy to over cook them so for me less is more but then I suppose that can be said for all editing software.

 

[Uncle Kevriano]

I have recently used the trial versions of the Topaz products and I think there is a place for each. I particularly like the A1 sharpen and denoise . I have noticed it is very easy to over cook them so for me less is more but then I suppose that can be said for all editing software.

It is, but they have recently added an Auto feature which seems to do a really good job. I use it extensively.