Editing an NEF file via “File, Plug in Extras” (LR & Topaz at latest versions in Win 11 Pro) the "PROCESS VERSION in LR is reset to version 1 (not current version 6) when image is returned to LR. Tried this multiple times with different images.
FYI -The “High Quality Image” preference is for non-raw images.
In my system when I edit a NEF file in PAI, the DNG is returned in “version” 6
1 Like
That’s what I use it for…
Hello @yuan.liang, thanks for your info. That’s the sort of feedback users need, when they report the bug in the first place. I just happened to follow up on their behalf.
It sounds reasonable what you wrote, I hope you can solve it.
Can you give us feedback to the other bug I was referring to:
Here a user compared 2.0.5 to previous versions and wrote that 2.0.5 became unusable for him.
@info1887: does this still happen in 2.0.6?
Thanks again.
1 Like
been using photo ai for a while upscaling art work my daughter creates. set for short side @7700 pixels. (redbubble 
) with .6 i’m regularly freezing after between 30-50 files… never had an issue with previous builds…
cheers,
sjg
I don’t seem to be able to roundtrip raw files from capture one to photo ai and back. The DNG file is not automatically imported into capture one. This has to be done separate which is annoying.
1 Like
I see no strong indication that this is a newly introduced issue: redo some restoration I’d done yesterday but with better quality source files. I’d suggest @info1887 to do comparison backward (v2.0.5 vs v2.0.4), on the controlled/same sources (either input images of successful restoration, or input images of unusable restoration), to see if the results are the same.
With that said, though I do not have images, I am more towards this is a existing model quality issue, instead of bug (code changes). Model training/updating takes longer cycle than 1 week (I see you are beta tester so. you know beta testing lasts long), since any change to a model will change output for all inputs, rather than just fixing one input case.
For this usually changing setup can fix, ie, filter selection, model (inside filter) selection, and slider tuning. Most of such feedback cannot be here (but are from chat system and direct message on forum), since we usually need more information about setup and also might request small/sample images.
You don’t state if this is a raw photo or jpg. You also don’t show what functions you have enabled. I tried a jpg photo in the PAI stand alone and there is no color change. I also tried it on a Sony ARW raw file and there was no color or saturation change. (Windows 11 PC)
Since 2.05 and Sonoma the program becomes unresponsible. I deleted it, installed 2.06 - also unresponsible. And to send images to Topaz? Really? No, just no.
Here, there are no problems on macOS Sonoma 14.1 and TPAI ( other than the known tiling and blurry patches issues as well as the long standing bug with saving edited images back into Apple Photos.
Since this last update, I can’t use Photo AI as a Lightroom plugin. I get to Photo AI from Lightroom, make my changes, but then can’t get the photo to reopen in Lightroom. I get this message: “Lightroom has encountered problems reading this photo. You will not be able to make adjustments to the photo.” I’ve been using Photo AI as a Lightroom plugin since it came out. This is the first time I’ve had this problem. I can’t use it now.
1 Like
Win 11 Pro desktop. PAI 2.0.6 Ps 2024 Plugin. All PAI Auto functions disabled. Processor = AMD RX6800 XT.
Original Image: Olympus .ORF raw. Opened into ACR for minimal “basic” processing - expos., highlights, shadows, whts., blacks. Opened from ACR into Photoshop 2024.
Goal: Test ability of PAI 2.0.6 Ps Plugin to make low res Ps generative fill content appear same sharpness/quality as rest of image that began as a Raw. I assume it gets sent (“called”?) from Ps layer to PAI plugin as a .tif (???). Outcome: Same as my prior test that started as a .JPG…PAI sharpened both original image components (using Strong Sharpen model) & Ps generative fill components (I used generative expand last time). Softness of the low res Ps generative content is improved & seems indistinguishable from the originally Raw content. Gen Fill content is on right side of image - seen in mask in Ps layer stack.
Snips in my Ps interface - from ORIG to PAI Ps 2024 output back on layer. Labels in filenames & on Ps layers.
I applied the latest update today and since I’ve installed it, I can no longer open it. The process will appear briefly in the Task Manager and then disappear again.
Do you have a bug tracking system (that at least beta users also have access to)? Like Jira/DevOps/…,
where there are assigned priorities, developers, attachments, etc?
I find the forums here to be unsatisfactory in terms of bug reporting and following up.
Plus there’s at least four ways to report bugs right now:
- A new post in the forum bug and issues
- A reply to a release post of a new version
- Using the feedback form on your website
- Sending Topaz Labs an E-Mail (when reported this way, no-one else in the forums knows that such a bug was reported at all)
Without a global bug tool which is accessible to all (or at least beta testers) we, the reporters or bugs, have no idea of the status of the bug. Is it being worked on or not; how high is it prioritized, in which version is it being fixed, when shall we test it again, who is working on it, and so on.
If I were you I’d shift bug reporting singularly to a bug tracker (Jira, etc.). I’m sure you’re using something like that internally, anyhow. And then allow the users when uploading attachments there to choose, whether the upload is private (for Topaz Labs only) or public.
7 Likes
Since Windows Topaz Photo AI came out, it has not been behaving 100% like a Windows application when it comes to resizing. For example, if I drag any other app to the side of the screen, it will resize precisely to 1/2 of the screen. When I do that with TPAI, nothing happens and I have to do it manually.
Can the next Windows version of TPAI please resize automatically ?
1 Like
One issue would be stripping Copyright info, which my camera automatically inserts in the EXIF…
1 Like
That would be an issue! Good to know what the impact is from a practical, reasonable perspective.
Is this actually an issue or just an example of an instance where metadata being stripped is bad?
As far as I’m aware we keep as much metadata as we can. The main exceptions are we do not write MakerNotes to non-DNG files due to that causing issues down the line (e.g., apps opening a JPEG with wrong crop information), we do not write Canon MakerNotes specifically because they say they are not copy-able, and we overwrite a few tags entirely (Software, Orientation, X/Y/Unit Resolution, and ProfileName in some cases). Besides that we try to retain as much metadata that ExifTool allows us. We basically just run a version of exiftool -tagsfromfile.
If there are concrete examples of critical metadata missing, please forward us the original file, the output file, and the metadata you expected to be in the output file that is missing. Please note that some metadata is not transferable and sometimes ExifTool maps metadata to different standard tags.
3 Likes
The latter (“an example of an instance where metadata being stripped is bad”) - I was just explaining why stripping metadata would be an issue for me.
It’s not high on my list of issues, but sometimes missing copyright information could be really annoying (it’s better if someone “borrowing” your image either leaves it in place or strips it)…
2 Likes
