I'll try that on this image and post the results AC (After Coffee).
Another Topaz Sharpen Ai - Before and After.
- Thread starter nuclearjock
- Start date
Yes that is what I understand and the non addition of halos is the clue that it is using some form of deconvolution sharpening and I would guess that it is also attempting to estimate the PSF. Final output sharpening will usually involve adding the non noticeable halos or for printing noticeable (at 100% zoom) on screen only
It doesn't use deconvolution sharpening. It uses a completely new sharpening method involving training the AI engine with millions of sharp and blurred images.
Their similar Gigapixel AI product actually invents detail, using pixels based on its experience of what they are likely to be. This is demonstrated by tests on extreme cases enhancing number plates and similar, where it can turn a hopelessly blurred plate into something that looks good, but the letters may be gibberish. (So it should probably not be used to sharpen images to be used in evidence.)
I seem to remember that Topaz recommends evaluating results AW (After Wine).
IMO some aspects of each image are more appealing. The feather detail in the first image is adequate while a bit over the top in the second. On the other hand the eye/head detail looks better in the second. If Sharpen AI was used in stabilize mode at default settings then dialing it back to 30 percent or so may be an improvement.
While Sharpen AI does not produce halo effects in the conventional sense, it can/does produce other sharpening artifacts. I've noted that in particular if there is any underlying rim effects due to CA correction performed by LR or other RAW converter then significant artifacts can show up around dark edges with lighter BG. Artifacts occur least in sharpen mode and most in focus mode.
While Sharpen AI does not produce halo effects in the conventional sense, it can/does produce other sharpening artifacts. I've noted that in particular if there is any underlying rim effects due to CA correction performed by LR or other RAW converter then significant artifacts can show up around dark edges with lighter BG. Artifacts occur least in sharpen mode and most in focus mode.
I understand that, but it ain't going to happen. I'm a MacBook Pro user, and the only way to do that is to buy a new machine. Nope.
Interesting thread, is there any subject that engenders more, sometimes heated, discussion than sharpening? Well, maybe camera make, sensor size and such, eh?
For me what is rather amazing, as you note here, is what "stabilize" can do. I have tried the methods in the latest PS as well as On1, in my opinion neither is as good overall, with so little effort, than this Topaz AI. I am not at all sure that I would use this regularly for every image.
Tony brings up the convoluted matter of deconvolution sharpening, I am surprised that more people don't know, or understand, this. Interesting that Mr. Growl notes that the Topaz product does not do this. What is most encouraging to me is that this is a "first iteration" of their AI products, and a pretty darned good first overall.
I am also very impressed at how well they behave on RAW files. The only real downside that I see is that I keep trying to find that "single program" workflow that can really work on raw data throughout. These products just throw one more wrinkle into that, in that you need some intermediate type once you are done. DNG is a good start, we just need all the other products to read them.
And whose fault is that??? You'd think a guy with your education would know better than to paint yourself into a corner ...
For me what is rather amazing, as you note here, is what "stabilize" can do. I have tried the methods in the latest PS as well as On1, in my opinion neither is as good overall, with so little effort, than this Topaz AI. I am not at all sure that I would use this regularly for every image.
Tony brings up the convoluted matter of deconvolution sharpening, I am surprised that more people don't know, or understand, this. Interesting that Mr. Growl notes that the Topaz product does not do this. What is most encouraging to me is that this is a "first iteration" of their AI products, and a pretty darned good first overall.
I am also very impressed at how well they behave on RAW files. The only real downside that I see is that I keep trying to find that "single program" workflow that can really work on raw data throughout. These products just throw one more wrinkle into that, in that you need some intermediate type once you are done. DNG is a good start, we just need all the other products to read them.
And whose fault is that??? You'd think a guy with your education would know better than to paint yourself into a corner ...
Bill, it's so good to have you back. BTW, retirement is fabulous!
Looks good to me. Now try it with 0.3 and show us how that looks.
My take in general on Topaz Sharpen AI:
1) I've been using Topaz software since they started. The first iterations of all their plug ins had always been good, but slow. They get the basic functionality down and then in subsequent iterations and releases, performance enhancements come. I see no difference here, so patience is key.
2) We are all still learning the capabilities of this tool and as such, we will have a learning curve with some hits and misses. The more we share, the quicker our mastery of said tool will be.
3) I'd love to have some masking tools built into Sharpen AI, but we can always use it as a plugin to Photoshop and use it's masking tools to limit the effects. Not ideal, but at least there is an option.
1) I've been using Topaz software since they started. The first iterations of all their plug ins had always been good, but slow. They get the basic functionality down and then in subsequent iterations and releases, performance enhancements come. I see no difference here, so patience is key.
2) We are all still learning the capabilities of this tool and as such, we will have a learning curve with some hits and misses. The more we share, the quicker our mastery of said tool will be.
3) I'd love to have some masking tools built into Sharpen AI, but we can always use it as a plugin to Photoshop and use it's masking tools to limit the effects. Not ideal, but at least there is an option.
O.3/0.5/0 or 0.3/0.3/0?
0.3 0.5 0
It is just the first number that determines the amount of sharpening.
Last edited:
I know. Just wanted to be clear
.
I was just processing some landscape photos with a lot of detail and was using Photoshop's Smart Sharpen with settings cranked up to 150/1.2 to get them really sharp. Then I tried Sharpen AI, in Sharpen mode, with the sharpen setting adjusted down to 0.3, and the results are sharper and clearer than the cranked up PS results.
I'm beignning to think I should batch sharpen all my tens of thousands of photos using Sharpen AI set to a low setting. The computer I am using at this moment takes 50 seconds to sharpen one 20MP photo (my fastest machine has a better video card so will be a bit faster than this).
A quick calculation shows that if I have this computer running continuously, I can process 50,000 photos in just 29 days. That doesn't seem too bad. When I did my digitising project, and converted 12,000 35mm slides to digital, it took me 18 months.
A quick calculation shows that if I have this computer running continuously, I can process 50,000 photos in just 29 days. That doesn't seem too bad. When I did my digitising project, and converted 12,000 35mm slides to digital, it took me 18 months.
I do sharpening last, and if I am only sharing the image to the web, then I'm going to sharpen the image that will get uploaded.
I usually output the JPG to 2080 on the long end and shoot for 500k or smaller file sizes. You'd be happy to know that the Sharpen AI product smokes through those just fine.
My recommendation to all is to consider adopting a similar approach. Only use Sharpen AI on the files you'll be doing something with. If I am going to print, then I might hit that up with a full size file...but why push through all that data if you are only going to be displaying the image on a forum or a screen? Even a 4k screen only needs so much.
Wondering what numbers you used.
Similar threads
Latest threads
-
N-RAW with N-Log Workflow in DaVinci Resolve- Started by Walter Rowe
- Replies: 0
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
Lots and lots of Red Winged Black Birds behind my son's house - Winnipeg- Started by Bohdan
- Replies: 4
-
Links on this page may be to our affiliates. Sales through affiliate links may benefit this site.Nikon Cafe is a fan site and not associated with Nikon Corporation.Forum post reactions by Twemoji: https://github.com/twitter/twemojiForum GIFs powered by GIPHY: https://giphy.com/