The biggest thing I miss about Topaz Denoise was its ability to perform bulk processing and I could be assured that even if I put 1000 images through it at once, 95% would come out fine - just like DxO Raw 3 and 4. Not so with Photo AI! You have to baby each and every photo or it does crazy crap and introduces weird artifacts. Also, I found with Nikon RAW images, you have to force the AI to use "strong" noise reduction rather than normal to get decent results. Even then, I can still see color noise shading in dark areas that don't appear when I use DXO Raw 4 on the same image. Bottom line - I only use Photo AI for its face restoration feature and use DxO Raw 4 or Lightroom Denoise for noise reduction on my sports photos.
I think it's best summed up by the word 'inconsistent'. It's very strange how much the results vary from RAW to RAW and not something I ever encountered with the old standalone apps. That face recovery is very good though. :)
When Topaz abandoned the separate programs, I abandoned them. Topaz has developed a reputation for software abandonment in an attempt to keep their hand in your wallet.
Thank you Andy, I appreciate your forthright opinions. I use DXO and I use Topaz. I do not use the removal tool and I have never used a mask in Topaz. Generally, I have been happy with Topaz, but I do not consider myself to be a "power user" of image software. I am aware that you can get some weird results with the Adjust Lighting tool and you can get some funky results with three Balance Colour tool; but generally they have both worked well for me. I really like the Balance Colour tool, as I like the way that it renders the Reds in an image. I have never seen the "chicken wire effect" with the DeNoise tool, but I use a Windows based PC.
Thanks Peter - perhaps it's a Mac only issue. I'll try and test on my Windows PC. Do you use it as a pre-processor and then output for further editing?
@@Andyhutchinson Hi, I only have DXO PL7 and Topaz. I start with DXO but only use it for exposure, tones and slight cropping. I used to use Pure RAW but I cracked the shits when they told me that I had to pay extra for Pure RAW ver 4.0. At this point, I started using Topaz DeNoise and, now, I start in DXO and finish in Topaz. I am happy with the results and it is a very quick workflow.
Cheers John. It's disappointing given how good the original trio of AI apps were. That said, I still pay for Gigapixel because it's the best upscaler on the market. :)
Topaz Products appear to be in a constant state of Beta Test while being sold to end users... Been like this since they moved from their old models...🤷♂️
I have been using Topaz products since their early sharpen tool and thought it terrific... Photo AI has been a bit weaker - usable under certain conditions - but weaker. I still have the separate versions of Sharpen and Denoise. A flying woodpecker shot from a few days back proved TOTALLY unusable in Photo AI but when I sharpened it in the OLD TOPAZ SHARPEN it was acceptable -MUCH better than the AI version.... So if anyone owns the old, separate versions and still has access to them (check the site and it will tell you), TRY THEM! They can do a lot better jobs at certain times than the newest PHOTO AI!!!!!
Topaz AI has continued to disappoint me. While this release might be a little better than the previous one, I can’t help but feel it is getting worse with each release. I have seen grid lines or blocks with some of my Canon raw files. Renders it completely unusable for some images. I haven’t tested an image with blown out highlights for quite some time but it used to turn those spots magenta. I keep hoping it will get better but I am getting more convinced I will be switching software.
Yes, I agree. It's pretty sad to see the decline in quality. The old apps used to be key to my post-processing. I still use Gigapixel - which does a better job of upscaling than PhotoAI but other than that, I moved on.
Thank you for your honest review. I still use my studio 1 and 2. I have all of the stand alones. This Photo AI is a hot mess. Topaz has forgoten what got them here.
Ever since Topaz moved to their AI business model they have been plagued by bugs. A feature will get fixed, then two weeks later will be back in the newest version. Probably the best strategy is to wait until they have a version where the worst bugs are fixed and then "camp" on that version for as long as possible. I still use Photo AI occasionally for one important reason: it works on files that neither DXO nor Adobe's denoise tools work with: jpg, tiff, linear dngs, etc. Also, I have some old raw files from a camera that DXO never supported and probably never will: the Pentax K100D.
That's kinda where I'm at. I got Lightroom but found out it's denoise doesn't work at all on my raw images. Turns out, Samsung S23 Ultra raw photos are linear raw files and thus are incompatible with Adobe denoise (major oversight to me but I digress). DxO also doesn't seem compatible at all as it says my raw files cannot be read. Currently trying the demo version of Photo AI and it's results on the 5 or 6 test photos I've tried are at least good enough for me to probably buy the software on a sale.
Happy with denoise, sharpen and resizing functions myself - and its fast on my (powerful) PC. It is work in progress. But a great start and very useful for what it does. Also think dark pictures are where it struggles the most. Well lit shots are almost OK to use after running though Topaz. Also get the blue touch once in a while from RAW processing - tuning down vibrancy in LR solves it for me. YMMV.
The lack of consistency is annoying and the grid bug is a deal-breaker for me. I use DxO for all my denoising, but I still have Topaz Sharpen installed and I just renewed my Topaz Gigapixel subscription. Competition is good and I'd like to see them get this product right. :)
Yeah, IMO DxO has the best NR out there, so I use it on all RAWs (although it annoys me that they didn't add XD2 to PhotoLab 7). I only got Topaz to deal with old photos and scans and it works very well for those. I got the original "IQ bundle" (DeNoise, Sharpen, and Gigapixel) and they gave me Photo AI for free when it came out, and I haven't renewed the updates for the "original three" since, as they're supposedly included with Photo AI. It looks great on paper but I prefer an all-DxO workflow (PL7 Elite, which integrates FilmPack and ViewPoint, plus Nik) from RAW to print in most cases.
Yea I had the same Topaz bundle and same free version of PhotoAI. But PhotoAI stopped being free to bundle owners about 18 months ago and you can't update from version 1 without paying. I let most of the bundle lapse but I did pay to keep Gigapixel because it's still the best AI upscaler.
I appreciate this critical review very much. I have just bought Photo AI and am only using it on scanned images from prints, 35 mm negs and color slides. I also own Sharpen, Denoise and Gigapixel, the latter not much used. I am finding that the Face Recovery for images stuffed with people because they are documentary images of a particular story in London UK back in the 1970s and early 80s is a valued feature of Photo AI. Big plus for the work I am doing. Still I find myself using the stand alone Apps to get some needed Denoising or Sharpening of the rest of the picture. So it's a good thing that I own all the Apps!
@@Andyhutchinson Yes, it is interesting and I hope the work may be projected onto a big screen in an open space near the River Thames one day! Probably I have to increase the size of the images for that type of thing. But meanwhile, all I care about is improving the very soft, or noisy scanned images so that they look half way modern and how people expect to see photos these days, for print or small-scale projection by digital projector. Topaz Labs softwares plus Photoshop Camera Raw filter for selective work on parts of images that are over or under exposed, is making the past come back to life and I am glad!
I prefer DXO but because my old manual lenses have no profile, I use Topaz for them. Lately, when I use Topaz AI, previous version, as a plug in in Capture One, it's freezing. Not in a hurry to upgrade to latest version.
Do you think the recovered faces in the rodeo image look a bit like cutout pasted on faces (ie, not blending smoothly enough to the bodies b/c too distinct)?
Years ago Topaz Labs were leading with their AI apps. So, I have been waiting for more than a year for Topaz to reach a level with Photo AI where it would be safe to use for commercial photography. It has failed so far. Random artifacts are more common than usable results. The strategy of making fast improvements and let the users do the testing has been fatal. But that's not all. More complexity has continuously been loaded on to a flawed vehicle which is now heading for a collision with reality. It's as if woke-realism has taken over the Labs and a succesful scifi project is played out in an alternative universe. It becomes more and more detatched and bizarre.
Developers don't just make those kinds of direction changes on their own... Something is amiss & has changed significantly from the "classic" Topaz Labs products days. And, I mean more than just a leap into AI.
And Denise.. sometimes I'll use just the noise and it not only Dennis is but also does just enough sharpening without making the wildlife look like it's a cartoon period especially birds and feathers
It's not worthy to feed it TIFFs or RAW. I had the grid-line thing a long time ago I think on their first version of the now-defunct Denoise AI. I thought they got rid of it a long time ago, since I don't have the issue anymore and didn't have it for the past 2 years or so. I used it extensively & found out the best workflow is to invoke Photo AI as a plug-in (in my case I do it from Photoshop) on the rendered jpeg files. The loss of details in sahdows aftyer denoising and color glitches shown in your video are strictly related to RAW files from cameras it doesn't like/recognize. Leaving it on Auto it does a pretty damn good job auto-detecting if the jpegs need denoising, face recovery or sharpening when used on large batches of files with Photoshop Actions. Messing with the settings is also not worthy in my experience. The values Auto-Pilot comes with are pretty much the best you can get by fiddling with the sliders 99% of the time. The software seems to be targeted / designed more as an automation tool than anything else.
I am really disappointed with both photo AI and gigapixel AI in term of performance. They are totally not usable at all. Extremely slow and once you add to do scale up and try to save and convert, it cannot complete the task. I have to terminate the task. Very frustrating. I have now stop using them. Very sad.
I'm negative when the product deserves it. I clearly demonstrated my issues with this app, such as the weird grid effect and the lack-lustre denoising and sharpening. I realise RUclips is a barren wasteland of pointless marketing videos that claim to be reviews, but I prefer to let people know what the reality is so that they don't waste their hard-earned money.
![[#2024MAMA] ROSÉ (로제), Bruno Mars - APT. | Mnet 241122 방송](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/dgGqD28J6aQ/mqdefault.jpg)
This is my 1st year owning Topaz Photo AI, I got it on sale on Black Friday, and I'm happy with it. Thank you for sharing your amazing knowledge ❤🎉❤
The main thing is that it's working for you. :)
The biggest thing I miss about Topaz Denoise was its ability to perform bulk processing and I could be assured that even if I put 1000 images through it at once, 95% would come out fine - just like DxO Raw 3 and 4. Not so with Photo AI! You have to baby each and every photo or it does crazy crap and introduces weird artifacts. Also, I found with Nikon RAW images, you have to force the AI to use "strong" noise reduction rather than normal to get decent results. Even then, I can still see color noise shading in dark areas that don't appear when I use DXO Raw 4 on the same image. Bottom line - I only use Photo AI for its face restoration feature and use DxO Raw 4 or Lightroom Denoise for noise reduction on my sports photos.
I think it's best summed up by the word 'inconsistent'. It's very strange how much the results vary from RAW to RAW and not something I ever encountered with the old standalone apps. That face recovery is very good though. :)
I still use the previous trio of products. Concur with your assessment.
Yea it's a shame isn't it. I used to champion Topaz apps all the time, but they just lost the plot.
When Topaz abandoned the separate programs, I abandoned them. Topaz has developed a reputation for software abandonment in an attempt to keep their hand in your wallet.
Thank you Andy, I appreciate your forthright opinions. I use DXO and I use Topaz. I do not use the removal tool and I have never used a mask in Topaz. Generally, I have been happy with Topaz, but I do not consider myself to be a "power user" of image software. I am aware that you can get some weird results with the Adjust Lighting tool and you can get some funky results with three Balance Colour tool; but generally they have both worked well for me. I really like the Balance Colour tool, as I like the way that it renders the Reds in an image. I have never seen the "chicken wire effect" with the DeNoise tool, but I use a Windows based PC.
Thanks Peter - perhaps it's a Mac only issue. I'll try and test on my Windows PC. Do you use it as a pre-processor and then output for further editing?
@@Andyhutchinson Hi, I only have DXO PL7 and Topaz. I start with DXO but only use it for exposure, tones and slight cropping. I used to use Pure RAW but I cracked the shits when they told me that I had to pay extra for Pure RAW ver 4.0. At this point, I started using Topaz DeNoise and, now, I start in DXO and finish in Topaz. I am happy with the results and it is a very quick workflow.
Wonderful and thorough review Andy, thank you. I agree on all points and find Photo AI disappointing,
Cheers John. It's disappointing given how good the original trio of AI apps were. That said, I still pay for Gigapixel because it's the best upscaler on the market. :)
Topaz Products appear to be in a constant state of Beta Test while being sold to end users... Been like this since they moved from their old models...🤷♂️
Agreed.
I have been using Topaz products since their early sharpen tool and thought it terrific... Photo AI has been a bit weaker - usable under certain conditions - but weaker. I still have the separate versions of Sharpen and Denoise. A flying woodpecker shot from a few days back proved TOTALLY unusable in Photo AI but when I sharpened it in the OLD TOPAZ SHARPEN it was acceptable -MUCH better than the AI version.... So if anyone owns the old, separate versions and still has access to them (check the site and it will tell you), TRY THEM! They can do a lot better jobs at certain times than the newest PHOTO AI!!!!!
Oh yep - 100% - I still use Topaz Sharpen and Gigapixel. DxO does a far better job of denoise these days though.
Topaz AI has continued to disappoint me. While this release might be a little better than the previous one, I can’t help but feel it is getting worse with each release.
I have seen grid lines or blocks with some of my Canon raw files. Renders it completely unusable for some images.
I haven’t tested an image with blown out highlights for quite some time but it used to turn those spots magenta.
I keep hoping it will get better but I am getting more convinced I will be switching software.
Yes, I agree. It's pretty sad to see the decline in quality. The old apps used to be key to my post-processing. I still use Gigapixel - which does a better job of upscaling than PhotoAI but other than that, I moved on.
Thank you for your honest review. I still use my studio 1 and 2. I have all of the stand alones. This Photo AI is a hot mess. Topaz has forgoten what got them here.
Very true. :)
Ever since Topaz moved to their AI business model they have been plagued by bugs. A feature will get fixed, then two weeks later will be back in the newest version. Probably the best strategy is to wait until they have a version where the worst bugs are fixed and then "camp" on that version for as long as possible. I still use Photo AI occasionally for one important reason: it works on files that neither DXO nor Adobe's denoise tools work with: jpg, tiff, linear dngs, etc. Also, I have some old raw files from a camera that DXO never supported and probably never will: the Pentax K100D.
Yep, being able to process non-RAW files is a big advantage.
That's kinda where I'm at. I got Lightroom but found out it's denoise doesn't work at all on my raw images. Turns out, Samsung S23 Ultra raw photos are linear raw files and thus are incompatible with Adobe denoise (major oversight to me but I digress). DxO also doesn't seem compatible at all as it says my raw files cannot be read. Currently trying the demo version of Photo AI and it's results on the 5 or 6 test photos I've tried are at least good enough for me to probably buy the software on a sale.
Happy with denoise, sharpen and resizing functions myself - and its fast on my (powerful) PC. It is work in progress. But a great start and very useful for what it does. Also think dark pictures are where it struggles the most. Well lit shots are almost OK to use after running though Topaz. Also get the blue touch once in a while from RAW processing - tuning down vibrancy in LR solves it for me. YMMV.
The lack of consistency is annoying and the grid bug is a deal-breaker for me. I use DxO for all my denoising, but I still have Topaz Sharpen installed and I just renewed my Topaz Gigapixel subscription. Competition is good and I'd like to see them get this product right. :)
Yeah, IMO DxO has the best NR out there, so I use it on all RAWs (although it annoys me that they didn't add XD2 to PhotoLab 7). I only got Topaz to deal with old photos and scans and it works very well for those. I got the original "IQ bundle" (DeNoise, Sharpen, and Gigapixel) and they gave me Photo AI for free when it came out, and I haven't renewed the updates for the "original three" since, as they're supposedly included with Photo AI. It looks great on paper but I prefer an all-DxO workflow (PL7 Elite, which integrates FilmPack and ViewPoint, plus Nik) from RAW to print in most cases.
Yea I had the same Topaz bundle and same free version of PhotoAI. But PhotoAI stopped being free to bundle owners about 18 months ago and you can't update from version 1 without paying. I let most of the bundle lapse but I did pay to keep Gigapixel because it's still the best AI upscaler.
I appreciate this critical review very much. I have just bought Photo AI and am only using it on scanned images from prints, 35 mm negs and color slides. I also own Sharpen, Denoise and Gigapixel, the latter not much used. I am finding that the Face Recovery for images stuffed with people because they are documentary images of a particular story in London UK back in the 1970s and early 80s is a valued feature of Photo AI. Big plus for the work I am doing. Still I find myself using the stand alone Apps to get some needed Denoising or Sharpening of the rest of the picture. So it's a good thing that I own all the Apps!
It's a classic cast of jack of all trades and mater of none with Photo AI 3, I reckon. Sounds like an interesting project you're working on. :)
@@Andyhutchinson Yes, it is interesting and I hope the work may be projected onto a big screen in an open space near the River Thames one day! Probably I have to increase the size of the images for that type of thing. But meanwhile, all I care about is improving the very soft, or noisy scanned images so that they look half way modern and how people expect to see photos these days, for print or small-scale projection by digital projector. Topaz Labs softwares plus Photoshop Camera Raw filter for selective work on parts of images that are over or under exposed, is making the past come back to life and I am glad!
I prefer DXO but because my old manual lenses have no profile, I use Topaz for them. Lately, when I use Topaz AI, previous version, as a plug in in Capture One, it's freezing. Not in a hurry to upgrade to latest version.
Thanks Andy
No worries :)
I'm finding the same issues with Topaz Photo AI 3.0.4. 😢
It doesn't seem to be improving with these updates.
Do you think the recovered faces in the rodeo image look a bit like cutout pasted on faces (ie, not blending smoothly enough to the bodies b/c too distinct)?
Yea there's an element of that, but in Topaz defence you can tweak the sharpness and deblur intensity.
Years ago Topaz Labs were leading with their AI apps. So, I have been waiting for more than a year for Topaz to reach a level with Photo AI where it would be safe to use for commercial photography. It has failed so far. Random artifacts are more common than usable results. The strategy of making fast improvements and let the users do the testing has been fatal. But that's not all. More complexity has continuously been loaded on to a flawed vehicle which is now heading for a collision with reality. It's as if woke-realism has taken over the Labs and a succesful scifi project is played out in an alternative universe. It becomes more and more detatched and bizarre.
Developers don't just make those kinds of direction changes on their own... Something is amiss & has changed significantly from the "classic" Topaz Labs products days. And, I mean more than just a leap into AI.
Yes, totally agree Eigil - seemingly another cases of consumers beta-testing unfinished products.
Legacy Topaz Sharpen AI is still better.
Agreed. I get a flashing screen bug with it now though.
And Denise.. sometimes I'll use just the noise and it not only Dennis is but also does just enough sharpening without making the wildlife look like it's a cartoon period especially birds and feathers
I’ve had the grid show up in iPhone, Canon raw and even in negative scans. Pretty. Bad.
Yea, it's not great is it.
You have found faults that I have not experienced processing Sony files.
Yea, it's odd and undoubtedly to do with the way different manufacturers encode their RAW files.
It's not worthy to feed it TIFFs or RAW. I had the grid-line thing a long time ago I think on their first version of the now-defunct Denoise AI. I thought they got rid of it a long time ago, since I don't have the issue anymore and didn't have it for the past 2 years or so. I used it extensively & found out the best workflow is to invoke Photo AI as a plug-in (in my case I do it from Photoshop) on the rendered jpeg files. The loss of details in sahdows aftyer denoising and color glitches shown in your video are strictly related to RAW files from cameras it doesn't like/recognize. Leaving it on Auto it does a pretty damn good job auto-detecting if the jpegs need denoising, face recovery or sharpening when used on large batches of files with Photoshop Actions. Messing with the settings is also not worthy in my experience. The values Auto-Pilot comes with are pretty much the best you can get by fiddling with the sliders 99% of the time. The software seems to be targeted / designed more as an automation tool than anything else.
Going to put the latest version through its paces.
Love the BS free take on everything..I feel like I should just come watch videos here when I do not have time for nonsense
Thank-you kindly :)
I am really disappointed with both photo AI and gigapixel AI in term of performance. They are totally not usable at all. Extremely slow and once you add to do scale up and try to save and convert, it cannot complete the task. I have to terminate the task. Very frustrating. I have now stop using them. Very sad.
Is that on Windows or Mac? Haven't found performance too bad with Photo AI on my M2 Macbook Pro - just the results.
The program is glitchy and completely unusable
That it is.
strongly disagree with this guy, is he always this negative????
I'm negative when the product deserves it. I clearly demonstrated my issues with this app, such as the weird grid effect and the lack-lustre denoising and sharpening. I realise RUclips is a barren wasteland of pointless marketing videos that claim to be reviews, but I prefer to let people know what the reality is so that they don't waste their hard-earned money.