Jump to content

Banner.jpg.39bf5bb2e6bf87794d3e2a4b88f26f1b.jpg

Topaz DeNoise AI - difference between 3.2.0 and 3.3.2?


Recommended Posts

Hi all,

I recently updated my 3.2.0 to 3.3.2 and I'm sure there's a difference in the rendering.

I contacted Topaz and their response was that they haven't changed anything in the algo, but I'm sure there's a discernible difference.

Is anyone else noticing this? 

I actually have some sample files if anyone fancies taking a look or playing around with them: https://1drv.ms/u/s!AqovBuVZMwj3kZMFpjjz4h19KrgYpA?e=Fgp2Ue (four TIFF files, about 1.4GB)

They're all created using Low Light at 50% denoise and sharpen, CPU rendered. Two of them were using 3.2.0, one on my PC, one on my laptop, so I could compare across machines. They're identical, as expected. Then I upgraded to 3.3.2 on the PC, and there is a clear difference. It's grainier, not as soft - and, I think, not as effective. I've also included the original image, autosave.tiff 

I've also shared these with Topaz support, not heard anything back yet.

Any thoughts?

Thanks, Brendan

Link to comment
Share on other sites

OK, so Topaz support confirm that yes, there was a change in the Low Light algo. I'm going to play around with the new one and see what I can get out of it but I find it so very annoying when these things change and, imho, become worse. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, BrendanC said:

OK, so Topaz support confirm that yes, there was a change in the Low Light algo. I'm going to play around with the new one and see what I can get out of it but I find it so very annoying when these things change and, imho, become worse. :(

This is of interest to me.

I have also noticed the way Topaz works since the update and was speculating with a fellow SGL'er that some 'under the bonnet' changes had been made to the Low Light option. I use it at no more than 10% noise reduction and even at that low level there is a difference. I rarely if ever use the Sharpen option - that is nearly always set to zero.

I also use Dfine2 and have noticed no changes at all over numerous updates over the past 4+ years.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

I've decided to stick with 3.2.0. The Low Light change just doesn't do it for me. It's been a bad software week: APT, StarTools and Topaz have all issued updates that don't work too well for me.

Here are two examples...

3.2.0 - nice and smooth

3.2.0.thumb.jpg.2f1fed2896c0a10c737ca9b34f0cb956.jpg

3.3.2 - to my eye, a bit crunchy and grainy, and more noticeable when you zoom in, on the original image

3.3.2.thumb.jpg.abe6a1bddca3903ca55fd4ba50e93a4d.jpg

I should add that neither of these images are processed to look as good as possible - they're just processed using defaults in StarTools and 50% Sharpen/Denoise with CPU rendering in Topaz, so they're more easily directly compared.

I mean, it could be a matter of choice, but I do prefer the 3.2.0. I also understand that Topaz isn't an astrophotography package (another irritation of 3.3.2 is that it automatically chooses 'the best' algorithm which is never Low Light, which I routinely use). But it's still annoying.

Edited by BrendanC
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.