Thanks- dear Peter! I'm using TOPAZ AI bundle (Denoise, Sharpen, Gigapixel) together with Affinity photo. It was a game changer for my wildlife pictures and can't understand why I didn't applied it before. I'm happy with it - especially the sharpening feature of Denoise. I'm not sure to switch to another software but - as you said - 3 players are pushing each other for better performance. Perfect for us :-)
Great comparison video! Best advice ever, download the trial versions and try them for yourself. Once I tried DxOPhotolab4, I was hooked. The upgrade to Photolab5 with DeepPrime has made such a difference in my high ISO photos from my Lumix m4/3 cameras. All those complaints about m4/3 noise and low light problems disappeared. Appreciate the time you took to do you comparison and the share your experiences!👍
Thanks Peter. I'm with Terry Noon (above) on this. DxO first and then Topaz DeNoise or Sharpen for a final polish. This workflow has made 25600 ISO images entirely usable for me in the extreme circumstances of bird photography in dim conditions: fast shutters speeds, aperture wide open, max ISO. Perhaps not for other users.
Good to hear. I've had my E-M1 Mark III limited to ISO 6400 with sunrise bird photography. It's time for me to push ISO higher and see what happens, using my DxO and Topaz DN AI. Even moreso, I think, for lucky OM-1 owners (like Peter)!
I used dxo recently on a trial basis and was amazed at how well it did! Soon as I can afford it I will be purchasing dxo! Thanks for the great review Peter!
Much appreciated video. In one of your earlier videos I believe you introduced us to DXO PhotoLab4 or maybe DXO PL5, I'm not sure. Anyway it had the "deep prime" feature. I tried it out and now use it on all my keepers I put on my stock site. Not only does it almost completely eliminate noise, it also corrects for lens distortion and gives my image a slight pop as a .dng when I import it to Capture One Pro. I'm using an E-M1 mkIII for all my work now and will actually be purchasing a second new body in the very near future. For my work it is the perfect choice. Thanks again!!
I echo the other comments - a quick word to how these three compare to Workspace would be much appreciated. It's nice to have ON1 confirmed as a viable contender with the other two though. When I first moved to Olympus 4 1/2 years ago I bought the stand alone ON1 Photo Raw program and have been very happy with it as my main post processing software.
Opening the consideration to the other features and functionality of the compared softwares, ON1 is beyond its quite good results in noise reduction the most complete package and a real alternative to LR (and maybe also PS) with its unique file management.
I’m glad you said that about ON1 - I thought it was just me. I do like this software package. On1 RAW, than k goodness, now supports OM-1 . The support On1 gives is fantastic,
Hi Peter. Nice comparison and it does seem that the noise issue is being removed as a concern in future. I have had some good results on occasion using DXO and Topaz together- this makes sure that the lens corrections are incorporated first using DXO before passing to Topaz to get the benefits of its offering. Just a thought but most times one or other app will do with say 10% benefitting from a combo as above. Thanks for a good video.
@@spinfuzor Peter's reviewed PureRaw on YT and likes it a lot. DeepPRIME NR on Raw files is quite similar in PureRaw and PhotoLab, but as you suggest, PureRaw is easier for users who just want KISS denoising. BUT: PhotoLab allows tweaking of the amount of NR, and PureRaw does not. Both perform the same optical adjustments for lens and camera. PhotoLab can perform more LR-like adjustments. PureRaw is less expensive for new licensees.
I agree DxO is the best in most cases.. The reason is: it is color calibrated for each supported camera/lens combination and ISO value and it is not only about noise reduction, DeepPrime is a AI powered raw converter which produces better detail, color and less noise than other converters. Disadvantage: DeepPrime only works with raw images and it needs a compatible graphics card for optimum performance.
On first release, DeepPRIME used to take me 2-3 minutes to apply to an image in export, which would make me think twice about using it. But with a newer computer, newer graphics card, and newer PL version, it's quick, as in about 20 seconds, comparable to Topaz; time is not an issue. Anybody not happy with processing time, you may need to upgrade hardware.
It is worth leaving familiar paths every now and then and taking a new path. It's unfortunate that the "big" photo editing programs like Photoshop and Lightroom lag behind the smaller tools when it comes to denoise.
Great video, thanks Peter. I'd be very interested to learn how you use sharpening in DxO. In my brief time with it so far, it seems to frequently oversharpen, but tweaking parameters doesn't help (it either becomes too soft or to artifact-y). Thanks.
I use PL5 and am very happy with it. But it is interesting that it doesn’t render the green color of the leaves (bird picture) very nicely. I have also observed this but blamed the camera for it.
I'm most often shooting wildlife especially birds among leaves with Oly and often want to dampen the Luminosity (brightness) of greens a tad, and sometimes Saturation as well, because for me, the Oly greens are a little distracting from my main subject. In Lightroom both are easy to lower a bit in the HCL panel.
Looking at everything aside from noise reduction, Topaz really falls behind here. It's colors are off, the noise isn't as well reduced in those selected images and most surprisingly, it also introduces white balance issues between light and dark spots, giving things a green cast in bright areas and a purple cast in the shadows. It's almost as if Topaz smooths out the color-noise and smears the blurred version of it on top. On1 seemed to hold up pretty well - especially the exposure correction seems to work slightly more effective. But compared to DxO it holds no candle imo, as it also introduces some minor color shifts and just isn't as effective (e.g. text and back of the bench).
When you ran these test did you use Topaz Denoise with Auto settings? Or did you play around with the different AI models? Because I find Topaz to be superior IMO when you adjust and tweak the setting to your liking.
As a hobbyist I only edit in my Samsung tablet and sometimes in my laptop, with free software. In my tablet I use ON1 and Lightroom, but Lightroom only accept DNG files for edit in the free Android version. ON1 can edit CR2 files without problems but I don't like the raw conversion in ON1. Other raw to DNG softwares aren't so good. For me a near perfect solution could be DXO PureRaw, to get denoised and lens corrected DNGs in my laptop that can be edited in any other software with full compatibility, in laptop or tablet or anywhere
Hi, Peter. Thanks for another good comparison. I am interested in all three products and (about two weeks ago) contacted Topaz to ask if they work with .ORF files. They said "not yet, but soon." Does Topaz software now work with files from the OM-1?
@@ForsgardPeter The Topaz website indicates that Topaz NoNoise AI works with .ORF files but that the other Topaz products do not as yet (11 July 2022).
I moved over to ON1 RAW a few years ago and now that it includes NoNoise AI as well as the greatly improved Resize, at saves me having to use/purchase LR, PS and a DeNoise programme. Additionally, if you choose, it is a one off payment with upgrades during that year and you then decide if and when to purchase the next version rather than the Adobe subscription that in my opinion turns out to be rather expensive over the years.
Adobe's photographers plan is about 12€ per month. That is not bad. There are updates and new features twice a year. If there is a need for video editing it is about 50€ per month at the moment. I remember when this was launched it was cheaper than buying the whole suite every other year. There is a downside. The software stops working when you stop paying. On1 seems to be a good software. Have not used it before this noise test.
Hi Peter, if you have the time, I’d love to know how to switch off everything in PL5 except the noise and sharpening. It’s difficult comparing it to the other software because it always seems to change colour and brightness etc. I have tried to counter this but without success. I only got the trial because PhotoRaw isn’t yet compatible with OM-1. I have Topaz Denoise and Sharpen and sometimes find that the Sharpen does a better job with certain images. It can be quite time-consuming adjusting the settings for noise and sharpen levels for different software and comparing the result but I sometimes do it for old images with sentimental value for example. I hope you can suggest some settings for Photolab. Thanks
So in Photolab each "development" slider, like in Lightroom, has an on/off switch. You can switch any module off in PL5 by doing this. Then, just keep the noise reduction and lens modules on, and you're good to go.
Im using topaz denoise. Works alright for me but im always unsecure about the workflow. Thats my main Problem. Denoise raw and afterwards luminar or first using luminar and highlight the shadows and afterwards topaz.
ON1 NoNoise and Topaz DeNoise are best to remove noise from TIFF or JPEG so you keep the lens modular. ON1 and Topaz don't even copy the lens modular over when making a DNG raw file.
I have tried these three products and IMO for use with lower ISO (results may be different with extreme ISO) DxO and ON1 are usually a tie, although ON1 can introduce a slight color change. Maybe I would give an edge to DxO, and there is a slightly different look, but ON1 is more flexible with a variety of adjustments. I did a trial of Topaz DeNoise AI but did not keep it. I do a lot of architectural photos and found that Topaz does not do a good job with medium textures such as brick and wood walls - it seems to think they are noise and smooths them out too much (there is a slider, I can't remember what it's called, that can recover some of that texture), while DxO and ON1 retain these textures.
In fairness, DxO PhotoLab (not PureRaw) can be used to reduce noise in JPGs, but you can't use DxO's best noise reduction model, DeepPRIME (selectable in PhotoLab, mandatory in PureRaw). You have to use PhotoLab's HQ noise reduction instead. HQ is still pretty good, though. I do run up against this with Oly images shot with ProCapture, which can only be JPG, not Raw.
Hej Peter, I sent a new ARW file into Topaz Photo AI yesterday, 10th of December 22, and Photo AI 1.1.1. made a massacre out of a fine structure in a stone on the beech. The stone is of red granite with darker stripes, and it was surrounded by a small pond of clear water on white sand. So the subtle structure of the darker pattern passed from above to below the waterline and was visible with the naked eye (and in the raw file) all the way to the bottom. Photo AI's autopilot decided only to denoise, but with the offered settings it totally blurred the darker structure below the water surface. If I reduced the Normal denoise to 1 the blur was acceptable, but to get the darker pattern visible, I had to increase the detail slider brutally, and as a result the upper part of the stone now got a horrible rough surface. Conclusion: Photo AI was unable to do the job. Then I ran the same ARW file with DxO Photolab 6 with DeepPRIME XD - and guess what? The result was perfect. The DxO app is a trial version, so I am a neutral tester, but probably a new owner soon. I wish the DeepPRIME XD was available in DxO Pure Raw 2 - business strategy, you know.
That is interesting. I have not heard about problems like that before. Maybe it is something to do with the file? Have you checked that Photo AI supports your camera?
@@ForsgardPeter My Sony A7R3 with a Tamron 28-75 mm is a well known combination everywhere. The problem is that Topaz' AI model for Photo AI considers the water surface to be a shape-breaker and not just a transparent liquid. Fortunately DxO Photolab 6 and DeepPRIME XD is able to distinguish. It's a matter of how well the AI model has been trained.
Peter said @1:15+: "There's only one odd thing: OM1 has very good lens profiles, but when [the images are] imported to Lightroom, the lens profiles are gone. It doesn't show them. Most likely the problem is Lightroom and not OM1." Lightroom doesn't allow the ability to check the box for Enable Profile Corrections for .ORF Raw images taken with Olympus gear. Adobe's explanation is that, unlike Raw files taken with Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc., but I guess similar to .JPG files generally, lens correction data is already built into Olympus Raw files, so lens profiles can't be switched on or off by LR. For confirmation, websearch the question: "Olympus lens profiles in Lightroom?" I've always wondered why DxO can do it and Adobe can't, but it is what it is. This is not new to OM1, though. It's applied to earlier Oly camera bodies and lenses as well. Great comparison of these three very helpful apps. Thank you!
While the AI noise reduction almost gets rid of noise problem itself, sadly sensor at higher ISO still suffers in the areas of color fidelity and dynamic range, unless sensor has dual native ISO setting or something like that. So we are better of shooting at lower native ISO values for maximum color fidelity and dynamic range, but if that is not possible having ability to clean the noise after the fact is truly , to use the commercial term, game changer. In my tests DXO still performs best at highest ISO and lover the ISO the less difference I see. But at high ISO in my view DXO is the best on the market for now.
Too bad you didn't include PL6 with the new DeepPRIME XD. I've only had it for a short time but the results are amazing. Most of my images are from my G9 (but also GX85, FZ1000, TG-5, and even a Galaxy S22) and I've primarily used PL (from 4 on) to process RAW. I also have the Topaz "suite" and find myself using Photo AI when I feel the need. It also works on JPGs, while the only JPG-compatible NR in PL is High Quality (but I mostly shoot RAW). The bottom line is that you (and others) have shown that ISO is now largely irrelevant as only an obsessive photographer (and photographers rarely buy prints) would notice any small difference in IQ--yet another reason that anything larger than MFT makes no sense except in very rare cases.
I understand that you have affiliate links for all 3 software and you don't want to degrade any of them, but there is no compartment to DxO and his denoising capabilities, I have all 3 of them, and Topaz is disappointing to me, and ON1 with more noisy pictures leaves a clear "footprint" on the picture. And DxO is just in a league of its own when it comes to denoising, he amazed me so many times...and being m 4/3 user noise is a constant issue, and he proves time and time again to be the best tool for that problem.
That is true, but PhotoLab5 is a full editing software. Topaz DeNoise AI and On1 NoNoise AI do only noise reduction. If you need DxO DeepPrime for noise reduction there is also DxO PureRaw that is about he same price as Topaz and On1 NoNoise AI. The reason I used PhotoLab 5 was that DxO PureRAW does not support OM-1 files yet. This could have been mentioned in the video, I agree.
Buying a full-price license? OK. But look at the long-term picture, as upgrades work. And if you can be patient, both DxO and Topaz offer deep discounts on sales for new purchases. Hints: try around Black Friday in November, and keep in mind DxO will soon release PL6. (I own and use LR, DxO, and Topaz. Better prices on legal DxO and Topaz software can be had.)
I just did a quick check between Topaz denoise, photolab 5 and manual noise reduction in CO22 on an heavely underexposed Em1mk2 nature photo (bears running in the shade of a forest, and found out the photolab 5 deepraw didn't correctly preserved the colors contrary to topaz noise AI raw mode after import into CO22; furthermore the photolab noise reduction was more bloated than the topaz one. The problem with topaz was that the underexposed photo was so dark in topaz Noise AI was that it was almost impossible to compare the noise reduction mode as the image was mostly black, not to speak of tweaking the adjustment. Finally, i got the best result using the manual noise and sharpness tools of capture one gaining a little details compare to Topaz Noise AI raw mode. I would say that if interaction time is an issue, Topaz quite good, if output quality is really required, some manual tweeks in capture one give an extra shapness. Photo taken with em1 mkII, 100-400 panLeica @ 213mm, 1/6500" f 5.1 3200 iso
An Oly pro-photographer friend of mine agrees with you and would cite his billboard image shot at ISO 3200, and no one sees the noise driving down the highway. Still if you Love 4:3 magnification with hand-holdability for frame-filling wildlife, DxO and/or Topaz noise reduction, and Topaz Sharpen AI, can give you greatly improved image quality (compared to using Lightroom alone).
Thanks- dear Peter!
I'm using TOPAZ AI bundle (Denoise, Sharpen, Gigapixel) together with Affinity photo.
It was a game changer for my wildlife pictures and can't understand why I didn't applied it before.
I'm happy with it - especially the sharpening feature of Denoise.
I'm not sure to switch to another software but - as you said - 3 players are pushing each other for better performance.
Perfect for us :-)
Topaz is a good bundle.
Maybe you can try dxo pureraw in your workflow as it include the denoizing of photolab.
Great comparison video! Best advice ever, download the trial versions and try them for yourself. Once I tried DxOPhotolab4, I was hooked. The upgrade to Photolab5 with DeepPrime has made such a difference in my high ISO photos from my Lumix m4/3 cameras. All those complaints about m4/3 noise and low light problems disappeared. Appreciate the time you took to do you comparison and the share your experiences!👍
What's the difference in Deep Prime quality from Photolab 4 to 5?
In terms of quality and speed of processing?
Thanks Peter. I'm with Terry Noon (above) on this. DxO first and then Topaz DeNoise or Sharpen for a final polish. This workflow has made 25600 ISO images entirely usable for me in the extreme circumstances of bird photography in dim conditions: fast shutters speeds, aperture wide open, max ISO. Perhaps not for other users.
Good to hear. I've had my E-M1 Mark III limited to ISO 6400 with sunrise bird photography. It's time for me to push ISO higher and see what happens, using my DxO and Topaz DN AI. Even moreso, I think, for lucky OM-1 owners (like Peter)!
I used dxo recently on a trial basis and was amazed at how well it did! Soon as I can afford it I will be purchasing dxo! Thanks for the great review Peter!
Photolab 6 expected in october 😄
Much appreciated video. In one of your earlier videos I believe you introduced us to DXO PhotoLab4 or maybe DXO PL5, I'm not sure. Anyway it had the "deep prime" feature. I tried it out and now use it on all my keepers I put on my stock site. Not only does it almost completely eliminate noise, it also corrects for lens distortion and gives my image a slight pop as a .dng when I import it to Capture One Pro.
I'm using an E-M1 mkIII for all my work now and will actually be purchasing a second new body in the very near future. For my work it is the perfect choice. Thanks again!!
Great to hear!
I echo the other comments - a quick word to how these three compare to Workspace would be much appreciated. It's nice to have ON1 confirmed as a viable contender with the other two though. When I first moved to Olympus 4 1/2 years ago I bought the stand alone ON1 Photo Raw program and have been very happy with it as my main post processing software.
My wife tested our “E-M 5 (mark I from 2012) her pictures cleaned up nicely in DxO PL 5. They actually look’s really good.
I can do magic to old images!
Opening the consideration to the other features and functionality of the compared softwares, ON1 is beyond its quite good results in noise reduction the most complete package and a real alternative to LR (and maybe also PS) with its unique file management.
I’m glad you said that about ON1 - I thought it was just me. I do like this software package. On1 RAW, than k goodness, now supports OM-1 . The support On1 gives is fantastic,
Hi Peter. Nice comparison and it does seem that the noise issue is being removed as a concern in future. I have had some good results on occasion using DXO and Topaz together- this makes sure that the lens corrections are incorporated first using DXO before passing to Topaz to get the benefits of its offering. Just a thought but most times one or other app will do with say 10% benefitting from a combo as above. Thanks for a good video.
I have not tried to combine these. That is a good idea to use the lens correction in DxO and then use the Topaz DeNoise. I need to give it a try.
@@ForsgardPeter maybe for a smoother workflow you can try pureraw
@@spinfuzor Peter's reviewed PureRaw on YT and likes it a lot. DeepPRIME NR on Raw files is quite similar in PureRaw and PhotoLab, but as you suggest, PureRaw is easier for users who just want KISS denoising. BUT: PhotoLab allows tweaking of the amount of NR, and PureRaw does not. Both perform the same optical adjustments for lens and camera. PhotoLab can perform more LR-like adjustments. PureRaw is less expensive for new licensees.
Good video - i like On1 as no noise ai comes bundled in the main s/w so no extra cost or step in my workflow.
I agree DxO is the best in most cases.. The reason is: it is color calibrated for each supported camera/lens combination and ISO value and it is not only about noise reduction, DeepPrime is a AI powered raw converter which produces better detail, color and less noise than other converters.
Disadvantage: DeepPrime only works with raw images and it needs a compatible graphics card for optimum performance.
That is excatly the reason I think that DxO is the best for me.
On first release, DeepPRIME used to take me 2-3 minutes to apply to an image in export, which would make me think twice about using it. But with a newer computer, newer graphics card, and newer PL version, it's quick, as in about 20 seconds, comparable to Topaz; time is not an issue. Anybody not happy with processing time, you may need to upgrade hardware.
It is worth leaving familiar paths every now and then and taking a new path. It's unfortunate that the "big" photo editing programs like Photoshop and Lightroom lag behind the smaller tools when it comes to denoise.
It IS odd to me as well that Adobe has had years of getting their butt kicked by DxO and Topaz in NR and haven't stepped up their game.
I'd like to know the comparison of process speed in between these 3 software.
Topaz is the slowest, On1 and PhotoLab5 are about the same.
Great video, thanks Peter. I'd be very interested to learn how you use sharpening in DxO. In my brief time with it so far, it seems to frequently oversharpen, but tweaking parameters doesn't help (it either becomes too soft or to artifact-y). Thanks.
I will look into it.
@@ForsgardPeter thank you!
DXO PhotoLab came out the best with ISO 25,600 because it restored loss color. That's something the other two programs can't do.
Trying to figure out what I did wrong but I can't get the trial upgrade of DXO to recognize OM-1 files.
You did try the latest version of PhotoLab5 and not DxO PureRAW?
I use PL5 and am very happy with it. But it is interesting that it doesn’t render the green color of the leaves (bird picture) very nicely. I have also observed this but blamed the camera for it.
I need the recheck that! I have not noticed any problems with greens. Thanks for pointing that out.
I'm most often shooting wildlife especially birds among leaves with Oly and often want to dampen the Luminosity (brightness) of greens a tad, and sometimes Saturation as well, because for me, the Oly greens are a little distracting from my main subject. In Lightroom both are easy to lower a bit in the HCL panel.
Looking at everything aside from noise reduction, Topaz really falls behind here. It's colors are off, the noise isn't as well reduced in those selected images and most surprisingly, it also introduces white balance issues between light and dark spots, giving things a green cast in bright areas and a purple cast in the shadows. It's almost as if Topaz smooths out the color-noise and smears the blurred version of it on top.
On1 seemed to hold up pretty well - especially the exposure correction seems to work slightly more effective.
But compared to DxO it holds no candle imo, as it also introduces some minor color shifts and just isn't as effective (e.g. text and back of the bench).
When you ran these test did you use Topaz Denoise with Auto settings? Or did you play around with the different AI models? Because I find Topaz to be superior IMO when you adjust and tweak the setting to your liking.
was playing around with the settings. I started with the auto and tweeked those.
As a hobbyist I only edit in my Samsung tablet and sometimes in my laptop, with free software. In my tablet I use ON1 and Lightroom, but Lightroom only accept DNG files for edit in the free Android version. ON1 can edit CR2 files without problems but I don't like the raw conversion in ON1. Other raw to DNG softwares aren't so good. For me a near perfect solution could be DXO PureRaw, to get denoised and lens corrected DNGs in my laptop that can be edited in any other software with full compatibility, in laptop or tablet or anywhere
Thank you for this great video. We appreciate a lot and are please to see that you prefer our solution. take care
My pleasure.
Hi Peter. Thank you for sharing. By any chance do you know if the OM-1 is ISO invariant?
I have not tested it, but I have heard that it is.
Hi, Peter. Thanks for another good comparison. I am interested in all three products and (about two weeks ago) contacted Topaz to ask if they work with .ORF files. They said "not yet, but soon." Does Topaz software now work with files from the OM-1?
Yes it does. Test it. There is a trial version.
@@ForsgardPeter The Topaz website indicates that Topaz NoNoise AI works with .ORF files but that the other Topaz products do not as yet (11 July 2022).
How does OM Workspace compare?
Sadly, still only works with Nvidia graphics cards on a PC. No support for AMD cards.
It is quite good, but I have to say that the newest version of these software are better.
Peter, would be interested how you would compare On1 v Lightroom. I admit to editing on On-1 first and then finishing off and storing in LR cloud
I might do that in the near future. On1 seems quite interesting.
I moved over to ON1 RAW a few years ago and now that it includes NoNoise AI as well as the greatly improved Resize, at saves me having to use/purchase LR, PS and a DeNoise programme. Additionally, if you choose, it is a one off payment with upgrades during that year and you then decide if and when to purchase the next version rather than the Adobe subscription that in my opinion turns out to be rather expensive over the years.
Adobe's photographers plan is about 12€ per month. That is not bad. There are updates and new features twice a year. If there is a need for video editing it is about 50€ per month at the moment. I remember when this was launched it was cheaper than buying the whole suite every other year. There is a downside. The software stops working when you stop paying.
On1 seems to be a good software. Have not used it before this noise test.
Love On1 like to by outright
Hi Peter, if you have the time, I’d love to know how to switch off everything in PL5 except the noise and sharpening. It’s difficult comparing it to the other software because it always seems to change colour and brightness etc. I have tried to counter this but without success. I only got the trial because PhotoRaw isn’t yet compatible with OM-1. I have Topaz Denoise and Sharpen and sometimes find that the Sharpen does a better job with certain images. It can be quite time-consuming adjusting the settings for noise and sharpen levels for different software and comparing the result but I sometimes do it for old images with sentimental value for example.
I hope you can suggest some settings for Photolab. Thanks
So in Photolab each "development" slider, like in Lightroom, has an on/off switch. You can switch any module off in PL5 by doing this. Then, just keep the noise reduction and lens modules on, and you're good to go.
Im using topaz denoise. Works alright for me but im always unsecure about the workflow. Thats my main Problem. Denoise raw and afterwards luminar or first using luminar and highlight the shadows and afterwards topaz.
ON1 NoNoise and Topaz DeNoise are best to remove noise from TIFF or JPEG so you keep the lens modular.
ON1 and Topaz don't even copy the lens modular over when making a DNG raw file.
I have tried these three products and IMO for use with lower ISO (results may be different with extreme ISO) DxO and ON1 are usually a tie, although ON1 can introduce a slight color change. Maybe I would give an edge to DxO, and there is a slightly different look, but ON1 is more flexible with a variety of adjustments. I did a trial of Topaz DeNoise AI but did not keep it. I do a lot of architectural photos and found that Topaz does not do a good job with medium textures such as brick and wood walls - it seems to think they are noise and smooths them out too much (there is a slider, I can't remember what it's called, that can recover some of that texture), while DxO and ON1 retain these textures.
Thanks for the info.
I use Topaz denoise. I like, that it also works with jpg and not raw-only
That is a good point!
In fairness, DxO PhotoLab (not PureRaw) can be used to reduce noise in JPGs, but you can't use DxO's best noise reduction model, DeepPRIME (selectable in PhotoLab, mandatory in PureRaw). You have to use PhotoLab's HQ noise reduction instead. HQ is still pretty good, though. I do run up against this with Oly images shot with ProCapture, which can only be JPG, not Raw.
Hej Peter, I sent a new ARW file into Topaz Photo AI yesterday, 10th of December 22, and Photo AI 1.1.1. made a massacre out of a fine structure in a stone on the beech. The stone is of red granite with darker stripes, and it was surrounded by a small pond of clear water on white sand. So the subtle structure of the darker pattern passed from above to below the waterline and was visible with the naked eye (and in the raw file) all the way to the bottom. Photo AI's autopilot decided only to denoise, but with the offered settings it totally blurred the darker structure below the water surface. If I reduced the Normal denoise to 1 the blur was acceptable, but to get the darker pattern visible, I had to increase the detail slider brutally, and as a result the upper part of the stone now got a horrible rough surface. Conclusion: Photo AI was unable to do the job.
Then I ran the same ARW file with DxO Photolab 6 with DeepPRIME XD - and guess what? The result was perfect. The DxO app is a trial version, so I am a neutral tester, but probably a new owner soon. I wish the DeepPRIME XD was available in DxO Pure Raw 2 - business strategy, you know.
That is interesting. I have not heard about problems like that before. Maybe it is something to do with the file? Have you checked that Photo AI supports your camera?
@@ForsgardPeter My Sony A7R3 with a Tamron 28-75 mm is a well known combination everywhere. The problem is that Topaz' AI model for Photo AI considers the water surface to be a shape-breaker and not just a transparent liquid. Fortunately DxO Photolab 6 and DeepPRIME XD is able to distinguish. It's a matter of how well the AI model has been trained.
Peter said @1:15+: "There's only one odd thing: OM1 has very good lens profiles, but when [the images are] imported to Lightroom, the lens profiles are gone. It doesn't show them. Most likely the problem is Lightroom and not OM1."
Lightroom doesn't allow the ability to check the box for Enable Profile Corrections for .ORF Raw images taken with Olympus gear. Adobe's explanation is that, unlike Raw files taken with Canon, Nikon, Sony, etc., but I guess similar to .JPG files generally, lens correction data is already built into Olympus Raw files, so lens profiles can't be switched on or off by LR. For confirmation, websearch the question: "Olympus lens profiles in Lightroom?" I've always wondered why DxO can do it and Adobe can't, but it is what it is. This is not new to OM1, though. It's applied to earlier Oly camera bodies and lenses as well.
Great comparison of these three very helpful apps. Thank you!
Thanks fo the info about the lens profiles.
While the AI noise reduction almost gets rid of noise problem itself, sadly sensor at higher ISO still suffers in the areas of color fidelity and dynamic range, unless sensor has dual native ISO setting or something like that. So we are better of shooting at lower native ISO values for maximum color fidelity and dynamic range, but if that is not possible having ability to clean the noise after the fact is truly , to use the commercial term, game changer. In my tests DXO still performs best at highest ISO and lover the ISO the less difference I see. But at high ISO in my view DXO is the best on the market for now.
Too bad you didn't include PL6 with the new DeepPRIME XD. I've only had it for a short time but the results are amazing. Most of my images are from my G9 (but also GX85, FZ1000, TG-5, and even a Galaxy S22) and I've primarily used PL (from 4 on) to process RAW. I also have the Topaz "suite" and find myself using Photo AI when I feel the need. It also works on JPGs, while the only JPG-compatible NR in PL is High Quality (but I mostly shoot RAW). The bottom line is that you (and others) have shown that ISO is now largely irrelevant as only an obsessive photographer (and photographers rarely buy prints) would notice any small difference in IQ--yet another reason that anything larger than MFT makes no sense except in very rare cases.
DeepPRIME XD was not available when this video was made in July. DeepPRIME was launched in October this year.
I understand that you have affiliate links for all 3 software and you don't want to degrade any of them, but there is no compartment to DxO and his denoising capabilities, I have
all 3 of them, and Topaz is disappointing to me, and ON1 with more noisy pictures leaves a clear "footprint" on the picture. And DxO is just in a league of its own when it comes
to denoising, he amazed me so many times...and being m 4/3 user noise is a constant issue, and he proves time and time again to be the best tool for that problem.
I have them all so that everyone can decide themselves. I agree that DxO is the best one.
The DxO handles contrast much better. You can tell which ones are DxO without knowing.
Great!
DX RAW I'm more than happy with.
There are all good. Amazing how tech is getting so much better.
Peter, you forgot talking about prices. Topaz DeNoise AI and ON1 No Noise AI are four times cheaper than DxO Photolab 5 !
That is true, but PhotoLab5 is a full editing software. Topaz DeNoise AI and On1 NoNoise AI do only noise reduction. If you need DxO DeepPrime for noise reduction there is also DxO PureRaw that is about he same price as Topaz and On1 NoNoise AI. The reason I used PhotoLab 5 was that DxO PureRAW does not support OM-1 files yet. This could have been mentioned in the video, I agree.
Buying a full-price license? OK. But look at the long-term picture, as upgrades work. And if you can be patient, both DxO and Topaz offer deep discounts on sales for new purchases. Hints: try around Black Friday in November, and keep in mind DxO will soon release PL6. (I own and use LR, DxO, and Topaz. Better prices on legal DxO and Topaz software can be had.)
capture one 22 pro
I just did a quick check between Topaz denoise, photolab 5 and manual noise reduction in CO22 on an heavely underexposed Em1mk2 nature photo (bears running in the shade of a forest, and found out the photolab 5 deepraw didn't correctly preserved the colors contrary to topaz noise AI raw mode after import into CO22; furthermore the photolab noise reduction was more bloated than the topaz one.
The problem with topaz was that the underexposed photo was so dark in topaz Noise AI was that it was almost impossible to compare the noise reduction mode as the image was mostly black, not to speak of tweaking the adjustment.
Finally, i got the best result using the manual noise and sharpness tools of capture one gaining a little details compare to Topaz Noise AI raw mode.
I would say that if interaction time is an issue, Topaz quite good, if output quality is really required, some manual tweeks in capture one give an extra shapness.
Photo taken with em1 mkII, 100-400 panLeica @ 213mm, 1/6500" f 5.1 3200 iso
👍
I think today people worry too much about noise.
That is true. It is not about the amount it is also about the look and feel of the noise.
An Oly pro-photographer friend of mine agrees with you and would cite his billboard image shot at ISO 3200, and no one sees the noise driving down the highway. Still if you Love 4:3 magnification with hand-holdability for frame-filling wildlife, DxO and/or Topaz noise reduction, and Topaz Sharpen AI, can give you greatly improved image quality (compared to using Lightroom alone).
Just too bad that DXO is much more expensive