Luminar Neo GenErase: First Look And Important Information

[@markbarnes9694]

Looking forward to a full video review of how GenErase compares to the regular erase tools in ON1 and NEO. That's for this video!

[@FreeWillPhotos]

That is in the que. Once ON1 is released, I will do that comparison. There are a lot of programs coming out all at the same time so I have to balance producing content and family life.

[@markbarnes9694]

Sorry, meant to say thanks for the video, (not that's). @@FreeWillPhotos

[@LensArt43]

Good job! Look forward to your next video.

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Thank you! The next Luminar video will likely be in a few days. I am shooting for Wednesday or Thursday...

[@marktimonen5359]

Great vid, looking forward to its' release.. :)

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Thanks and the wait is coming to a close pretty soon

[@marcrjacobs]

Very cool, Chris; Looking forward to this feature.

[@FreeWillPhotos]

It is interesting... I am experimenting with it to see when is the best time to use the feature. I think if you are working on a RAW file, then you want to make the RAW edits first and then apply this feature to the image, but outside of that I am neutral on the end results. I still have more tests that I want to run on the feature, but since it is a beta tool I won't show the bad results because that would not be fair to the Skylum team. Instead I report any odd renderings to the team. When this is released as a full feature, I will really push it to the limits.

[@martineudall]

Chris on two test images I did it did leave artefacts. More of a problem is that it caused distortion similar to lens distortion but worse

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Yea this tool is hit or miss on the artifacts, but those can be cleaned up with the clone tool or the erase tool. I would suggest using this tool on large areas where you need AI to give you something worth while having in the photo and then clean it up. I do think this will get better over time.

[@martineudall]

Anthony Turnham did an interesting video comparing large areas with small. The smaller area selection was better due to the pixel limitations of 1500*1500. Eg 6000*4000 file is would require no more than a quarter to get a sharpe replacement

[@DigitalPhotoMentor]

Hi, I'm a Skylum partner too but I missed the zoom call. Interesting question about using it commercially. Did you raise that one? I need to go watch the replay. I'd love to connect with you to chat

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Hey thank you for the comment and I replied to your message on the email you sent me. Just let me know if that didn't answer you question about commercial use.

[@TC_Conner]

Their “genErase” works like PS’s Magic Eraser tool. You aren’t charged anything to use PS’s Magic Eraser tool which works really good. But there is some type of payment associated with PS’s Generative Fill. How can Luminar Neo know if someone is using GenErase for commercial work? 12:08 in, I remember that guy walking by us!

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Hey TC thanks for the comment, and I can see the similarities of this, but this tool is doing a little bit more than PS does. The difference here is you don't need to purchase a subscription to use this tool. Once it is implemented, it will just be an update to the program so if you purchased a perpetual license, you will have access to this tool and the AI cloud. I don't know how or if AI photo segments can be tracked, but the data that is used to compile the final image has to be deemed either available for commercial use or not. GenErase may not be a tool to concern with that issue since it is mostly repurposing pixels in the original image and then scaling them up once it returns from the cloud, but it is something to be aware of. The legal world of AI is really the wild wild west as laws to regulate it are still being developed. It is a cool and scary place to be since in the wrong hands unethical things could happen. This is part of the long debate on "is AI destroying the world?" Some day we sky net will become self-aware. LOL. I also remember with the person walked into the frame as well.

[@TC_Conner]

@@FreeWillPhotos Anyone that is subscribed to PS gets Generative Erase. It was included in the latest PS update.

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Right, but that is a $10-20 per month commitment, where if I pay for a perpetual license to Luminar Neo I don't have to pay a monthly tax to use the software. I pay the Adobe tax because I think the software is worth the price, but I fear they hold users hostage because eventually their price is going to go up, and I like options that don't make me the frog in the boiling water if you know what I mean.

[@TC_Conner]

@@FreeWillPhotos I’m on Adobe’s Photography Plan, $120/yr. Hasn’t increased since I’ve been on it and I subscribed soon after it was first announced. But, it wouldn’t surprise me to see a bump in their fee, most everything is more expensive now.

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Yea I am just thinking of the days when I could pay $300-600 to own a program outright, and then Adobe took that option away and went 100% subscription. To be fair to Adobe, they did keep their subscription prices low, but I feel like now that they have added more AI features to their software we are only a few steps away from a $120 plan jumping to $180 or $15 per month. I think this is still reasonable overall considering it is still less expensive than streaming applications, but with so many programs on the market that have perpetual license that can do nearly the same thing as Photoshop and LrC, I am excited for the future.

[@marklaurendet1861]

Interesting but does not look that different to the way other programs do it. Like the magic brush. Not sure if I would use any feature that needed the cloud, apart from the main program if it was not fully cloud based. Don't like the way that could go in the future. As for AI, very interesting comment regarding "Commercial Use" AI seems to be the "buz" word these days. A selling point for normal tools it appears in some cases. Like if your program does not have it, it is missing something. If AI will ever effect "Commercial Use" I think it will need a proper definition.

[@FreeWillPhotos]

Hey Mark, that is a fair comment on all points (cloud editing concerns, commercial use and comparing it to the erase tool). There are some differences with this tool compared to the erase tool. The main one is getting a more accurate replacement to the area that is being masked. The erase tool does a great job on small things that don’t need too much information, but this is designed to remove an entire person from a photo, and replace it with something that is appropriate for the area.

[@gilm1534]

It doesn't work at all for me, sorry. Zero!

[@FreeWillPhotos]

What does it do when you try to use it? Are you just not satisfied with the results it gives? Can you share more about what isn’t working please.