|
|
|
|
I would love to hear opinions and experiences with DXO and Topaz, I would like to add one as a plug in but it seems very confusimg to me because I am not famililar yet with their layout. I do sometimes shoot high iso if I take performimg arts shows, especially dancers with low light, and fast movement. My technique has changed over the years, I rarely would use burst mode of an action shot, but just rely on my own sense of anticipation and rhythm to get the shot. So my main concern is noise especacially due to the high contrast lighting used so often.
Thanks for any opinions and experiencs with these software programs.
I switched from LR/PS to DxO and Topaz Photo AI awhile back. Part of the reason was subscription cost, but quite frankly after doing research on noise reduction Topaz is the best I've used...ever. Both noise and sharpness controls, upscaling, all of it works flawlessly and it's very intuitive. I saved several great but flawed images with this, and couldn't be happier. I've seen images shot at 25,600 ISO look flawless after Denoise and sharpening with this program. Buy it once, and no more.
DxO is my go to for editing now, I just like the controls available more than the old guard. Not hard to learn, the masking controls are more to my liking. Same one time payment thing, the add ons are a bit expensive but give you a lot for the money. I'm very happy with them both.
Hi Kathryn, (Hi again, Brian!),
I have only used Topaz Photo-AI for de-noising. Now, I shoot on an APS-DSLR, hand-held, often with a long lens (70-300mm) and in the UK's terribly drab Winter. All that means Iuse an (Auto) high ISO. The consequence is a lot of noise. Since buying Topaz (£200 - expensive) a year ago, I have been delighted by its fantastic results. I now also use it for larger re-sizes and raw sharpening with raw de-noise. With already-processed images, I use it for de-noising TIFFs. Recently, my annual subscription (which came with the original purchase) has expired and they want another £100 to re-new. However, I am not inclined to renew at present - the programme continues to work, I simply miss-out on new updates.
I edit all my photography in ACDSee Ultimate (now version 2025) - which is improving its own "up-sizing" and de-noising, so I might use only that in the end. I think one might be able to link the two programmes but I simply open the image into Topaz, work on it, save it and then open the result in ACDSee. (NB: ACDSee does not import images as Lightroom does, it simply opens them from Windows* folders). [ * Mac version available].
By the way, I have used ACDSee since the 1990s. It is available as a subscription model or one-off payment model - I use the latter with my discount for my existing user status.
I switched from LR/PS to DxO and Topaz Photo AI awhile back. Part of the reason was subscription cost, but quite frankly after doing research on noise reduction Topaz is the best I've used...ever. Both noise and sharpness controls, upscaling, all of it works flawlessly and it's very intuitive. I saved several great but flawed images with this, and couldn't be happier. I've seen images shot at 25,600 ISO look flawless after Denoise and sharpening with this program. Buy it once, and no more.
DxO is my go to for editing now, I just like the controls available more than the old guard. Not hard to learn, the masking controls are more to my liking. Same one time payment thing, the add ons are a bit expensive but give you a lot for the money. I'm very happy with them both.
Thanks so much Brian, The Topaz does look good but hard for me to tell for sure on a trial version. And DxO seems much easier to navigate.
Hi Kathryn, (Hi again, Brian!),
I have only used Topaz Photo-AI for de-noising. Now, I shoot on an APS-DSLR, hand-held, often with a long lens (70-300mm) and in the UK's terribly drab Winter. All that means Iuse an (Auto) high ISO. The consequence is a lot of noise. Since buying Topaz (£200 - expensive) a year ago, I have been delighted by its fantastic results. I now also use it for larger re-sizes and raw sharpening with raw de-noise. With already-processed images, I use it for de-noising TIFFs. Recently, my annual subscription (which came with the original purchase) has expired and they want another £100 to re-new. However, I am not inclined to renew at present - the programme continues to work, I simply miss-out on new updates.
I edit all my photography in ACDSee Ultimate (now version 2025) - which is improving its own "up-sizing" and de-noising, so I might use only that in the end. I think one might be able to link the two programmes but I simply open the image into Topaz, work on it, save it and then open the result in ACDSee. (NB: ACDSee does not import images as Lightroom does, it simply opens them from Windows* folders). [ * Mac version available].
By the way, I have used ACDSee since the 1990s. It is available as a subscription model or one-off payment model - I use the latter with my discount for my existing user status.
Thanks Wood Visage for your infromation! I am goind to take a look at ACDs as I have never even heard of it before. Sounds good!!
Hello Kathryn, thanks for your reply. Here's the link you might like to view. The firm, ACDSee offer several overlapping products - which can be confusing. But this is the top one which does all they offer - it is the one to which I was referring. Hope that helps. Cheerio.
https://www.acdsee.com/en/products/photo-studio-ultimate/
Thanks for the link!
Hi Kathryn,
I'm an Adobe addict, not liking every change they implement, but I'm familiar with the tools I need. For de-noise and sharpening, I use Topaz Photo AI and did not see any better yet. As a plugin from Photoshop it's easy to use, like any other filter, but it needs a fast PC to not be annoyingly slow. If you work with Lightroom only, it's not so easily accesible, you have to duplicate as TIFF always. Sharpening often takes it too far, another reason it's better to use in Photoshop. You can mask it off where not needed or apply it with reduced opacity, which isn't possible in Lightroom either.
So if you work with Photoshop, Topaz is a clear recommendation from me.
Rgeards,
Mike
Hi Kathryn,
I'm an Adobe addict, not liking every change they implement, but I'm familiar with the tools I need. For de-noise and sharpening, I use Topaz Photo AI and did not see any better yet. As a plugin from Photoshop it's easy to use, like any other filter, but it needs a fast PC to not be annoyingly slow. If you work with Lightroom only, it's not so easily accesible, you have to duplicate as TIFF always. Sharpening often takes it too far, another reason it's better to use in Photoshop. You can mask it off where not needed or apply it with reduced opacity, which isn't possible in Lightroom either.
So if you work with Photoshop, Topaz is a clear recommendation from me.
Rgeards,
Mike
Thanks so much Mike. I only have Topaz as a trial so I can't upload a photo to better see the results. I am wondering if you have ever used the face thing? I tried it on one photo and it looked pretty good but I tried it on another and it was strange looking. I think the right program can make a big difference but learning it all is daunting sometimes.
Hi Kathryn,
I never use the face "filtering" Topaz does, because as you noticed, results are quite incosistent. If it works properly, it cleans skin and sharpens eyes & lips. But in many cases, it does not recognize elements properly and also blurs eyes.
The neural filters in Photoshop do a better job, and there are specific action sets to further refine portraits easily.
Here's the outcome of Topaz, which blurred eyes, too. Left is the RAW shot...
Neural filters of PS did a far better job on the skin, especially beneath the left eye:
I used Beauty Retouch CC on just her eyes & lips, which the Adobe neural filter left untouched.
But again, Topaz does a terrific job in sharpening. Skin / Face retouch would not be a reason for me to obtain it.
When shooting this famous spot I used a tripod, but had the VR active on a 70-200mm tele. https://1x.com/photo/2350987
A major mistake, all photos were blurred significantly. I thought I'd go crazy, finally got to the spot and came back with nothing useable. Topaz did the magic, recovered all details.
Rgerads,
Mike
Hi Kathryn,
I never use the face "filtering" Topaz does, because as you noticed, results are quite incosistent. If it works properly, it cleans skin and sharpens eyes & lips. But in many cases, it does not recognize elements properly and also blurs eyes.
The neural filters in Photoshop do a better job, and there are specific action sets to further refine portraits easily.
Here's the outcome of Topaz, which blurred eyes, too. Left is the RAW shot...
Neural filters of PS did a far better job on the skin, especially beneath the left eye:
I used Beauty Retouch CC on just her eyes & lips, which the Adobe neural filter left untouched.
But again, Topaz does a terrific job in sharpening. Skin / Face retouch would not be a reason for me to obtain it.
When shooting this famous spot I used a tripod, but had the VR active on a 70-200mm tele. https://1x.com/photo/2350987
A major mistake, all photos were blurred significantly. I thought I'd go crazy, finally got to the spot and came back with nothing useable. Topaz did the magic, recovered all details.
Rgerads,
Mike
Thank you so much for your examples, and the link too. Your work is beautiful no matter what program.
