Topaz AI Clear Is Quite Impressive

[kilomikebravo]

(Ref. the previous discussion about Topaz AI Gigapixel)

So I purchased both AI Gigapixel and AI Clear the other day but didn't have an opportunity to test the latter until last night and I was very impressed. (For those who did not participate in the previous discussion, these two products from Topaz Labs help with improving the quality of your still image post processing.)

I had yet to fly the M2P after dark but did so last night in an attempt to photograph the annual Christmas parade put on by our small town's volunteer Fire Department. (LOVED the automatic takeoff and landing lights!) Unfortunately, I wasn't able to get very good shots of the parade vehicles and float but I did get some of a few neighbors' Christmas lights afterward. Brought all the gear back inside, disappointed, copied the files to the confuser, and opened the the images in PS. (No ACR adjustments.) Cropped the best image to frame the house and ran it through Topaz Denoise 6 and saved the result. Then I opened Topaz Studio to test AI Clear (AIC is a "pro adjustment" for Studio, according to Topaz,) and without touching a single slider, let it do its thing. That took a couple seconds and the improvement in the image was impressive. Here are the the resulting two JPG's and I will be curious to hear what the rest of you think. (To best appreciate the IQ improvement, I suggest downloading both files and viewing side by side at 100 percent.)

Before and After

 

[PC1134]

Be interested in your thoughts on Gigapixel. I tried it but it took forever to render and gave massive files, with ver little difference in image quality. That was on my DSLR.

 

[kilomikebravo]

Be interested in your thoughts on Gigapixel.

PC: Based on what I've read and the info I've received from Topaz via email, it would appear that the main purpose of AIG is upsampling images when large prints are required. We discussed this a good bit in the thread link I put in the first post. And while the AI portion of Gigapixel does appear to improve the IQ during the upsampling process, for me anyway, it appears to be a minor. If you add that to the extremely long rendering times and huge file sizes, I just can't see me going to all that time and trouble for minimal IQ improvement.

That said, it does an EXCELLENT job of upsampling, even to 400 percent and higher with no discernible degradation and that is the reason I purchased it.

But the best experience I've had in the past couple of days has been seeing what Topaz AI Clear can do. It is the first time in a very long time that I was so surprised at the almost immediate improvement to an image that an automated routine could accomplish. I like it so much, I've been going back to my final versions of personal photos that I put online and running them through AI Clear. Results vary from better to stunning, IMHO.

It's worth a look but it is only a "professional adjustment" in Topaz-speak. Much like a plug-in for one of the Adobe apps. So, you have to have a copy of Topaz Studio first to use AI Clear.

 

[PC1134]

I do have AI clear and it is effective, but I couldn't see much benefit for me with Gigapixel.
Thanks for your input in clarifying.

 

[Bussty]

PC: Based on what I've read and the info I've received from Topaz via email, it would appear that the main purpose of AIG is upsampling images when large prints are required. We discussed this a good bit in the thread link I put in the first post. And while the AI portion of Gigapixel does appear to improve the IQ during the upsampling process, for me anyway, it appears to be a minor. If you add that to the extremely long rendering times and huge file sizes, I just can't see me going to all that time and trouble for minimal IQ improvement.

That said, it does an EXCELLENT job of upsampling, even to 400 percent and higher with no discernible degradation and that is the reason I purchased it.

But the best experience I've had in the past couple of days has been seeing what Topaz AI Clear can do. It is the first time in a very long time that I was so surprised at the almost immediate improvement to an image that an automated routine could accomplish. I like it so much, I've been going back to my final versions of personal photos that I put online and running them through AI Clear. Results vary from better to stunning, IMHO.

It's worth a look but it is only a "professional adjustment" in Topaz-speak. Much like a plug-in for one of the Adobe apps. So, you have to have a copy of Topaz Studio first to use AI Clear.

Thanks for posting will have to give it a whirl! Quite like the Topaz stuff, AI Gigapixel of course and if you have any tricky masking Topaz Remask is awesome too! Cheers

 

[kilomikebravo]

if you have any tricky masking Topaz Remask is awesome too!

Busty: Yep, been using Remask for years and it sure saves time.

 

[Bussty]

Busty: Yep, been using Remask for years and it sure saves time.

Hi KMB

I've tried the trial of AI Clear. Do you ever get weird colour blobs? It's certainly way faster than AI Gigapixel. If you look at below processed with AI Gigapixel on left (150%) AI Clear on right...
Original below

 

[kilomikebravo]

Bussty: No, I haven't seen the color blobs but odds are, they're there and I just haven't seen them. Truthfully, the only time I go beyond 100 percent magnification is when I am searching for noise which explains why I haven't seen the blobs. But I figure, if *I* can't see them at 100 percent, no one else will either. And, as you said, it's SO much faster than AIG (and as good or better at improving the subjective IQ IMHO,) that I'm sold on using it.

BTW, was the original you posted processed with either AIG or AIC?

 

[CanadaDrone]

Be interested in your thoughts on Gigapixel. I tried it but it took forever to render and gave massive files, with ver little difference in image quality. That was on my DSLR.

Do you have a good GPU with GPU acceleration enabled? Topaz Gigapixel works much faster through a GPU but does have a CPU option if your GPU is not fast enough.

Also for those unsure if you want to invest in Gigapixel, if you have Photoshop CC, you have access to Preserve Details 2.0 enlargement options which do basically the same thing as Topaz. Certain images seem to favor the Topaz method, other images favor the Photoshop method - both are pretty good for what they are. Neither are perfect and have their disadvantages. They are also definitely not something you would want to run every image through just for the heck of it.

 

[Bussty]

Bussty: No, I haven't seen the color blobs but odds are, they're there and I just haven't seen them. Truthfully, the only time I go beyond 100 percent magnification is when I am searching for noise which explains why I haven't seen the blobs. But I figure, if *I* can't see them at 100 percent, no one else will either. And, as you said, it's SO much faster than AIG (and as good or better at improving the subjective IQ IMHO,) that I'm sold on using it.

BTW, was the original you posted processed with either AIG or AIC?

This is true you have to zoom in a long way to see them. The original is taken on an Olympus OMD EM-2 single shot run through Aurora 2019 then AIG then downsized for the forum to 1920x1080

 

[kilomikebravo]

Forgot to add...

Bussty: Yes, I have a GPU (GTX 970,) but again, I find that AI Clear does every bit as good of a job improving subjective IQ as AIG without the extra time and huge files. But, I AM getting a bit tired of using proxies so I'm about to purchase some gear. (i9-9900, ASUS mobo, 32g of DDR4, and one of these SUPER fast Samsung SSD's just for a Premiere scratch disk. From what I've read, PP MUCH prefers horsepower, cores, and threads over any help from a GPU so I'm sticking with the 970.)

 

[CanadaDrone]

Forgot to add...

Bussty: Yes, I have a GPU (GTX 970,) but again, I find that AI Clear does every bit as good of a job improving subjective IQ as AIG without the extra time and huge files. But, I AM getting a bit tired of using proxies so I'm about to purchase some gear. (i9-9900, ASUS mobo, 32g of DDR4, and one of these SUPER fast Samsung SSD's just for a Premiere scratch disk. From what I've read, PP MUCH prefers horsepower, cores, and threads over any help from a GPU so I'm sticking with the 970.)

I don't recommend buying the Samsung 960's - the 970's are out. Also you should get the EVO instead of the PRO unless you need the extra endurance, which I don't know if you do or not, but most "normal" users do not. The speed difference between the EVO and PRO now are negligible.

Also you only need a dedicated scratch disk if you will be using more than that 32GB of RAM, in which case you would be better off buying more RAM in the first place if you have the choice. Just something to consider anyway. 32GB is likely enough. Photoshop will write to scratch regardless, but it won't need to read from it if you have enough RAM. Some people like to use a dedicated scratch just for wear & tear, but you don't need a top end NVMe drive for that - your choice of course.

Video PP can be very GPU heavy as well, so best to research exactly what you intend to do and see how your program of choice utilizes the GPU.

 

[kilomikebravo]

CD: Many, many thanks for a second opinion and I will consult my geek nephew on everything you said, (all of which makes excellent sense too, BTW.) I have only ordered the system board, cpu, cooler, and 32g of memory. Now I'm thinking I should call up NewEgg, cancel that order, and go for 64g instead. Haven't ordered the M.2 drive yet and I did see the 970's and wondered why the kid pointed me to the 960, (probably to save me money.) But after what I just learned from you, it's pretty obvious that the 970/EVO is the way to go if the diff is negligible.

I don't remember if I mentioned this in the past but for doing the usual import, edit, render routine for 4k/24 footage, I have tested with and without the GPU in the equation, just on the simple stuff I do in Premiere. And my results indicate that it's the CPU that gets maxxed out with very little work being done by the GPU. From what I've read, that seems to be the case, i.e., horsepower and cores. But, I will certainly take you up on the good advice before I make the final purchases and, thanks again, CD.

 

[CanadaDrone]

CD: Many, many thanks for a second opinion and I will consult my geek nephew on everything you said, (all of which makes excellent sense too, BTW.) I have only ordered the system board, cpu, cooler, and 32g of memory. Now I'm thinking I should call up NewEgg, cancel that order, and go for 64g instead. Haven't ordered the M.2 drive yet and I did see the 970's and wondered why the kid pointed me to the 960, (probably to save me money.) But after what I just learned from you, it's pretty obvious that the 970/EVO is the way to go if the diff is negligible.

I don't remember if I mentioned this in the past but for doing the usual import, edit, render routine for 4k/24 footage, I have tested with and without the GPU in the equation, just on the simple stuff I do in Premiere. And my results indicate that it's the CPU that gets maxxed out with very little work being done by the GPU. From what I've read, that seems to be the case, i.e., horsepower and cores. But, I will certainly take you up on the good advice before I make the final purchases and, thanks again, CD.

Anytime my friend - good luck!

Try to make sure you will actually use 64GB of RAM before buying that much. Personally I suspect 32GB is enough (it is for me) but I don't know your usage.

The 970 EVO is definitely the "no brainer" NVMe decision right now for any normal application.

Many video processes are certainly CPU intensive, and I would prioritize the CPU for sure, but depending on what you're doing (and the software) it can be GPU heavy as well - it is just situation dependent. For example certain effects, encoding with resolution changes, etc. are typically GPU heavy. If you are just doing more basic things, it will be mostly CPU. Adobe recommends a minimum of 4GB VRAM for Premiere however.