Interesting comparison--thanks for posting. When I saw the new Deep Prime
Noise Reduction in the new iteration of DXO, my first question was how it
compared to Topaz.
Methodology seems decent, but it is a difficult comparison with DXO being a
full suite with converter. Topaz more flexible with different sorts of files
as well.
The OOF backgrounds look a tad less splotchy with DXO--bottom line. I bet that
can be fixed in PS. Topaz started directly supporting my GPU a couple months
back and it runs like greased lightening compared to before.
I wonder if DXO will change from deconvolution to machine learning for
sharpening? They have a tremendous time investment in the lens profiles
though. It is sometimes to nice to even up the lens performance throughout the
image then and perform the final sharpening. This seems less critical with
topaz sharpen AI as it tends not to produce many artifacts in already sharp
areas.
Trying to sift useable data from the noise, Mike
--
_________________________________________________________________
Options: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/listinfo/olympus
Archives: http://lists.thomasclausen.net/mailman/private/olympus/
Themed Olympus Photo Exhibition: http://www.tope.nl/
|