DeNoise AI, NoNoise AI, & PureRaw 2 COMPARED - Which is BEST?

Поделиться
HTML-код
  • Опубликовано: 21 ноя 2024

Комментарии • 77

  • @AnthonyMorganti
    @AnthonyMorganti  2 года назад +2

    In this tutorial, I compare three different noise reductions applications to one another. The apps I compare are Denoise AI, NoNoise AI, and PureRaw 2.
    ** I am an affiliate for all of the other companies mentioned below EXCEPT Affinity Photo and Capture One.
    Please read my Code of Ethics Statement:
    onlinephotographytraining.com/code-of-ethics/
    For more info about NoNoise AI, go here and click on the heading at the top, "Plugins":
    on1.sjv.io/EaGR2K (Save 20% with Promo Code: AM20 - May not work on sale product)
    For more info about Topaz Labs Denoise AI, go here:
    bit.ly/3cDqa5J
    *Save 15% on all Topaz Labs apps - use the Promo Code: AMDISC15
    For More info about PureRaw 2, go here:
    tidd.ly/3JmGnwt
    Probably not working but they gave me a 15% off Promo Code - give it a try: Anthony15
    My Current Gear
    I’m always trading in cameras and lenses trying out new products. As of the recording of this video, here is the gear I currently own and use. All gear is purchased by me at normal retail pricing - I’m not sponsored by anyone nor am I an ambassador for any camera/lens manufacturer. The links below are my Amazon affiliate links.
    **As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
    Cameras:
    Nikon Z9: bit.ly/32Pa9Kg (Adorama Affiliate Link)
    Nikon Z7ii: amzn.to/351PPmL
    Nikon Z6ii: amzn.to/3399eS7
    Nikon Z6: amzn.to/2TIBGnR
    Nikon Zfc with Nikon 16-50mm f3.5-6.3 Lens: amzn.to/3ykA07w
    Nikon D500: amzn.to/2WyO8Lt
    Sony A7Riv: amzn.to/3amo9JJ
    Lenses:
    Nikon Z-Mount:
    Nikon Z 24-70mm F4.0 Lens: amzn.to/2Z0hW55
    Nikon Z 24-70mm F/2.8 S: amzn.to/2JWo5IX
    Nikon Z 24-200mm F4-6.3 Lens: amzn.to/3j4xVrA
    NIKKOR Z MC 105mm f/2.8 VR S: amzn.to/3Cw4CVU
    TTArtisan 11mm F2.8: amzn.to/354Vnji
    Sony E-Mount:
    Sigma 24-70mm F2.8 DG DN Art Lens: amzn.to/3iKdbBQ
    Sigma 85mm F1.4 DG DN Art Lens: amzn.to/36fD8F1
    Nikon F-Mount:
    Nikon 200-500mm F5.6 Lens: amzn.to/2WpggM2
    Nikon 24-70mm F2.8 Lens: amzn.to/2VQMKi9
    Nikon 28-300mm F3.5-5.6 Lens: amzn.to/2QuWmyb
    Nikon 14-24mm F2.8 Lens: amzn.to/2ZXR55C
    Nikon 70-200mm F2.8 VRii Lens: amzn.to/2WG1p5f
    Nikon 1.4x Teleconverter: amzn.to/2WlkZ1z
    Nikon 18-200mm F3.5-5.6 DX Lens: amzn.to/2MiEKUk
    Tokina 100mm Macro Lens: amzn.to/2ZRgxfK
    Sigma 105mm 1.4 Art Lens: amzn.to/32PmFDZ
    Other Gear:
    Battery Grip:
    VG-C4EM for Sony A7Riv: amzn.to/3g3Wvnm
    Tripods & Ballheads
    Vanguard Tripod: amzn.to/2WqWB2u
    Siriu Ballhead: amzn.to/2W1MyS0
    MeFOTO Travel Tripod: amzn.to/31GVvys
    The Carbon Fiber Version: amzn.to/2LjVt9m
    Joby GorillaPod: amzn.to/2zMNAEc
    Camera Straps & Backpack
    Peak Design Camera Strap: amzn.to/2Sqi4Eg
    Peak Design Slide Camera Strap: amzn.to/2DoLxLl
    Peak Design Everyday 30L Backpack: amzn.to/2MJPFcb
    Spider Pro Hand Strap: amzn.to/30k170u
    Spider Pro Hand Strap ver 2: amzn.to/3aC3p1Z
    Memory Cards
    Sony 120GB XQD Card: amzn.to/2HlfR8Y
    Sony TOUGH-G series SDXC UHS-II Card 64GB: amzn.to/2PUJHoD
    Sony TOUGH-G series SDXC UHS-II Card 128GB: amzn.to/3oP6EZX
    Sony XQD/SD Card Reader: amzn.to/2NBuSHB
    Sony 128GB CFExpress Card: amzn.to/353hWC4
    Delkin Devices 256GB CFExpress Card: amzn.to/3pULMDR
    CFExpress Card Reader: amzn.to/2X2xMbQ
    Anthony Morganti’s MUST HAVE applications:
    At least one Non-Destructive RAW Editor
    Lightroom - bit.ly/2zwQ0nW
    Capture One - www.captureone.com
    Luminar - bit.ly/2JUJxKw (Save with the Promo Code AM16)
    On1 Photo RAW - on1.sjv.io/EaGR2K (Save 20% with Promo Code: AM20)
    Exposure X7 - bit.ly/2U8UxrK (Save 10% with Promo Code: AnthonyMorganti)
    PhotoLab 5: tidd.ly/2HhiN9X
    At least one FULL Editing App:
    Photoshop - bit.ly/2zwQ0nW
    Affinity Photo - affinity.serif.com/en-us/photo/
    My MUST-HAVE Plugins:
    Topaz Gigapixel AI - bit.ly/3cDqa5J
    Topaz Sharpen AI - bit.ly/3cDqa5J
    Topaz Denoise AI - bit.ly/3cDqa5J
    *Save 15% on all Topaz Labs apps - use the Promo Code: AMDISC15
    or instead of Topaz Denoise AI:
    On1 NoNoise AI - on1.sjv.io/EaGR2K (Save 20% with Promo Code: AM20 - It may not work on sale product)
    Nik Silver Efex Pro 3 - tidd.ly/3dc4gYm
    The Best Sky Images I've Seen Available -- Ocudrone - bit.ly/3vtDpjR
    *Save 10% with Discount Code: Morganti10
    ** Note that all of the promo codes listed above may not work on sale products.
    *** I am an affiliate for all of the companies listed EXCEPT Affinity Photo and Capture One. Please read my Code of Ethics Statement:
    onlinephotographytraining.com/code-of-ethics/
    Please follow me on Instagram: instagram.com/anthonymorganti/
    Thank you!

  • @ivanfojan8859
    @ivanfojan8859 2 года назад +4

    So nice to hear a youtuber say "iso" as one word, instead is "iesso" as separate letters.
    After all, we say "laser" and "radar" as a word and they are acronyms just the same!
    Anyway, back to the video.
    It's great to see that these three nr programs, are all very good.
    Great video :)

    • @BenelliMr
      @BenelliMr 2 года назад

      and I love even more when CALIFORNIANS and TEXANS say BADDRI and mean BATTERY. Or Italians say TARTINE when they mean THIRTEEN

  • @alaikens6353
    @alaikens6353 2 года назад +6

    I have these 3 products and use them as needed on noisy images. My conclusion is that the results are situational to the photo. When I use them, I process an image through all 3 each directly, import and then compare the results in Lightroom. PureRAW appears best to me most frequently, followed by DeNoise, and then NoNoise. However, last summer I captured the Milky Way behind the Bodie Island Lighthouse in Nags Head, NC. NoNoise was by far the best result managing the noise in the sky while leaving detail in the foreground grass. In my opinion, use the tools that you have, compare the results, keep the best and delete the unwanted results. The worst that happens is that you spend a few minutes and delete a few files.

    • @DalsPhotography
      @DalsPhotography 2 года назад

      Fully agree with you !!!! :) I also have them all .

  • @jenniferdavenport9571
    @jenniferdavenport9571 2 года назад +2

    DeNoise has the best UI for me. I also like how it doesn't mess with the tone and how it adds it's name to the file before saving. It does the job. Thanks for the video comparing these.

  • @MortAllachie
    @MortAllachie 2 года назад +5

    The eye looked more sharp in the PureRAW 2 version. I love that PureRAW finally support Fuji RAW files, so as soon as the trial expires, I will throw my money on the table even though I already have Topaz 🙂

  • @sloemo4024
    @sloemo4024 2 года назад +7

    I think a lot of what you’re calling residual noise in the birds beak and feathers is actually artifacts from over-sharpening.

  • @radiozelaza
    @radiozelaza 2 года назад +6

    PureRaw replaces digital noise with something akin to film grain, it looks the best

  • @renestaempfli1071
    @renestaempfli1071 2 года назад

    I have compared Topaz Photo AI, ON1 2023, PL6 and PureRaw2/CaptureOne 2022 with regards to noise removal. The images had an ISO range between 12800 and 64000 taken at a concert with my SONY A1. PureRaw2/C1 produced clearly the best results. At ISO 64000, only PureRaw2/C1 produced usable results printed at the Canon Pro 1000 in A2 format.

  • @Bassbarbie
    @Bassbarbie 2 года назад +7

    The reason the PureRaw is showing some toning differences is because you selected the lens corrections. You could deselect these.
    Mostly I just use DxO Photolab with DeepPrime for noisy images, but occasionally I will run something through the others to see if they can manage a better job. I do so much less processing now I've moved from Lightroom to Photolab.

    • @marca9955
      @marca9955 2 года назад +1

      It sucks if they think saturating an image is what you do as part of lens correction. Fixing geometry, CA, sharpness rolloff etc. are all useful in a raw processor but to have those I have to let PR2 significantly mess with my colours too.

    • @Bassbarbie
      @Bassbarbie 2 года назад

      @@marca9955 I don't know about PureRaw, but in Photolab you have the option for geometric corrections only if you wish.

  • @stevew7779
    @stevew7779 2 года назад +2

    Very useful and clear video! I use both Denoise and DXO Photolab for noise removal and find one or other works best in different scenarios, but I probably use the Topaz more. Both are way better than Lightroom's native noise reduction. Learned some good stuff from this video though!

  • @19Photographer76
    @19Photographer76 2 года назад +4

    My guess, since I have the applications, PureRaw does some Tone processing. If that was done on the other 2 applications, noise might become visible. PureRaw can always be processed again to 'hide' the visible noise if needed. PureRaw is generally used prior to stacking images.

  • @DalsPhotography
    @DalsPhotography 2 года назад

    How great this comparison is !!!! I tend to use the one needed as I have all of them, it depends on the photo that I am processing. I don't like that kind of noisy stuff that DeNoise (Topaz) adds to my images. In the end, I use more No NOise from On1 than topaz. Thank you Anthony , lovely video, regards from Uruguay.

  • @Herobox-ju4zd
    @Herobox-ju4zd 2 года назад +5

    I'd say Pureraw looks the best, especially when it comes to the background. I'm not really a fan of how the other 2 are color banding the background.

    • @e.colemantlpss6406
      @e.colemantlpss6406 Год назад

      That may just be the video compression by youtube and not actually in the image.

  • @photo-wizard
    @photo-wizard 2 года назад +2

    Considering the amount of time to move the sliders around in Topaz Denoise, I prefer the very simple and faster DXO PureRaw. It also corrects lens problems. Just throw your RAW files into PureRaw and export them as DNG - done :)
    If you come back from a wedding or a travel with tons of photos Topaz Denoise just takes too much time to adjust the sliders for every image.
    In addition I saw Topaz Denoise having severe Problems with fabrics like clothes and others. Grooms and guests seem to wear plastic suits after denoising with Topaz Denoise. And it sometimes creates strange color blotches in soft parts of images like the background.
    All together I like PureRaw more - quick, easy and great results.
    btw: I love your videos - thanks for your work!

    • @BenelliMr
      @BenelliMr 2 года назад

      fully agree; and I export as TIFF 16 bit

  • @remektekmedia6641
    @remektekmedia6641 2 года назад

    Anthony, I just love your comparisons! So useful, thanks.

  • @jamesgerboc
    @jamesgerboc 2 года назад +5

    It might be interesting to compare these results with standard noise reduction in Lightroom, Luminar, etc. Unless you have a large batch of workable images, it’s not likely an efficient workflow to denoise via a standalone noise app. A plug-in adds a couple steps. A slider within is ideal.

  • @BrettOssman
    @BrettOssman 2 года назад

    Hopefully not too long winded:
    I currently use different tools for different tasks as laid out below.
    I also use Auto as much as possible for speed.
    Is there a better way to use each tool to its fullest potential and still use them all?
    Might be a good video.
    Lightroom (Raw)
    - Basic Panel (White Balance and Tones only)
    - Len Correction
    - Export to Photoshop
    Photoshop (PSD)
    - Using Smart Objects with plugins on separate layers for each
    - Topaz DeNoise AI
    - Camera Raw Filter (clipping needs a slight tweak on occasion)
    - Luminar Neo
    - Camera Raw Filter (clipping needs a slight tweak on occasion)
    - Nik Color Efex Pro (rarely)
    - Camera Raw Filter (clipping needs a slight tweak on occasion)
    - Topaz Sharpen AI
    - Camera Raw Filter (clipping needs a slight tweak on occasion)
    - Save back to Lightroom
    Lightroom (PSD from above)
    - Take a last quick look at Basic Panel (Tones for clipping)
    - Catalogue tasks such as
    - Captions/Descriptions
    - Keywords
    - Exporting
    - etc

  • @ChristiaanRoest79
    @ChristiaanRoest79 2 года назад +4

    I would go for the PureRaw 2 image with some additional noise removal in lightroom. With the slider in lightroom you can remove the noise only in the background. Would turn out best.

    • @BenelliMr
      @BenelliMr 2 года назад

      You have the slider and the preview window in Photolab. And once you have optimized, you apply fro the whole series, you export a hundred photos or more and you go for dinner

  • @AdrianIII
    @AdrianIII 2 года назад +9

    So the final part of the comparison would be how each image looks after final processing. That is, does final processing increase noise enough to change the ranking of these apps?

    • @roknroller6052
      @roknroller6052 2 года назад

      The images are to high quality to test the software this is the problem with almost all tutorials and reviews, its either done from extreme quality stock images, Down res’d. Or professional users photography

  • @TimLaytonDarkroomDiary
    @TimLaytonDarkroomDiary 2 года назад

    Very practical and much-needed comparison. Thanks for making this video.

  • @williammcdonnell3539
    @williammcdonnell3539 2 года назад +1

    For what it's worth, Topaz support staff recommended using Sharpen AI (since I own it) in preference to the Sharpen Slider within DeNoise which you do in this comparison. This would probably make a difference, but I have not done an A/B comparison.

  • @susheeltm
    @susheeltm 2 года назад +1

    The edges of the beak look much sharper in the PureRaw2 image when compared to both the others. Don't you think?

  • @Finite-Tuning
    @Finite-Tuning 2 года назад

    Denoise AI for the win. I certainly don't regret my purchase of it, nor any of the Topaz products. Well, actually I do regret keeping Mask AI, but I purchased it as a bundle during a sale event. It pales in comparison to Photoshop. If it's not a super simple white background then forget about it, even then it isn't great. Anyway, cheers 🍻

  • @bensaunders616
    @bensaunders616 2 года назад +3

    I find that PureRaw 2 consistently returns the processed file about a half stop darker than the original Raw file. I was surprised that in your example it was brighter. I also find that Denoise does a better job overall noise reduction compared to PureRaw 2. Actually I think the original PureRAW did a better job of noise reduction than PureRAW 2.

  • @seabreezeof
    @seabreezeof 2 года назад

    My workflow, directly into DXO Deep Prime with no edits, when returned, I edit, then if it still has a little noise, I run it a second time through DeNise AI. but we are talking a very noisy file, most files work once through DXO Deep Prime.. Anthony, remember the brighter the images is when returned from any Denoise action, the more you will see noise, if the file is a very noisey to start out with.

  • @neilschlosser1112
    @neilschlosser1112 2 года назад +3

    Excellent as always - thanks Anthony! One question, if cropping the image and/or increasing the resolution, should noise reduction be done before or after? Thanks.

    • @TimLaytonDarkroomDiary
      @TimLaytonDarkroomDiary 2 года назад +3

      The workflow that I follow is to denoise as first step and then process as desired in LR/PS and then use Gigapixel to enlarge. I am getting good results using it this way.

  • @Impostertot
    @Impostertot 2 года назад

    Thank you Mr Morganti for these comparisons. Which is your preferred method: process images first in LR/PS then send to denoise software or vice versa?

  • @garyrowe58
    @garyrowe58 2 года назад +6

    I'd be interested to know how well Lightroom itself could remove noise from the image, and whether any of the others are actually better.
    Also, seeing how much PureRaw makes it pop, as a landscape photographer I'd be nervous about how much processing it is doing, without any control by me, and does it make changes I can't undo!

    • @frstesiste7670
      @frstesiste7670 2 года назад +2

      You cant undo noise reduction, lens profiles and demosaic (if it does that), but you can always go back to the original file.

  • @iankelsall25
    @iankelsall25 2 года назад +2

    DeNoise ai retains more texture in the feathers than NoNoise or pure raw 2 in this particular image. at print resolution, you would not see grain or noise unless it was a truly huge print maybe. the most important job of these programs is retaining detail, not smoothing it out for the sake of grain that you would not see on a print.

  • @Eigil_Skovgaard
    @Eigil_Skovgaard 2 года назад +1

    In my opinion Topaz DeNoise AI has the best rendering of details in the very bright feathers on the top of the eagle's head. At one point fine details and noise are difficult to separate from each other, and if all "noise" is just removed, the perceived details totally disappear. Also I - I think it was ON1 NoNoise AI having a problem with the demosaicing of Fuji raw files rendering red colors with stripes!
    When I use Sony's ARW files with DeNoise AI they are returned as DNGs - but about 4 times larger than the original raw file, which to me looks as if a TIFF file is being returned in a DNG container. I don't know how this same process turns out with the other two applications.

    • @stevehoge
      @stevehoge 2 года назад

      Yes, some details about output file sizes would be a welcome addition to this comparison.

  • @simonwalter7142
    @simonwalter7142 2 года назад

    Thanks as always for your great videos. Do you think the apps really do work better standalone or are they just as good as plugins?

  • @Mrbluesplayer43
    @Mrbluesplayer43 2 года назад +2

    I think we can all agree that noise removal has come on leaps and bounds over the years and TBH all produce acceptable results on an isolated subject like above. However, whilst I realise you are partial your bird shots, your initial image is not what I'd consider really noisy. It would be nice, and perhaps far more informative to see this comparison done with something taken at more extreme ISO's like an aurora or astro shot perhaps.

  • @CrueLoaf
    @CrueLoaf 2 года назад +1

    I like Denoise but they have put me off by upgrading it and nagging me to but the upgrade! Trying to install my purchased copy on a new Mac was also a nightmare.

  • @stevehoge
    @stevehoge 2 года назад +1

    It would be really useful to know if there's an appreciable difference in DNG output file sizes for these tools. If output is comparable to the original RAW file size I'd be tempted to batch all my sessions through a tool as the first part of my workflow...but if my RAW file is exploding into a TIFF-scale 256MB monster I'd be more selective about it.

  • @petergottschling2597
    @petergottschling2597 2 года назад

    Thank you Anthony, this was very informative for this novice. For me, simpler is better so probably will go with DXO2 because I like what it did to the image appearance.

  • @huwmorgan51
    @huwmorgan51 2 года назад +1

    Thanks for doing this Anthony. Did you get a chance to look at the size of the dng files?

    • @stevehoge
      @stevehoge 2 года назад

      Yes, I was also interested to see the resulting DNG file sizes compared between products.

  • @edadams477
    @edadams477 2 года назад

    Anthony, I am a bit confused by you saying NoNoise is best as a standalone. I use it as part of my raw development in On1 Raw 2022 which I think is the real advantage to it. I have Topaz DeNoise and have found out of the box NoNoise is a bit crisper and Topaz DeNoise is a bit soft but using NoNoise from within my raw workflow is so much easier than using Topaz DeNoise as a plugin and bring it back as a layer in On1 Raw 2022 or having to find it to process it standalone in Topaz DeNoise , then make sure I put it back in the right place for On1

    • @aaronsiegel8367
      @aaronsiegel8367 2 года назад +1

      Running in ON1 Photo RAW 2022 is the same as running in the ON1 NoNoise standalone they both have access to the raw image.

  • @InArcadiaSum
    @InArcadiaSum Год назад

    I have a new Ideal boiler and Halo, which seems to work OK. However, looking at the reviews on Apple for the Halo phone app, it doesn't work well or at all, and the majority of user reviews are highly critical. No phone app for me, if it just complicates things.

  • @hashy666
    @hashy666 Год назад

    So what one do you think was the "best"

  • @alanplatt888
    @alanplatt888 2 года назад +1

    thank you for the comparison, nice work. Have you any experience of DXO PL DeepPrime ?

    • @Bassbarbie
      @Bassbarbie 2 года назад +3

      I haven't used PureRaw, but I think it will be the same as DxO Photolab Deep Prime - which is brilliant with raw files. One of the downsides is that you cannot use it on anything but raw files. For Jpegs, tifs or dng files, I believe you need to use one of the other programs.. It is also slow to process, but I think worth the wait for special images.

    • @alanplatt888
      @alanplatt888 2 года назад +1

      @@Bassbarbie Thank you for the reply

  • @keshav4778
    @keshav4778 2 года назад +1

    Do dxo then export to photoshop and do denoise.... The best so far

  • @Skye_the_toller
    @Skye_the_toller 2 года назад

    I made extensive tests over the last few days… Topaz remove noise, but, in some situations, brings some artifacts in white… DXO seems sharpen the photo and makes tone d’ajustements.. but results are globally more predictive… but… the 2 software cannot handle all the Z9 files at this point…

  • @DM-fp8uw
    @DM-fp8uw 2 года назад

    DXO had tone changes and the other two were tweaked by you after the AI finished so hard to compare.

  • @jav_eee
    @jav_eee 2 года назад

    Just bought your presets. On some photos, some of the presets are greyed out. Those same ones might not be on a different photo. What does this mean?

  • @AdrianIII
    @AdrianIII 2 года назад +5

    Consider pronouncing DeNoise as DEE-Noise instead of DUH-Noise?

  • @uhligsu
    @uhligsu 2 года назад

    I believe that with non-raw files, such as scanned negatives, Topaz Denoise AI, ist superior. Maybe worth another test,

    • @stevebryson5464
      @stevebryson5464 2 года назад +1

      Agreed. I use the Topaz product (as a plug-in) for digitizing negatives and slides. Very good results.

  • @PaulCarmona
    @PaulCarmona 2 года назад

    Personally, I found that Pure raw breaks my work flow and is really slow, find that using Topaz Photo AI gives be quick and great results for what I do, only use Topaz DeNoise when I need more fine tuning that AI photo can give me and keeps my Lightroom/ Photoshop round tripping easier to work with

  • @AndyMillerPhotoUK
    @AndyMillerPhotoUK 2 года назад

    Im wish I could join with you in processing my own images, but Pure Raw 2 still only support my Z9 with a couple of my Z-mount S-line lenses and NOT the Z 70-200/2.8 with a TC attached. Whereas PL5 allows me to download all the relevant modules BUT PL5 still does not support the Z9. ARGH !!!
    Please start by setting Recover Original Detail to ZERO in DNAI.

    • @KarenVaisman1
      @KarenVaisman1 2 года назад +1

      Can you please elaborate on what you mean about not support Z9 files?

  • @ypebanbung-michael8865
    @ypebanbung-michael8865 2 года назад +1

    if no adjustments would be done in any applications just auto this would be a fair comparison I guess.

  • @Viktalphotography
    @Viktalphotography 2 года назад

    In my experience, Pureraw2 it's not significant faster at all, just stick to version one and save yourself some money.

  • @raylander6329
    @raylander6329 2 года назад

    Exceptional video, as always; very clear and great comparisons; thank you for this

  • @marshafouks
    @marshafouks 2 года назад

    I have the latest version of Topaz AI Sharpen. Should I also upgrade to the latest version of Topaz A1 Denoise? thanks

    • @gbdr_ps_fan8656
      @gbdr_ps_fan8656 2 года назад +1

      In my opinion the latest Denoise AI version (3.6.1) is noticeably better than its previous release. So, yeah, I'd say go for it. Now it's very similar in quality to PL 5 with it's Deep Prime, which I sill prefer overall.

    • @marshafouks
      @marshafouks 2 года назад +1

      @@gbdr_ps_fan8656 Thanks

  • @ataraxia4526
    @ataraxia4526 2 года назад

    As some one who shoots DNG I could regret buying the DeNoise AI but it's pointless to regret things. DeNoise AI used to perform well in the beginning but now it is kind of useless. It creates lots of weird artifacts, with DNGs at least. Photos become too often just a mix of blotches of heavy unnatural grain created by the SW next to plasticy clean areas.

  • @Hsukhaybir
    @Hsukhaybir 2 года назад

    This not how noise reduction supposed to be .. zooming like that is Impractical for real work use .. DXO is the best out of them but this comparison makes Looks awful because you need to balance between sharpness and noise reduction, the other 2 has much softer pictures which is matter! And because no one will zoom at that level to see the noise ..

  • @SurvivalRino
    @SurvivalRino Год назад

    Damn this dude put moition blur on his cursor

  • @jonasweiss5817
    @jonasweiss5817 2 года назад

    A mess of extra effects in all but Topaz, and it darkened the image.

  • @marca9955
    @marca9955 2 года назад

    I hate that PR2 messes with my colours when it's only supposed to remove noise and correct lens distortion. I think it's all so they can do those awesome before/after comparisons and say "look, with only one click!" Compare the before/after comparison RAW against the straight RAW to see how they degrade the appearance of it to make that case.
    DXO is a shit company in so many ways. They continue to sell DXO Optics Pro for Photos in the Mac App Store, even though it hasn't worked for years. They refuse to issue refunds for it. When you get a VAT exemption they just keep the VAT. They don't offer student discounts. They don't honor their own promo codes, as for Anthony above. Just a shit company with some good engineers.