Unable to use Gaia AI model. Get the below
Last FFmpeg messages:
Unable to parse option value “0” as video rate
Unable to parse option value “0” as video rate
Yes however, it should have stated that as I’ve been getting updates for the past few months (due to 3 coming out at the end of my last year and being so bad).
Now when I need to go to go back to the 3.0.12 version and all I can download is 2.6.4.
Is there a link for 3.0.12 etc.?
Okay 2.6.4 will then update…I’ll see how far.
Right so I get to install and upgrade to 3.0.0 but then I have to register and…no your licence expired in November.
So I’m now locked out of all the extended updates we were given due to 3 being so bad.
Marvellous. I’m now 13 versions behind.
You can still get it all, here: Releases - Topaz Community
Yeah they forgot to allow for those folks they gave extended updates too though.
We are now all back on 2.6.4.
Don’t install 3.1 if you got the extended “beta testing” updates!
I tried it.
By color change, do you mean a condition like in the test image?
The bottom is the original video and the top is the converted one.
In the case of SD resolution, the colors are Rec. 601.
HD resolution is Rec709, but TVAI does not do that conversion, so the data is Rec601 in HD resolution.
Some editing software may interpret the HD resolution as Rec709 and read the data as such, resulting in color alteration.
This may be a different cause, but just for reference.
What do you mean? I’ve never experienced a drawback to having an official release installed + the beta du jour.
You know what I mean…we are all beta testers using Topaz software. 
1 Like
Most places, they will also accept passing it on to family members. I had no problem giving one of my older machines to my Grandson, (Along with a generous number of Steam Gift Cards and the free version of Visual Studio.)
Today, we are all witnessing the infancy of AI in many different forms. He will witness its maturation and coming together in the coming years.
In the 1950s, we were fascinated with the possibility of TV/wristwatch telephones in the future. Now they are here. The flying cars and intelligent houses are becoming reality. Fascinating!
“The future is fun. The future is fair. They already have wars. We may even be there.” - The Firesign Theatre
1 Like
Trying 3.1 in trial mode, I see that Themis motion deblur seems to do well on slow movement at least, of inanimate objects but falls apart completely in rapid movement and turning - especially faces. It’s OK on fairly static and reasonably large faces but if you’ve seen mangled faces with other models, you ain’t seen nuthin yet!
I could only judge in areas not covered by that massive flickery Topaz watermark but essentially, it enhanced any existing mangled features and made them far more prominent. I had to change the sound track to the Monster Mash by Bobby Pickett and The Crypt-Kickers
Suffice it to say that the one feature that might have persuaded me to stump up the upgrade cash doesn’t work on the kind of oldish video that I would need it to work on.
I bought a license for 2.x because it was pretty stable, and actively receiving updates, in the form of new and improved models.
Not long after purchase, those updates stopped completely, and focus shifted entirely to the alpha for 3. Then the beta for 3. Then the rushed release of 3 from beta.
Performance and workflow have taken a major step backwards, particularly on AMD graphics cards. 3 is unusable with AMD compared to 2.6.
The trimmer in 3 is also a massive step backwards compared to 2.6. I am not sure how anyone could conclude that it was an improvement in functionality.
Was there anyone in the alpha/beta for 3 that thought that it WASN’T released way too early?
Did anyone in the beta feel like it was an improvement over 2.6?
Not exaggerating, 3 really could have used another year in development and beta. It might be release ready next November.
In the mean time, new and improved models could have been added to 2.x.
In many ways, a monthly subscription model would actually be preferable, as users could pay $15 a month if and when they needed the program, or when they deemed it worthy of actually subscribing to.
Currently it would not be worth $15 a month to me, never mind $150 for a year of ‘upgrades’ that are actually just incremental updates and essential performance/stability patches that are locked behind a paywall.
How much effort would it be to implement 2 distinct paths for users? Active licenses receiving ‘upgrades’ in the form of new models, and inactive licenses only receiving the performance/stability ‘updates’.
6 Likes
Well stated! Though the software is slowly getting better with each minor update, it’s still not usable for me. I wonder how many customers feel similarly. I doubt many non-technical customers would venture into this forum and post about their experience, so we’ll likely never know.
1 Like
When people are offered an ‘update’ (clearly stated as an ‘update’, never an ‘upgrade’!), without any warning that they are not actually entitled to it, which then overwrites and breaks their previously working installation of the program while prompting them to cough up $150 if they wish to keep using the program…
While also saying “This version actually performs how you expected the previous versions to perform!”
Pretty sure that will drive angry customers to their forums and support channels. Hard to imagine that many people would just be fine with that kind of move.
It comes across as a cynical and shady cash grab to me. It’s a great way to earn a bad reputation with customers, and does the opposite of encouraging customer loyalty.
3 Likes
Per Migliorare il ricampionamento video si potrebbe creare un archivio interno dall’analisi dei fotogrammi del video in questione in modo comparativo dai fotogrammi adiacenti, immaginando di avere a che fare con lo stesso cliente si potrebbe valutare la possibilità di una comparazione con i fotogrammi degli altri video e se ciò non fosse possibile si potrebbe ricorere ad una scansione ad alta risoluzione della foto per il fotogramma in questione da inserire nell’archivio, potrebbe essere utile inserire dei materiali di comparazione nell’archivio tipo le librerie del programma Terragen, e ampliandolo di anno in anno.
I think naming it version 3 was also a marketing stunt, which gives the impression it’s tried and tested software, but in reality, it’s not. Like you, they should have continued to support model improvements for 2.XX, while working on version “1” of the new software product. I’d still be using version 2, had they continued to make model improvements, but after giving up on SD video upscaling in version 3, I totally removed the software from my computer, but I continue to use other Topaz programs.
4 Likes
Absolutely on the spot.
I installed the version 3.XX and what it came to mind was: well, they managed to ruin a perfectly functional software to something that isn’t comfortable for me to use.
I didn’t bother to renew my licence… I had it for one year but I decided to stick to the 2.XX that does a pretty good job without the hassle - not forgetting that for me and my system, the 3.XX runned slower than 2.XX.
They did the same with the new Photo Ai. I hate it. I’ll rather stick to Sharpen, Gigapixel and DeNoise stand alone apps than let Ai decide which enhancements my image needs.
7 Likes
An interesting thing about this build.
In the 3.1 beta, performance increased when TVAI was in the background, this is not the case in the stable version. But when I turn off the screen the performance goes up by ~~20%. When I turn on the screen I can see for moments that I have much more FPS. And this is not a bug. I fire upscalation and it says it will finish in 4h. I turn off the screen, leave the computer to do its thing and it finishes much earlier.
Why would you remove a programme that is now (at last, finally, took them long enough) surpassing the 2.6.4 version?
So the way I see it, I updated to 3.0.0 (probably 3.0.3) about 4 days before my year was up. It was trash and I was annoyed but then Topaz due to 3.0.X being next to useless let us folks that had come to an end get further updates.
That’s fair and nice of them. So yes the past couple of 3.0.X updates have shown improvement. Just a few days ago I was thinking “yes this may be worth paying another year for!”
Then 3.1 0 came out and I updated to that. BANG…no go, your license expired in November.
Ahh okay says I, would have been nice of you to advise that when going to install! No worries I’ll just go back to 3.0.12 or whatever.
Oh no…we are just limited to 2.6.4 and any updates after (even ones within my year) I can’t have.
Is this tactic going to get me to part with my cash in these increasingly hard times? No.
So essentially we were just another bunch of beta testers who have now been thrown off the program, I would have been happy for Topaz to have just advised us “temporary betas” that we would be cut off from 3.1.x line but could remain on the 3.0.x line. But no, thanks for the feedback guys, now duck off!
4 Likes
In light of recent … issues regarding licences and updates/upgraded and the discussions here about the quality of the TVAI and Topaz in general… I’ve just happily renewed my own licence.
Have a nice day.
