I would certainly use these AI tools only where necessary. Quite apart from that video giving you an idea of what this AI-powered software can do, you now have a comparison point as you work through your PureRAW 3 trial. He does have other videos on using Photo AI in non-Raw workflows, but that isn't your primary interest. He gives a very good overview of what Photo AI can do in conjunction with Lightroom Classic. I am also glad that you felt Anthony's Photo AI video was worth watching. You are unlikely to benefit from the ability of Photo AI to sharpen selectively, upscale or handle JPEG and TIFF files. I think you are on the right lines: if your need is to handle high ISO Raw files, I would go with DxO PureRAW 3. I am really glad those comments helped, Steve. Unless you already have an older edition of PureRAW to upgrade, I would get trial versions of PureRAW and Photo AI to decide which one you prefer. DxO's lens corrections are likely to be better than Adobe's - but it is unlikely to be worth the processing time and storage capacity to run files through PureRAW just for a lens correction. Both Photo AI and PureRAW offer sharpening, but applying sharpening to a DNG is arguably sharpening too early in the workflow. Photo AI offers upscaling I don't believe PureRAW does, but you probably do not need to upscale unless you are cropping heavily or are processing files shot on cameras made over six years ago. If not, I will make a decision on whether to renew the Topaz update agreement or buy DxO PureRAW.Īs Elzenga says, the main benefit of these AI-powered programs is noise reduction. If the Adobe engine gets AI-powered noise reduction, I may start to use that. Photo AI and PureRAW 3 offer a similar workflow - and whilst one can be better than the other for certain images, I'm going to see how Photo AI and Lightroom Classic have evolved by the end of my current Topaz update agreement. I don't have DxO PureRAW because I already have the Topaz Image Quality bundle (Photo AI, DeNoise AI, Gigapixel AI and Sharpen AI) with active updates. Anthony Morganti shows the Lightroom Classic workflow in his YouTube review of DxO PureRAW 3 (the link goes directly to the Lightroom Classic part of the video, though the whole thing is perhaps worth watching). I will likely tweak that process once I upgrade to a faster laptop later this year, but for now at least, it is working for me.Click to expand.It returns it in a DxO PureRAW 3 collection. So far it has been the one edited by PureRaw about 80% of the time that I have kept, as the sharpness and improved clarity work well, and don’t seem overdone. I then compare the two images and discard the one that I don’t like. Once I have a file that I think is a keeper, and my edits are complete, I open PureRaw, process the original, non imported, non edited file, export it to LR and then I paste my edits from one to the other. From there I do my first stage of review, deleting some, flagging others, etc, then I start on my edits. I copy new images to my hard drive directly from the card, and then I import them all, using Copy, into LR. I believe I have settled on a process for now that I like, both for efficiency, as my three-year old MacBook Pro takes 2 minutes to process one image in PureRaw, and for quality control, as I find the processing to be sometimes overdone by PureRaw. PureRAW processes the underlying camera raw information.Īfter processing, it embeds the adoptions from LR (like the exposure and color) but not the adoptions which would conflict with the changes from PureRAW like profile correction, sharpening or noice reduction.īy the way, if you use the export functionality from LR (format Original or DNG) the behavior is identical as you would make changes to your DNG/RAW and saving metadata to file and use drag&drop.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |