Topaz jpeg to raw ai software#
Topaz jpeg to raw ai series#

It's an old trope that 'no image editor can put back information that wasn't captured by the sensor or the camera's output file'. Has anyone else tried this Topaz program? What sort of results did you obtain and are they (i) worth having and (ii) not achievable with other software? (Yes, I know the Canon G5 could do RAW images but in those days I couldn't afford the very expensive larger memory cards necessary to hold them). Yet it has enabled me to take some old 8bit camera jpeg images from the beginings of digital photography (my first were with a Canon G5 in 2004) and improve them in a way I couldn't with only Photoshop tools.

This Topaz gizmo does seem to need careful choice of its simple settings to avoid an overcooked look or the presence of various artefacts.

The number of pixels remain the same yet the DNG results seem to be able to show more detail as well as a greater tonal and colour 'density' to enable edits that don't immediately produce banding or other artefacts common with fiercely-edited 8bit jpegs. In doing so, it supposedly uses its AI to interpolate the additional information that it inserts into the 8bit file structure to turn it into a 16bit file. It can take an 8bit jpeg input and convert it into a 16bit DNG file output.

Topaz jpeg to raw ai software#

So when we hear people state that a raw has more DR than a JPEG, it's due to the poor rendering or handling of the data to create that JPEG.Anyone tried this Topaz software gizmo yet? I downloaded the 30 day free trial, expecting it to be useless because impossible (or so we have always been told) but was really surprised to find it of utility. Quote from: digitaldog on February 08, 2019, 12:42:04 pm Excellent question.Ī raw capture that's 10 or 11 stops of dynamic range can be compressed to 7 stops from this JPEG processing which is a significant amount of data and tonal loss! Loss that Topaz can't recover. The rendering of this data and the reduction of dynamic range is from the JPEG engine that isn't handling the DR data that does exists as well as we can from the raw! Another reason to capture and render the raw data, assuming you care about how the image is rendered! So when we hear people state that a raw has more DR than a JPEG, it's due to the poor rendering or handling of the data to create that JPEG. This compression can clump midtones as much as 1 stop while compressing shadow details! People incorrectly state that raw has more highlight data but the fact is, the DR captured is an attribute of the capture system it's all there in the raw but maybe not in a camera proceed JPEG.Ī raw capture that's 10 or 11 stops of dynamic range can be compressed to 7 stops from this JPEG processing which is a significant amount of data and tonal loss! Loss that Topaz can't recover. The JPEG engine that processes the raw in cameras massively clips and compresses highlights. Just as good? That too needs some proof of concept. Because it adds resolution (fine detail will be smaller than 6 pixels on a 6x upscale), it can even be useful to upscale 6x and downscale 1/6th back to your original output size.

Topaz jpeg to raw ai series#

That would work especially well on your Architectural series of images. When you produce large format output, I most certainly recommend having a look at 'Topaz GigaPixel A.I.', a standalone application that can upscale your original output to 6x larger linear dimensions (with a max of about 50000 pixels) while adding resolution. Clear layer.Īnd when someone else's Raw file get corrupted (would never happen to ourselves, would it) one might be able to salvage the embedded JPEG thumbnail. While your quality images probably won't benefit as much as lesser quality source files, who knows they could benefit from a blended A.I. But no, since your Raws do not suffer from lossy compression artifacts like JPEGs do, you can skip the JPEG part of the workflow and optionally have a look at the Topaz 'A.I.