Photo AI, Process RAW or Photoshop? Real Comparison

In this video, I show real results comparing images processed in Topaz as a RAW file vs the results when processed via Photoshops filter plug-in
Share your experiences and workflow in the comments.
Check out the suite of Topaz products here
www.topazlabs....
(Affiliate link)

[@karengoodell4497]

Very helpful. Appreciate your time in putting this together. Great demonstration.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Very welcome

[@giovanni_a67]

Scott, thank you very much for this and all the other very informative videos that you produce. I love watching them. I have just a comment. When you open the NEF file in Photoshop (around the minute 6:00 in the video), that one is not anymore the RAW file. In the moment that you click on "Open" in camera raw, what you get in Photoshop is the "developed" version of your raw file, with the default camera raw settings (or any setting tweaked by you). You are not working anymore on the raw file, more likely a PSD/TIFF image, even though this has not yet been saved as such. Photoshop shows it with the original NEF file name for lack of a better name (personally I would change that behaviour in PS to show it as "untitled" until you save it). That is why you see no differences compared top when you save first as a TIFF and then open it in Photo AI. The only difference between the two procedures is that in the first case you send it to Topaz before saving as TIFF, in the second case you save it first, then you send it, but the data that you send to Photo AI is basically the same.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks, I will come back and re-read this comment when I can digest it more

[@edwarddailey9536]

Great stuff as usual Scott.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad you enjoyed it

[@MrTmiket0007]

Thanks for sharing another wonderful video like always, I love your photos and tips 🐦👍🤗

[@WildlifeInspired]

So nice of you

[@pauldanesiphotography]

Thanks for another great video. I have been using Lightroom with the 3 Topaz Lab plug ins, but I am convinced that the Photo AI is now on a par with the 3 individual programs and it allows me to use Denoise and Sharpen at the same time. My workflow starts with Lightroom, I make most of my adjustments and then I move forward to reduce noise, and if needed, sharpening. Have been trying to learn more about Photoshop, but it is strictly for manipulations rather than adjustments. Keep up the great work.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks for sharing!

[@markbuchanan8828]

Interesting topic Scott. I typically use DeNoise AI from within LRC which of course creates a TIFF file. I notice that consistently once the noise reduction is done and the file is "re-opened" in LRC (a copy of the original and also a TIFF) that a few highlights are blown out. This jumps out because I leave the blown highlights indicator "on" in LRC. I find that I need to adjust the highlights slider down by -10 or -12 to eliminate the over exposed areas. I suppose it's another way that Topaz is tweaking the image to make it look better, beyond simply removing the noise and sharpening. I do prefer the simpler workflow by accessing Topaz from within either Ps or LRc.

[@19Photographer76]

That's been my findings with the Topaz RAW converter. I've been using DxO Pure RAW, it works great.

[@peterjackhandy]

I use Capture One & do the various alchemy that creates my 'Look', stopping short of sharpening & de-noising: I then 'edit with' Photo ai, send it as a 16 bit tiff, let ai do its auto-pilot business, then fiddle with the settings as I feel necessary. This is where I sometimes get a different result to others: 'Normal' de-noising seems to retain a (not unpleasant) very fine grain, even at full strength; whereas 'Strong' presents a super-smooth result which is pretty consistent throughout the range from 1% to 100% with the slider having no discernable effect. I'm wondering if others find this, or whether it may be because the original is a fuji raf (x-trans) file.

[@LindaDonaldsBTJ]

Very interesting -- thank you for this explanation! This approach is also applicable for using Topaz Photo AI via the plugin in Affinity Photo as well (not just for Photoshop users).

[@WildlifeInspired]

True!

[@cwjs]

Thank you for showing so clearly the comprasion between the methods, I think it looks to me that the PS filter looks a better way, I do not see why it would be worth using a distructive edit.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Glad it was helpful!

[@martineudall]

Scott one of the best photo ai worflow scenarios I have seen. Just found your channel and subscribed. I use on1 for editing but process is similar. Just one question where would you use lens correction original editor or photo ai and would you turn it off in photo ai?

[@venkatalgramam4461]

Hi Scott - Wonderful informative Videos. I stay in Dubai / Oman & am a newbie to wildlife photos. Many thanks for your wonderful videos. I have to thank you for all the info in your videos - it has really helped me on my wildlife photo journey . I have a question, i am more an LRC user - Would it make a difference if you open the AI plugin from LRC & then do the denoise / sharpen first get it back as a TIFF or DNG back to LRC and then take it to photoshop for further edit - esply for high ISO files or would you suggest do the initial photoshop edits thro camera RAW & then do other edits in PS like removing branches and then bring it to AI finally for nose reduction/sharpening . Also with all the masking etc available in LRC now, is there still a big difference between using camera raw or doing the initial edit in LRC itself ?? . LRC is a lot faster to use - i am an advance hobbyist at best so time is at a premium !!!. Your comments / suggestion / a video in future will really help

[@d1m18]

Why didn't you use the exact same settings in Photo AI in both external processing and the PS Filter/layer?

[@WildlifeInspired]

In the raw file editor, the normal setting got rid of all noise. In the PS filter the normal setting DID NOT. I thought I explained that. I had to use "strong" to get the noise universally removed

[@charlesdavis6371]

interesting experiment - ty

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks for watching!

[@clbayley2762]

Great video! Do you open the raw file into Photoshop via Camera Raw, and if so what profile is attached? Typical default is Adobe Color, but you can get other profiles to match you camera JPGs, or boost saturation. Maybe a different profile will match the color between files. Love your work!

[@WildlifeInspired]

Good point. I'll play with color profiles. Typically I'm in Adobe RGB but since 99 percent of my stuff ends up on the web only as sRGB, I often don't worry about it. However, when making these videos I should explore all the nuisances. I'll do a raw file through various color spaces to see what happens

[@grega9220]

Is that saturation a change in Color Profile? Maybe the DNG is "Adobe sRGB" and PS is "Adobe pro" ?

[@WildlifeInspired]

I have had a couple people as me that and I will have to play around a little more

[@grega9220]

@@WildlifeInspired I just watched another video by Matt K and his image does the same thing with saturation. (@3:25)

[@JGZphotography]

Well, case in point, sending images to servers on the social, news, sports, or business media pretty much require JPG image files-not RAW, DNG, TIF as these are huge 135+ MB files that are never used for internet display postings for viewers. In fact ALL, images on the internet are compressed JPEG at 72 dpi resulting in a 350 KB file. One can only imagine the mass storage required holding DGN files. Now, on the other hand, if printing large posters, banners, and other commercial work for clients, most will request TIF uncompressed files from edited RAW files. Don't know of any cameras that can output as DNG, only a few software apps do, but not PS. While workflow varies in individuals, depending on their photo genres, the general workflow is often from RAW, then into Adobe Camera RAW, then export to JPG or TIF, then batch in a denoise / sharpen application, and outputting into JPG or TIF. While your comparison and pixel-peeking is appreciated, the bottom line for most photographers is to meet the deadline!

[@ralphmastrangelo4818]

Hi Scott, This video was really done very well! With regard to noise reduction, would Normal with a higher Strength setting be comparable to Strong with a lower Strength setting? I don’t yet have Photo AI to test this.

[@EtzionHadassy]

Hey Scott, great video, very informative as usual. I process my photos (Nikon Z9) with LRC and Topaz. I found out that when i process the file as raw and save it as Dng, LRC is pretty limited in it's processing capabilities. The masking and tone adjustments are not the same. That had led me to only use Photo Ai as a plugin in LRC.

[@WildlifeInspired]

Thanks for the info!

[@thomasglendenning3486]

I don't necessarily agree with what you indicated here because everything you did was looked at very closely 500% magnification or so. Most photographs will not be viewed at 300% to 500% and I am just interested in the printed version or the digital version ... the pixel peeping that you are using rarely if ever gets viewed to that level except by pixel peepers. I'm only interested in the view at the standard viewing distance, and at that distance, the difference cannot be seen. In other words I don't really what the pixel peepers say they can see at 500%, it only applies to very few people who are really looking for problems.

[@PerS-ti4fq]

BE AWARE! Because mirrorless cameras always performs lens corrections in camera, there are often no lens profiles for mirrorless camera lenses in Photoshop. So when converting RAW files with Topaz Photo AI (or DXO Pure RAW) all lens information is LOST (check the Optics tab in ACR and there is no lens info anymore). If needed you have to do manual lens corrections in ACR or Lightroom. That can be a big drawback for the Photo AI RAW approach.