Topaz Photo AI v2.0.6


This week we have a handful of camera profile updates and general fixes. We’ve also updated Qt (the thing we use to make the app) to version 6.6.0. If you notice any interactions not working please let us know.

As always, a full change log is below.

Please give us any feedback or report issues with this release. We’ll be updating TPAI regularly to address those pieces of feedback and issue reports. If there’s a specific image you’d like us to see, you can send it us at this dropbox link.

Released October 19th, 2023
Mac: Download
Windows: Download

Changes since 2.0.5:

  • Updated Qt to 6.6.0
  • Added error message when the program could not allocate memory
  • Added camera profile for Sony ILCE-7CR
  • Added camera profile for Fuji GFX 100 II
  • Added camera profile for Nikon Z f
  • Fixed camera profile mapping for Epson ERF files
  • Fixed camera profile mapping for Panasonic DC-TZ95D
  • Fixed CLI not running images when Autopilot preferences enabled no models
  • Fixed shortcut for showing file being enabled in Photoshop plugin
  • Fixed mask not showing up when entering mask mode from Side by Side view
  • Fixed incorrect wording in resolution control in preferences
  • Fixed some UI interactions
  • Fixed top left of crop being incorrect for some files
  • Updated lensfun definitions

I’ve noticed for the past few updates (3 or 4) that the installer becomes unresponsive when getting to the point of downloading AI models. There are no issues with Internet slowness and I have let the installer go for hours and it doesn’t complete. I am able to force quit the installer and the Topaz Photo AI software seems to work just fine. Also happens when downloading the update file separately outside of the Topaz Photo app. This may have started after updating to MacOS Sonoma, so not sure if those things are related.

1 Like

  Has anything been done, yet, about the privacy issue that I reported here?

  If I have a setting set to protect my privacy, I have it so set because that is what I intend.  I did not appreciate having the previous version pestering me to change it, and then making it too easy to accidentally change it to other than what I wanted.


I think what they should do is under preferences - > privacy have a new entry as follows:

‘Show the send images button / hide the send images button’

If hide is selected, do not even show that button in the save interface.

If show is selected, the user still has to manually select the slider on the save interface to send. If they do that, there should be a ‘are you sure?’ prompt that allows cancellation.

3 levels of checks this way and there should never be an unintentional upload.

1 Like

  I’m content with the send images switch being always visible.

  What bugs me is that even though I set in my preferences to default to not send, Photo AI bugs me, from time to time, urging me to allow it to change that preference to default to sending.  If I wanted it to default to sending, then I would have set it that way.  I set it to default to not sending because I do not want any of my images to be sent without my explicit, freely and intentionally given consent.

On one occasion, when that dialog popped up nagging me to set the default to send, I accidentally clicked the button to enable that.  It may not be the intent, but it feels like a deliberate, malicious intent to trick me into giving consent that I would not freely give without being so tricked.

1 Like

I believe the default is to send anonymous usage data. The option to send images is turned off by default. See my original warning post …


As you added a few new camera profiles I tested importing RW2-files from my Panasonic GH6 again: not working. (made same post for version 2.0.2) - hope this will change in the future. For me the program is working fine - no installation problems and help sometimes to get better photos (but not every photo becomes better)

@adam.mains, quick question. There were bugs in version 2.0.5 that users reported.
Among other things:


From the history of 2.0.6 you posted nothing in that area seems to have been fixed, is that correct?

(If so, that would mean that we have yet another weekly release that we cannot use productively)

1 Like

I think your issue here is that looks like a scan and you should ask if you can process them because I seem to remember that there is no guarantee that it will work on scans because the models have not been trained for that.

Also noticed there were two face recognition squares in one particular image: one on the face correctly, the other on the heavily blurred almost blank background where there were no faces at all. Like the second square is an offset reflection of the first, yet the UI reports 2 found.

Seconded. This problem could be considered a “dark pattern” of UI design, like Microsoft Edge hiding turning on unwanted privacy violating features behind “information” messages with “Got it” and “Maybe later” instead of “OK/Yes” and “Cancel/No”. At the very least it interrupts work flow, at worst it causes accidents that could violate privacy law for handling client data.

1 Like

Hi, it’s not my issue, I just asked about it.
I assume you are talking about the multiple face detection.
Another user has had the same problem in 2.0.5 and that looks like a photo in plugsnpixels screenshot, not a scan:

2 times upscaling of a NEF file turns the elliptic (near circular) wheels of the main subject into polygons and further distorts the numbers.
Small areas are not identified as background in a very simple task to chose between red/yellow vs blue.

  This would not be the first sign that I have seen, of a significant ethical deficiency on the part of Topaz’ programmers; the other being the issue of EXIF data being stripped from processed images without the user’s knowledge or consent, as reported here:  EXIF data being stripped .NEF→.DNG

  I was a computer programmer, back in the 1980s, and into the early 2000s.  The rise of new technologies has created a lot of ethical hazards, that did not exist nearly so much when I was in that profession.

  I wonder if there needs to be some college level course, a required part of any modern computer science curriculum, that specifically covers ethical issues like these, such as protecting users’ privacy, and not damaging or discarding users’ data.

  What little of this sort of thing applied when I was in that profession were pretty obvious, and taken as a given.  I find it rather dismaying how careless Topaz is being about such ethical issues that I never even thought of treading on.

How are you defining ‘ethical’ in the context of EXIF data not being captured?

1 Like

Win 11 Pro. Ps 2024 Plugin. Processor = AMD RX6800 XT.

@anthony.lawn. Hi Anthony!

Using File > Automate.

Had experience that started with 2.0.5 and continues.

It looks like the PAI-processed result is sent back to a TPAI layer in Ps’ layer stack. The popup box I’ve previously sent snips of (that required closing for PAI processing to trigger) does Not appear. And Ps is completely locked up. I can’t do anything in Ps once that happens. Cannot flatten layers, add layers, close Ps.

It looks like it’s trying to hide that box I referred to and go straight to a newly processed layer. But it’s actually worse than before b/c no indication we need to close something for the processing to occur & free up Ps UI to operate.

UPDATE - 3:45p PST - @anthony.lawn - I’m uploading an .mp4 video I just recorded to demo the issue described here for you/the team to see. It’s got no sound. When I’m clicking on the various Ps UI elements (eye icons, hamburger menus, etc. - nothing happens after the PAI output is returned as a TPAI layer…the entire Ps UI is locked and there is no functionality). Also, note that it takes quite a while from calling PAI via File > Automate to when the PAI UI actually opens … honestly, it seems slower with the usual Ps Filters menu approach too.

  It’s not about data not being captured.

  It’s about data, extant in the input files, being stripped out during processing, without informing the user that these data are being stripped out, and without giving the user the choice to consent to this data being stripped out.  To me, this seems like a rather obvious and serious breach of ethics.

  A program should not be stripping EXIF data out of a user’s images, without that user’s consent, and without giving the user the option (which should be the default) to not have those data stripped out.  I find it not only very disturbing and offensive that Photo AI has presumed to do this, but also the lies and bullshit that Topaz’s representatives have spewed in a pathetic attempt to defend this seriously unethical behavior.

  They were caught, red-handed, engaging in unethical behavior.  They should just man up, apologize, and correct it; and stop making excuses for it.

I believe the challenges have been noted in past release notes. I remember reading them. But I work with my images creatively, so the data associated with them becomes a distant memory…

How would you propose it be addressed (I read a lot of comments re: PAI in a number of forums & haven’t noticed that as a trigger issue from others…); at least until the tech dev capabilities are there?

If you find it a social/ethical affront. And, it is a known operating parameter. Why not stop using the product for now? Your health & well-being are important to protect. I’ve been through a lot this year. I know.

The problem for me is that when you have ‘send images’ turned off in settings, they nag you to re-enable automatic uploading “just for this one photo”. It would be easy to accidentally re-enable it “just this time” when you are in a hurry and it’s something that we should have to consider once and once only: if and when we want to change our data and image privacy preferences from ‘no’ to ‘yes’.

Even anonymous data should be turned off by default, people who want to send data or images can turn it on again if they wish. I think as you have previously suggested, these issues should receive more attention.

M2 Mac Mini, latest Ventura, fresh install after manually deleting 2.0.5 from Applications:

Back to the flickering GUI and seeming inability to load images (it did eventually load, but navigation panel was blank; Command-W did not close it. Command-Q did quit PAI.

This is a couple of hours after doing the install with no further interaction since. IIRC the GUI was movable immediately after the install.

Quit PAI, relaunched, same flickering.

Deleted the .plist prefs files (2 of them), relaunched. No more flickering when dragging but GUI still cannot be moved, small JPEG image opens to the small nav window only (not main workspace).

Trying to quit for yet another go-round, back to this conflicted dialog:

Screenshot 2023-10-20 at 1.48.48 PM

Relaunched again, same flickering GUI issues. Will try a fresh reinstall…

Reinstall (from fresh download) successful but did not seem to download models this time. Nor was the Dock icon removed as usual.

Asking for activation. Succeeded. GUI is enlargeable and movable without flickering – but I think I went through this earlier as well, dragging to full screen width (not full screen mode). Image loads and processes preview as expected.

(Note: The M2 Mini has a second monitor attached but not on, maybe a factor in the GUI issues?)

Face Recovery shows 2/2 faces as expected, not 2/1.

Correction: In this image (which we still can’t rotate in PAI!), I’m getting 1/6 faces…

So it seems to take about 3 installs of each new version before it works correctly.

M1 MacBook Pro, Sonoma b3: (Updating to the next 14.1 right now [RC].)

PAI launches and seem to work fine, but going to 4X and trying to navigate the nav preview, the cursor hand is trapped there. I can scroll around the image in the nav preview but cannot click and select a section to view or get the cursor out of the window.

Just for fun I compared this face result with Gigapixel 6.3.3 and PAI did a much better job. Also, with both apps open at once, GP did not respond very well until I quit PAI (M2, 16GB RAM).