Topaz Photo AI vs. DxO PhotoLab 6 DeepPrime - Which Noise Reduction Software is the Best?

[@mtreadwell01]

Thanks for another great video! One thing you didn't mention - although from my personal experience, for Raw files - DxO is still king. However, you can only use DeepPrime and DeepPrime XD with raw files only. If you are trying to denoise a JPEG file, you're out of luck unless you want to denoise using DxO "old tech". That's where Topaz Photo AI comes into the picture for me. Topaz does an amazing job on my old JPEG photos, and HEIF photos I take with my iPhone when my camera is not with me. I have both, I use both. Both are amazing products and recommend them equally.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Great insight! Thanks for sharing.

[@ddsdss256]

Thanks. I've been using DxO for a while now (so much better than an Adobe subscription!) and currently have PL6 Elite, FilmPack 5 Elite, ViewPoint 4, and Nik 5. I also recently got the Topaz "suite" and generally use Photo AI (it's still not 100% clear if it's better than using the individual components, but they're certainly been updating it more as it's still a "semi-beta"). The main reason I added Topaz was that DeepPRIME/XD only works on RAWs and I have some old, low-res (as low as 1MP!) JPGs and scans. Not only does DeNoise work on those, Sharpen and Gigapixel can really transform them to the point where even large prints can look good. In my limited experience with these so far, both NR programs work very well, although determining how to best use them is where the learning curve kicks in (and it depends on the image). Also, I'm wondering if you had ClearView Plus ticked in PL6, as the Topaz images looked a bit hazier. BtW, was that wading in The Narrows in Zion?

[@AustinJamesJackson]

That’s actually a different canyon but still in Zion! Thanks for all the info. I thought I checked everything off in PL6, but may have missed something somewhere. And definitely good to know about PL6 not working on non-RAW images. I love the Topaz Software, and the learning curve isn’t too bad, especially on Photo AI. Honestly, 9 times out of 10, the program choosing the noise reduction and sharpening model and amount works perfectly for me.

[@ddsdss256]

@@AustinJamesJackson Thanks--it did look a bit deep with the drought, but Zion is a magical place. We went there after the Grand, Lower Antelope, and Bryce Canyons and found it to be the best of the bunch. Too wet to climb (the sandstone gets soft) but after the rain cleared, it was visually amazing. PL6 will work on JPGs (with the usual limitations, which is why I prefer RAWs), it's just that the only NR that works with JPGs is High Quality. I don't know if you do any perspective or advanced lens correction, but it was also annoying that you couldn't use Nik Perspective Efex on RAWs either, so I got ViewPoint 4, which allows me to apply corrections on RAWs in PL6. That's a huge benefit as I like to do any cropping or other geometric adjustments first.

[@00fabian7]

Thanks for the comparison! Clarifies both benefits and deficits of both (which sadly hasn't made the decision much easier, but is gold for making a well-informed purchasing decision).

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Thanks for watching! If it comes down to it, I’d recommend Topaz just because it’s much easier to use as a plug-in.

[@banginghats2]

Thanks for the review. I've got lots of jpg/tiffs going back to 2002 and would like to work on them. I only switched to raw almost exclusively in 2004. Have you tried comparing the two programs on jpg or tiff to see which is better at removing noise when you don't have a raw image?

[@AustinJamesJackson]

I haven’t! I’ll have to do this in the next video!

[@mtreadwell01]

If you have jpegs to denoise, the amazing technology of DxO (Prime, DeepPrime and DeepPrime HD) only works with RAW files. If you try to denoise a JPEG, DxO will not allow you the option to use one those above mentioned settings. For JPEG - I would recommend Topaz Photo AI

[@pgtips4240]

DxO is better imho because the other tools in the software work in coordination with the noise reduction. There is also contrast and micro-contrast which are incredible parameters to adjust. I have been using DxO labs for quite a few years now and it still absolutely blows my mind. Even when I load a photo into DxO theres just something about the software that instantly makes the image look amazingly good. I like topaz too but for noise reduction alone I think DxO is king.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

DxO certainly has some really powerful tools!

[@georgesaguna]

Don’t rush into paying for the software as I learnt the hard way. In my case I bought it mainly for the de-noising as it looked impressive. After sending about a 1000 shots to be taking care off (it took about 4 hours) from lightroom the images came back nearly a full stop darker then when edited. I tried to send the images un edited to PR2 directly from lightroom and same result. I tried to open it directly on PR2 and same result. I have been in contact with them ever since and there is no solution till today.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Wow, that’s too bad. Sorry to hear that. When I was using DxO, the DeNoising software was applying edits on my photos, which I had to change by unchecking a bunch of boxes. Super annoying that they are on by default. Topaz software is always worth a try if you don’t have success getting your issue resolved!

[@georgesaguna]

@@AustinJamesJackson I have looked around on different forums to find out more and I am not the only one to have such a problem. I advice people to download the free trial and see how the software works on their computer. If all is fine then proceed to pay for it, don’t be a fool like me and trust the word of such companies.

[@LukasStrasik]

In DXO (PhotoLab 6), I found that the reason for this is Wide Gamut, but if you switch to Legacy, you'll get the correct colors/exposure.

[@georgesaguna]

@@LukasStrasik is that available in pure raw 2?

[@rsearun2620]

@@AustinJamesJackson A simple preset at the beginning of the edit process solves this.

[@graciaman]

I’ve been using DxO PureRaw for a while now and have never been disappointed. Both seem amazing but if already invested in one of these it seems investing in the other won’t be worth the money.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Absolutely agree!

[@vincentkeith5259]

I'd give the nod to topaz for the first images - the cave diver in particular looked soft in DxO. But that last image - wow DxO did amazingly well there. They both did pretty well with the sky, but that foreground... Since I'm in the process of selling my house & all of my camera gear (and almost everything else) I have to wait until at least the house sale is done to make my switch to a single system (from Large format film or medium format digital back on LF + Medium format (film and digital) + Nikon APS-C. It's just too many cameras, too many lenses, too much everything. But it was a fun. So New camera system - and new workflow. I know I'm going Fujifilm, just not which camera yet - and I have no idea which software I'm going to pick. Almost sure it won't be Adobe - although that may turn out to be the least expensive option.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

So many options! Good luck with the sale and finding a new software to use!

[@Eigil_Skovgaard]

I have tested Topaz Photo AI and DxO DeepPrime XD per December 2022 on subjects that are important to me from nature, such as small branches lit from behind. DxO is a clear winner. I have compared before any sharpening, i.e. no Lens sharpening in DxO and only noise reduction in Photo AI. Actually it's impossible to reduce noise only in Photo AI without getting artifacts from implicit sharpening along high contrast edges, which is why I prefer DeepPrime XD. Be prepared for the Autopilot generated mask on subjects in Photo AI. More often than not it's imperfect, and the repair brush is a joke. Per default this mask is used when sharpening is added, and it can render strange transitions between the main subject and the background. For those who choose DxO PureRaw 2 over PhotoLab 6 to save money, I have found a subtle but important improvement in the rendering of small highlights details with the more expensive choice - and of course - in addition you get a very good raw editor (though with a few irritating issues). I am primarily using ACR and am not promoting DxO for other reasons than the pure technical. In the future my initial noise reduction/sharpening will be in PhotoLab 6 - unless the Topaz Photo AI development speeds up and the product improves radically from early 2023.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Good to know! In all the tests I’ve done in addition to the ones on this video, I can’t really tell that one is better than the other.

[@Eigil_Skovgaard]

@@AustinJamesJackson Then just trust me regarding the artifacts apparent with Topaz AI as opposed to DxO AI - It's an obvious difference in general when you dive into the details. But maybe you are not a pixel peeper, Austin ;O)

[@blueanthias]

Excellent analysis. Thanks much.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Thanks for checking it out!

[@aocdk840]

Really hard to compare when the DxO photos are clearly edited in terms of contrast and even lens correction - but no editing at all with Topaz?

[@AustinJamesJackson]

DxO automatically applies adjustments to the photos! I tried to turn off as many as I could, but it was a huge pain. Another one of the reasons why I prefer Topaz!

[@aocdk840]

@@AustinJamesJackson OK fair game - nice review BTW Im trying to find out which to buy... its really not easy - Im leaning towards Topaz Ai - although it does have some setbacks (birding) where it leaves some odd artifacts here and there - which I find hard to edit out (mask adjustment is very weird!?) - but that part is not super intuitive in DxO either - so yea I think I end up with Topaz - also as I have been using PS for 20 years - its just easier for me to have Topaz as a plugin. Thx for reply btw!

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Absolutely! I love how much easier it is to use Topaz as a plug-in. Hope you figured out which one you’re going to get!

[@rsearun2620]

He continues to talk about a huge pain but in 20 seconds you can set up a neutral preset. Good video, but it suffers from the lack of DxO knowledge.

[@rsearun2620]

@@AustinJamesJackson again, make a preset. It can be your default when you open it. Topaz has lots going for it, and I like both, for different uses.

[@MedusaJellyFish300]

Wow, very good video ✨️🌟✨️

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Thanks!

[@terence5ng]

DXO has plugin version of their denoise

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Thanks for letting me know! I’ll check it out.

[@z.bennett421]

With your comparison in Lightroom you never deselected the DxO layer so when you show Topaz it really is combining the DxO edit and Topaz edit into one rather then showing only Topaz.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

It only shows one photo at a time even if you have multiple selections!

[@billygarrett3911]

Well first off, big difference in DxO Photolab 6 Deep Prime vs Topaz Photo AI. You get more options in DxO over Photo AI.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

DxO is a full editor, where as Topaz is only meant for a few small tasks. So comparing the whole DxO software to Topaz isn’t really a fair comparison.

[@billygarrett3911]

@@AustinJamesJackson so its really hard and I think a big negative comparing the two on price and performance. Maybe you should consider the comparison of ProRaw3 vs Photo AI. Now would be a better comparison, and yes I have both and I am leaning more to ProRaw.

[@RSV9]

DXO is the best option.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

I think both softwares work equally as well, and I personally prefer Topaz for the ability to launch much easier as a plug-in!

[@RSV9]

@@AustinJamesJackson Photo AI and Gigapixel AI are image "enhancers", especially Photo AI promotes its program for its "autopilot", so they really should be compared to Radiant Photo which also offers its product to automatically enhance images.

[@rsearun2620]

Without the lens profile for DxO you've ignored a big benefit.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

DxO is certainly a more full program, but if you are only using it for denoising purposes, I like PhotoAI far better. Most people don't want to have to reinvent their workflow to use DxO, and if you're already using another photo editor you can use the lens profiles available there before loading it in to either DxO or Topaz.

[@rsearun2620]

@@AustinJamesJackson nice to have choices. Most agree, Topaz is a distant 3rd to the new release of Lightroom, and of course to DxO.

[@AustinJamesJackson]

I found Topaz to be slightly better than Lightroom for DeNoising, for most users it won’t matter but it was slightly better. And again, I’m not a fan of DxO because of the difficulty of using as a plug-in.

[@AllmedialabNl]

The plural form of software is software and not softwares!😊

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Thanks! Lol

[@hanslotus7196]

Fail. you can see he has no plan by topaz!!!😂😂

[@AustinJamesJackson]

Huh? Not sure what you mean.

[@rsearun2620]

The fail is that he does not know how to use DxO.