Thanks for the assistance profiwork. My latest issue was not to cut the image into pieces. It was to merge the processed images via Photoshop. That Microsoft tool crashes too often and also was unable to merge the images to a photo again!
I’ve grown to accept that the final image will not look like the preview, but it is galling to see what is possible when using the underlying AI code on only a small part of the image area as the preview does.
The addition of the Man-Made image type process used with the Max Quality model does produce a slightly better result on your test image that we’ve ever achieved before so at least we have that much progress.
The idea that they could process the image as a series of patches, and then integrate them back together for the final output, is a reasonable one. The seamless stitching of the boundaries may be what makes this a less than straight forward solution.
I hope users and developers can find the problem and solve it. While I didn’t experience it myself, I trust others have and based on the description it does seem like the program is not delivering for some on what is promised.
Considering the nature of your complain I am very confused by this sentence. How can you be so vocally unhappy with preview, but then be happy with AI based zoom in non integer steps (multiples of 100%)? Zoomed preview is far more removed (aka different) from the actual output file than 100% preview.
What Eric wrote I already knew. For me, this is obvious as the words of Captain Obvious. But I proposed a solution on how to get the result identical or comparable with the preview for the whole picture of any size. And the trouble is that they ignore me.
So Eric say it’s not a problem. And will be not fixed. But i see with my eyes the preview much more quality than final image. The settings of the image is useless now, because the preview not shows the final quality. It’s different on each zoom size mode.You will don’t know how’s the final image look like. Interesting. That’s not good.
If you used all or any of the programs from Topaz Labs, you would know that they have a different interface, not unified. And it’s very bad. Topaz Studio had the most thoughtful interface, and I asked to be guided by it in design, as well as add more mouse control, for example, for sliders. They started with a smooth zoom. He is not yet as good as in the studio, or in Photoshop, but I hope they lead programs to a common style.
Personally I am waiting for undo/redo. Zoom at non integer levels using AI processing is mostly useless for assessing image output anyway, so the wheel zoom is more of a gimmick that is too easily activated accidentally. CTRL + wheel would be a better choice, because it is a widely used shortcut (browsers, Lightroom and I even changed my PS to use that) and less easily used unintentionally.
But, could you explain where and what are you want to cancel with using the Undo function?
Slider changes. Preview renderings are cached so doing a undo/redo is a quick and easy way to compare two different slider settings via keyboard short-cuts. Giving how finicky the sliders are it’s also an easier way to reset a single slider to its last/default value.
Works great in Sharpen and Denoise, even doing multiple steps.
The problem I have with their explanation is even on v5.1.6, you get a sharper/more focused upscale from plain CPU vs OpenVINO accelerated or GPU. Its much closer to the preview on images where the preview is sharp and the upscale is not.
Surely if the AI models are the same, the result shouldn’t differ depending on what hardware you use to get to that result?
Gigapixel Ai is an expensive tool to be asking so much from its users…why am I struggling to solve what is clearly a production problem…my windows pc meets all the requirements, according to Topaz’ s own guidlines for what should be trouble free use. The other products like Denoise, and Adjust are near perfect in performance…but I refuse to spend time every day trying to figure out why Gigapixel doesn’t work…if it’s not crashing after only getting to a 3% completion phase it stalls at the time of saving…I will be broadcasting to all my photographer friends not to put there money into it until the program is ready for Prime Time:(