Here are two of the same NEF
Using TPAI fine detail is lost from the denoise process and is not regained through sharpen.
Using LRC Denoise while some noise is retained the fine detail in the feathers is retained and brought out with sharpen.
Until TPAI can deliver this level of performance (which it has never done and has never really improved since v1.5) I suggest TPAI doesnt work properly. As it was originally marketed as a denoise and sharpen (and upscale) product, until it is competitive with others it fails IMHO.
exported to TPAI from LRC NR strength = 25; Sharpen = 25
Even those just using Adobeās generative AI tools at the moment may find TPAIās AI remove tool more useful once Adobeās credit system comes into force.
It could depend on how many credits someone gets. And, how slow the Firefly response time becomes once someone runs through them. For a fair number of folks, if Firefly gen response times drop to over 50-60 secs, PAI would have a competitive edge.
Yes. And, once theyāre gone users still can use the generative features for āfreeā (in the sense youāre already paying for a subscription, so itās not free free). Adobe will just slow down the processing speed for those who use up their credit allocation. Users donāt have to pay more unless they (optionally) want to purchase more credits for a given month.
PS tools at the moment are much more powerful. Not only the generative AI, PSās own remove tool. Plus layers and history. PAIās tools are good for someone who doesnāt use PS/LrC
And you didnāt look at my images where i did compare each other.
And it was always about that the generative ai of adobe does send parts or the whole image to its server, bc 70% of the users are not able to compute it on their systems.
And a nice approach to get more images. (Adobe says no).
It actually says that you as a user must have asked your customers before using the generative ai.
I only have CS6. Donāt like the subscription service, I also know of plenty of people, who donāt like it either.
I donāt like PAI, at all. PAI, maybe good for people who just use the software to do everything for them but I want far more control. The results from PAI on my images has been poor. When results are sub standard it is difficult to find out why. Even turning all the auto settings off and doing at individually for each process does not yield as good results as using Sharpen AI.
I wonāt. But all the development is going on PAI. I have been informed that the stand alone software is discontinued, so much for free upgrades for a year, when there wonāt be any.
Topaz used to be good but I donāt like the direction is going in now, maybe they will change course again? Rivals are catching up and overtaking Topaz, I think DxO has better noise reduction. Topaz Sharpen is still the best as far as I know.
PAI, is not even at beta stage, but get all the users do the testing for them.
You are being used.
Fortunately I did not pay this, otherwise I would be getting a refund.
I do have an old ābuy-onceā version of Photoshop as well. But as you I wonāt go with any subscription model, so PS is out for me.
And for those users TPAI is a viable choice. Yes, there are cases where the old separate apps still provide better results as TPAI - but then I got the legacy standalone Apps in a Package together with PhotoAI so I canāt really complain.
Could they do better? Of course yes. But then: who canāt?
Overall I See TPAI as an unfinished/unpolished but still viable choice for upscaling and enhancing bad quality photos. With HQ photos the experience is a bit different but then I mostly leave those alone (theyāre already HQ, soā¦) - apart from removing unwanted people/objects. And thus I am also quite happy with the newly introduced remove tool.
i understand the anger of people that have bought the standalone apps and not getting updates, though.
Well PAI does not work for me. But then Im looking to do quality prints not just web viewing. AI is very inconsistent. It introduces colours into Black and white images. It blurs parts of faces, it adds grey areas, it shifts colours.
I will stick with CS6 and some plugins. I may go down the DxO path, they seem to be leading in certain areas, such as RAW and denoise. Remove tool not that bothered as rarely use it and there are other ways to do it.
This is a bit off topic perhaps, but for anyone who doesnāt like subscription-based software but still want to have something decent that isnāt just a Raw developerā¦
Have a look at what Humble Bundle and their āyearlyā Corel offering where you get - among others - Paintshop Pro for under 30ā¬.
It might not be on par with Photoshop or other āfancierā options but for this happy amateur itās plenty, and a good start before sending stuff to PAI (or any of the separate apps).
Sure, the version Humble Bundle offer is one year ābehindā - this year you get the 2023 version which mean that 2024 is probably just around the corner - but Iāve bought this bundle two times now and will probably āupdateā this year as wellā¦
Yes but.
Only on Raw files.
Only until ISO 800, after that it does need a second stage denoise to get rid of the artifacts.
Only suitable for normal images, does destroy Space images, when used for denoising raws.
I do second stage denoising with TPAI on images above ISO 1600, denoised all my Wedding images with TPAI this year, and lately with Autopilot activated (2nd stage denoise).
TPAI strong is superior, it is able to sharpen through noise.
Show.
I really like to see.
I do too, but i use TPAI as a tool like every other one, not like a magic stick.
.