Forgot Password
Pentax Camera Forums Home
 

Reply
Show Printable Version Search this Thread
06-14-2022, 12:12 PM   #1
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,574
THIS is why I don't trust AI image processing software...

For some time I've had a "thing" about AI image processing tools... I just don't trust them. In my view, whilst the results can be amazing, what they give you is content replacement rather than enhancement. Instead of using noise reduction, sharpening, scaling and other pixel-for-pixel processing techniques to get the best out of what's already there, they'll analyse the scene and actively replace chunks of it based on what they "think" the content should be. Now, if the end result looks good, there's a perfectly reasonable argument that says "why should that matter?" - and to some extent, in some situations, I'd agree... but I have a hard time getting my head around the fact that the end result isn't an enhanced version of what the sensor captured, but a facsimile - a whole new rendering. That just doesn't feel right to me.

A few weeks back I bought the Topaz AI suite of DeNoise, Sharpen and Gigapixel at a very reduced deal price - and I have to say, they're useful to have in my post-processing toolbox. With careful use - and, often, some manual editing after the fact - they can work wonders... but sometimes even the most careful use can result in unwanted artefacts or unusual results.

Why do I mention this? Well, it's been said in these forums that tools like Gigapixel AI offer a viable alternative to upgrading from a lower resolution camera to a higher one... and I just don't believe that's the case. That said, I'm very glad to have bought the Topaz AI suite, and I will (already do, in fact) use it for a variety of purposes - but AI has a long way to go, IMHO.

I know a lot of you folks don't like Tony & Chelsea Northrup, but this video is worth watching if you're curious about AI resizing tools and have 15 minutes to spare. If you'd rather skip to the chase, the TL;DR is that Tony likes Topaz Gigapixel AI best out of the three tools he's tested - but at 10:47 he demonstrates some of the issues he's run up against, and this shows - with exaggerated examples, perhaps - precisely why I don't yet trust AI image processing software...




Last edited by BigMackCam; 06-14-2022 at 12:53 PM.
06-14-2022, 12:40 PM - 1 Like   #2
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,068
I am not pro or con Tony. He is honest yet often not informed enough.

I liked seeing at 11:40 the upscale vs real at the same size. Often he doesn't reveal that his info is at unrealistic viewing sizes. He does say we see 300% viewing size at times but when is he showing other sizes? I don't know. Can I see the stars are blobs at actual viewing size? I don't think so but he skims over that incredibly important point..

Like all data, I would look at it carefully and see if this software obliterates it or enhances it. I love the tool but not the authority or confirmation.
06-14-2022, 01:02 PM - 4 Likes   #3
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 646
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
For some time I've had a "thing" about AI image processing tools...
The Northrups are just trying to turn a buck off website talking about their opinions of photo stuff. When they agree with me they're right, other times ... anyways...

Many of these bits of software can indeed eliminate the need for some folks to upgrade their system depending on their needs and gear. Likely 90% or more of photos taken don't really need any more than 8mp. As far as the Topaz stuff goes, they put user controls in there for a reason, partly for their AI to 'learn' from, and partly to train you to use them.
06-14-2022, 01:19 PM - 1 Like   #4
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,574
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by JohnMc Quote
Many of these bits of software can indeed eliminate the need for some folks to upgrade their system depending on their needs and gear.
Hmmm... if I add "and expectations" on to the end of that, I guess I'd be closer to agreeing. I've seen the claims arising from some photographers for whom image quality seems very important indeed, and for them I wonder. It's possible, I guess.

QuoteOriginally posted by JohnMc Quote
As far as the Topaz stuff goes, they put user controls in there for a reason, partly for their AI to 'learn' from, and partly to train you to use them.
I'm not the kind of fella to use auto settings (thank goodness, because the Topaz tools usually get those settings very wrong - the default AI method, levels of noise reduction and sharpening, etc.), and the first thing I did while spending time learning the software was to see how each of the models compared with different image types, and the effect of slider adjustments. They definitely allow a great deal of improvement over the default guesses that the software makes, and I do feed back my results to Topaz. Still, there are instances where no amount of well-informed tweaking will produce a result that doesn't require some actual editing in something like GIMP or Photoshop. As far as Gigapixel is concerned, that's a whole other workflow compared to shooting with a higher resolution camera.

This isn't me ragging on Gigapixel and other AI tools. They have their uses. I just see too many artefacts and unusual results in too many situations (with the AI at its current levels of intelligence) to trust them, or to agree with certain claims for them... but I'll say again, I'm glad I have them, and I do use them... sparingly

06-14-2022, 01:56 PM - 1 Like   #5
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,068
A photographic tool usually comes down to how much it is a hindrance. To time in particular. Is a possible enhancement worth the time or effort to achieve it more often than not?
06-14-2022, 02:17 PM   #6
Digitiser of Film
Loyal Site Supporter
BigMackCam's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: North East of England
Posts: 20,574
Original Poster
QuoteOriginally posted by swanlefitte Quote
A photographic tool usually comes down to how much it is a hindrance. To time in particular. Is a possible enhancement worth the time or effort to achieve it more often than not?
With the Topaz AI tools - based on my experience thus far - that's not an easy answer... IMHO. Depending on how far you push them and your expectations, I may answer "probably" or "possibly"... but then if you don't push them enough, often the difference between the AI enhancements and traditional raster image processing enhancements is less impressive. There are occasions where the AI versions shine, and you think "Wow! How did I ever do without this?!" - but it's quite dependent on the individual image content and quality. With raster processing techniques, you can apply the same approach each time - with different levels of adjustment, obviously - and derive the same improvements over sharpness, noise reduction, scaling etc., and the overall rendering of the lens and camera are largely retained. With AI, it seems more of a crap-shoot to me, with some of the original image character lost, and repair work after the fact is sometimes required. But again, it depends on individual expectations and tolerances. I didn't start this thread to claim AI image processing tools are bad, but to point out there are reasons why I personally don't trust them yet. Even so, I think they can be useful - I just wouldn't depend on the same level of usefulness for every candidate image...
06-14-2022, 02:25 PM - 3 Likes   #7
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
AggieDad's Avatar

Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Houston, TX
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 1,439
For some people the adage, "When all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail" always holds true.

But the post-processing tool box has a lot of tools in it – how many different ways are there to complete an edit within a given post-processing app? Just keep in mind that these AI actions are just additional tools. Like all tools, there are times and places to use them and times and places not to use them.

06-14-2022, 03:11 PM   #8
Pentaxian
swanlefitte's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Location: Minneapolis
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 4,068
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
With AI, it seems more of a crap-shoot to me,.
To me that means it is a hinderance on a decent image but worth placing a bet on a unique image that didn't technically turn out to salvage it. This also means I would never spend enough time to find out, probably. The person who takes the time might be like a card counter in Black Jack and know when to hold or fold em.
06-14-2022, 03:14 PM   #9
Junior Member




Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: Lyon area
Posts: 46
QuoteOriginally posted by AggieDad Quote
Just keep in mind that these AI actions are just additional tools. Like all tools, there are times and places to use them and times and places not to use them.
I'll second to that, PS or Lightroom can also cause all sorts of aberrations and bad processing, you've to go easy on the knobs otherwise it'll just look artificial and sometimes worse than original picture
06-14-2022, 05:01 PM - 2 Likes   #10
Site Supporter
Site Supporter
RobA_Oz's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Tasmania, Australia
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 8,182
I use the Topaz AI tools quite a bit, although not every image is going to benefit from what they can do, and I haven’t tried the Gigapixel AI one yet.

While I agree that the default settings in Sharpen and Denoise can produce unsatisfactory results, they don’t always do that. Nonetheless, as others have said, they’re just tools and one has to put time into learning strengths and weaknesses, as well as how to best use them. I think that I’ve now put adequate time into learning how best to use them, so that I can judge when they’ll help turn a photo into something worth looking at.

I will say that contemporary sensor technology is diminishing my need for them, in a relative sense. In particular, the high-ISO noise in the K-3iii is such that some photos I took with the K-3 wouldn‘t have benefited as much from DenoiseAI if I’d had the K-3iii at the time, possibly SharpenAI as well, since I could have shot at higher shutter speeds or smaller apertures.

More power to Tony and Chelsea if they’re moving away from just promoting new camera gear, to talking about making pictures. IF they are, mind.
06-14-2022, 05:10 PM - 1 Like   #11
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
robgski's Avatar

Join Date: Nov 2012
Location: Shenandoah Valley, Virginia
Photos: Gallery | Albums
Posts: 8,759
With Topaz or any other tools, one can get amazing results, unless the source image is really poor.

iMO, the time saved using TopazAI has salvaged many images that I had considered hopeless much more easily and more quickly than I could do on my own. I am very pleased with it, but I often use masks to selectively apply the fix in Sharpen or DeNoise.
06-14-2022, 05:42 PM   #12
Pentaxian




Join Date: Sep 2020
Posts: 646
QuoteOriginally posted by BigMackCam Quote
Hmmm... if I add "and expectations"
Now that's just mean.




QuoteQuote:
Still, there are instances where no amount of well-informed tweaking will produce a result that doesn't require some actual editing in something like GIMP or Photoshop. As far as Gigapixel is concerned, that's a whole other workflow compared to shooting with a higher resolution camera.
Those three aren't meant to be a substitute or replacement for PS (or other editing software), only augmentation too (aka plugins) just like PK (PixelGenius, Photoshop Plug-in Developer, Developer of PhotoKit plug-ins, PhotoKit, PhotoKit Sharpener, PhotoKit Color, PhotoKit-EL - which conceivably could still work for some folks). Before you buy that next magic bullet talk to me, I have a bean seed that's extra special, needs very little noise reduction, and is darn near a bargain to boot.
06-14-2022, 06:06 PM   #13
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
cdd29's Avatar

Join Date: Sep 2016
Location: Southern Indiana
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 955
I'll jump in on Topaz. haven't been using it very long (Sharpener & Denoise) but with a particular Canon p&s, results were usually favorable as long as not pushed to the extreme. I was able to salvage some photos I didn't think were salvageable. Seems like the higher resolution the camera, the worse the results. But then again, if used conservatively it can enhance images. Like anything, it can either help or hinder depending on how it's used. I won't say if it's shot correctly it isn't needed as I've had some shots that were pretty spot on exposure & focus that were enhanced a little with Topaz stuff.
06-14-2022, 06:29 PM   #14
Loyal Site Supporter
Loyal Site Supporter
Mooncatt's Avatar

Join Date: May 2020
Location: Wisconsin
Photos: Gallery
Posts: 1,369
QuoteOriginally posted by robgski Quote
I am very pleased with it, but I often use masks to selectively apply the fix in Sharpen or DeNoise.
Same here. One of the tricks I've learned is running through the program multiple times. For example, I had one that my aperture was too wide and threw off my DoF. One section only needed minor sharpening, but another needed quite a bit to rescue. I ran the photo through Sharpen AI masking both sections and sharpened enough to fix the minor area, and marginally improving the bad section. I exported that result and opened that new file into Sharpen AI again, this time masking only the bad area and fixing it for good. I wish you could shop intermediate steps all at once without the need to export and import again.

Gigapixel shines for cropping and enlarging, and photo recovery. I recently used it on a number of photos for a memorial service (along with other tools) to be able to print them out. Many of these were passed around via text messaging and heavily compressed. It didn't make things perfect, and I wasn't expecting that, but the final prints were good enough to draw favorable comments from many that attended.

My only point of contention is calling everything artificial intelligence these days. I think it gives a false idea of what programs are capable of. If this were truly the case, I wouldn't have to mask out certain types of fabric in DeNoise because the "A.I." can't tell the difference between noise and fabric patterns. It's just a very advanced algorithm, not intelligence.

Oh, and since I'm here, let's go back to one of the initial comments that Topaz is replacing, not enhancing the data. I'll give you that in some cases, but I've also seen a slice of pizza turned into a bikini clad supermodel in Photoshop. I think the ship has sailed on that being an argument against Topaz. So the question is if you want to do all the adjusting yourself, or let some of it be automated. There's pros and cons to each, so use what makes you happy.
06-14-2022, 07:13 PM - 1 Like   #15
Moderator
Loyal Site Supporter
Wheatfield's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The wheatfields of Canada
Posts: 15,903
I've been using some of Adobe's AI processing filters for a while. Mostly they are very good, sometimes they fail spectacularly. One of the things that seems to work quite well is what they call Enhancement, which doubles the pixel count, taking, for example, a 6mp *istD image to 24MP, ot a K1 image to 144 MP.

The technology is imperfect, but it gets much better with every new version. The failures are fewer and farther between.
Reply

Bookmarks
  • Submit Thread to Facebook Facebook
  • Submit Thread to Twitter Twitter
  • Submit Thread to Digg Digg
Tags - Make this thread easier to find by adding keywords to it!
gigapixel, image, photography, photoshop, result, results, suite, time, tools, topaz, trust, trust ai image
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Topaz Labs JPEGtoRAW AI - essentially replaced by GigaPixel AI ?! BigMackCam Digital Processing, Software, and Printing 10 05-17-2022 01:34 AM
Does modern post processing AI make old lenses good again. normhead Pentax SLR Lens Discussion 60 01-24-2022 06:46 PM
Ratings and Reviews do you trust them and why? aslyfox General Photography 57 11-01-2019 10:35 PM
Can Nikon Ai and/or non Ai lenses be adapted to work on the K mount? Vantage-Point Canon, Nikon, Sony, and Other Camera Brands 3 07-28-2013 08:25 PM
Non-electronic lens: Why can't Av mode just trust me? mattdm Pentax DSLR Discussion 8 06-27-2008 09:03 PM



All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:46 PM. | See also: NikonForums.com, CanonForums.com part of our network of photo forums!
  • Red (Default)
  • Green
  • Gray
  • Dark
  • Dark Yellow
  • Dark Blue
  • Old Red
  • Old Green
  • Old Gray
  • Dial-Up Style
Hello! It's great to see you back on the forum! Have you considered joining the community?
register
Creating a FREE ACCOUNT takes under a minute, removes ads, and lets you post! [Dismiss]
Top