I've been testing AIarty for a couple of weeks on my own photos, I have found it be better than Topaz about 60 or 70% of the time. It's worth taking the time to have a play around with the different models for slightly different results. Compared to Topaz I find that Topaz either overcooks it giving painterly looks or undercooks it having insufficient effect. I'm also trialing AiArty Image Matting. It really is excellent. In my opinion it is the best tool for subject selection, way way better than photoshop. Well worth trying
I just tested the trial version. - AI is optimized for AI generated(!) images - no integration in Lightroom - no RAW output - results from my noisy lores test images clearly inferior to Topaz in its current version So for now, I stick with Topaz IF I have to repair an image. But I agree with the comment of Topaz being often either of marginal help or overdoing it.
Thanks for the info on this, I'm going to give it a try. I have Topaz and I like it, but for some of my shots it produces unacceptable results. Small, high-contrast, hard-edged details on top of large areas of uniform color never have good outcomes - lots of double lines, glowing outlines, and weird AI additions that aren't in the original. I've also tried DXO but I find that no matter what the settings, landscapes with lots of rocks end up looking 'crunchy'.
Das sieht wesentlich natürlich aus als in Topaz Photo AI. Topaz kann immer nur "bisschen verbessern" oder "vollkommen übertrieben """verbessert""", sodass jeder sofort sieht, dass das ne scheiß KI gemacht hat, weil jedes Foto wie ein Gemälde danach aussieht" Glaube, AIARTY ist echt einen Blick wert.
Aiarty Image Enhancer: deblur, denoise, upscale photos: bit.ly/4gKQZ9O
I've been testing AIarty for a couple of weeks on my own photos, I have found it be better than Topaz about 60 or 70% of the time. It's worth taking the time to have a play around with the different models for slightly different results. Compared to Topaz I find that Topaz either overcooks it giving painterly looks or undercooks it having insufficient effect.
I'm also trialing AiArty Image Matting. It really is excellent. In my opinion it is the best tool for subject selection, way way better than photoshop. Well worth trying
I just tested the trial version.
- AI is optimized for AI generated(!) images
- no integration in Lightroom
- no RAW output
- results from my noisy lores test images clearly inferior to Topaz in its current version
So for now, I stick with Topaz IF I have to repair an image. But I agree with the comment of Topaz being often either of marginal help or overdoing it.
Interesting!
Thanks for the tip!
Thanks for the info on this, I'm going to give it a try. I have Topaz and I like it, but for some of my shots it produces unacceptable results. Small, high-contrast, hard-edged details on top of large areas of uniform color never have good outcomes - lots of double lines, glowing outlines, and weird AI additions that aren't in the original. I've also tried DXO but I find that no matter what the settings, landscapes with lots of rocks end up looking 'crunchy'.
Das sieht wesentlich natürlich aus als in Topaz Photo AI.
Topaz kann immer nur "bisschen verbessern" oder "vollkommen übertrieben """verbessert""", sodass jeder sofort sieht, dass das ne scheiß KI gemacht hat, weil jedes Foto wie ein Gemälde danach aussieht"
Glaube, AIARTY ist echt einen Blick wert.