![]() ![]() Enabling sharpening seems to give similar results as using SharpenAI which I find tends to be a bit too much for my tastes, especially without masking. You just have a "strength" which appears to primarily affect the level of denoise and then it decides how much sharpening to apply. The main difference appears to be that you can't control the level of denoise and sharpening independently (again I'm referring to when you only have denoise enabled). Regarding the sharpening, while I've only looked at a couple images, it seems that the level of sharpening that was done in Denoise is still being done in PhotoAI when you only use Denoise (i.e., don't enable sharpening). It also was very snappy, with the possible exception of the initial "scanning image". Saving the file worked just fine and took me back to Lightroom just like Denoise did. The colors and exposure aren't changed at all. FWIW, I'm running it on a MacBook Pro M1. I have't had any of the issues described earlier. The risk is over-sharpening, which is not at all desirable. Most of the time you may find they are not needed, but my older images I thought were OK at the time have now been nicely updated. ![]() I find having different modes a bit unsettling but i have also found that for some images a different mode works better. In my older pictures sometimes I needed quite a lot to remove the …. The trick with sharpen is to use as little as you can. If the subject is still and the lens is not especially sharp at that focal length, that is,I guess, “lens blur” (My early variable aperture Nikkor 70-300 zoom was not really sharp at anything beyond 200 for example) If the subject is moving and your speed is a bit slow OR you are moving a bit, I think that is motion blur. The difference between motion blur and lens blur is not entirely clear. The quality of the results is unfortunately now much clearer to me.Īh language and linguistics are interesting topics.īlur is a lovely euphemism isn’t it? It is,I guess, the opposite of sharp, so maybe it is OK. Yes I like to complain about the updates from Topaz, but I also have to say, they have become indispensable apps and plug ins for me. More recent images often need no sharpening and the noise levels from the D500 is quite low compared to the old D90 with a kit lens.Īll in all I have found Topaz Labs AI has done an excellent job for me and, for the current iteration of stand alone apps, changing the processing presences to use the GPU with 8gb of video ram has speeded up the processing very well. Sometimes it was motion blur, sometimes it was low light plus focus/lens blur. I really appreciated the way older files could be brought up to speed. My older lenses clearly had some issues with sharpness and my focussing technique 10 or 12 years ago was not as good as it is now. I was able to get sharper images and cleaner images with the new versions without over doing it. I had used the older Topaz apps on some of the images before, but in this case I went back to the original NEF files and first fine tuned the amount of noise (they call it blur now) on the screen, and then the same with sharpening. I would like to agree, BUT having just gone through a search through older NEF images taken years ago for a project, I find myself appreciating the newer features of Topaz DeNoise and Topaz Sharpen.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |