Love your comment about making a choice and sticking with it. Then getting out there and taking photos. I just updated my camera and a lens and its really easy to get lost in the gear (software in the case of this video). Best to forget the gear and focus on the images and the art of it
Sorry this is so late; I hope you'll eventually see it. Matt, at 11:17 when you are comparing NoNoise on a raw file vs Topaz, is the Topaz picture from a raw file or or a processed file in your normal Topaz workflow?
It's always been about the fine feather detail for me. Looking at NoNoise, it seemed to leave noise between the feathers on the top of the head and smoothed out some of the fine feathers on the back of the neck. But, I personally haven't tried it. DeNoise has been awesome and yes, a few times I've had to run it a second time over selected areas but I'm good with Topaz. Thanks for the comparison, Matt!
4-6 seconds in Topaz? On my 2019 mac mini i7 with 64G memory, it's in the order of 3 to 5 minutes for the preview generation. Still get the same speed as you in ON1 NoNoise.
Very interesting comparaison, Thanks! But on what version was this NoNoise you just talking? What about: ( no body talk-about)), ths NoNoise effect will be on old 35mm noisy picture and on the old B&W 400 ASA negative film? What about the result from a low light picture from a celle phone? Thanks!
Hi. I don't think anyone talks about that because most people aren't using it that way on those types of photos (you are the minority if you are). For me to talk about it would be disingenuous because I don't have personal experience with it. But here's the great news... it has a free trial so you're welcome to download it and give it a try yourself on the photos that you have. But don't assume that most people have or would desire to use this on "old 35mm noisy" photos. This is current technology/software that is meant to help tackle problems in current cameras - not for decades old technology. Hope that helps. Thanks!
@@MattKloskowski / Finally, I've bought the NoNoise and tried on old 35mm and 220 rolls of positives pictures. It work first class to improve the quality on those pictures. It is worth a WOW!
Matt, could you make a video for multiple images into one. I watched the one with Jared, but it isnt working. He said to copy the bottom layer onto the layer above, but he didnt say weather or not to do it with EVERY layer. Please help. Thank you so much.
I started LR and didn’t do any of my editing and instead clicked on edit in On1 Nonoise. Then was asked to edit with LR copy and made the choice to be a Tiff file. The app did the file change and never left LR, but stopped and did nothing. I deleted that file and went to file clicked on plugins and clicked on transfer to ON1 Nonoise. That did open Nonoise and worked. So it seems this is operating as a stand alone program within LR. What is disturbing is hearing you say that in the fall the upgrade On1 Photo Raw will include Nonoise, That means I will pay for Nonoise twice when paying to upgrade. So, Nonoise needs a lot of work. As it is now once getting it to work it is pretty good. I already have Topaz Denoise and even though it is slow it does a good job and I will continue using it.
Looks like ON1 NoNoise at 11:11 opened your shadows better than Topaz, subtle but you can see it close up. I have about the same work flow but use Topaz De-noise with Sharpening turned up.
Thank you Matt for the video. I have both and find in a lot of situations that Topaz is better. But I had great luck with a JPEG file in NoNoise. It is funny how programs handle different images differently. To me it is faster once you are in NoNoise but man the wait to get in there seemed like a life time. In Topaz your in quickly but have to wait sometimes on the program after that but seems to even out in the end. I think that it is really going to come down to the image you are working on in some cases let's say image A Topaz is going to do better and on image B NoNoise is going to do better. In time I guess we will learn which is going to do a better job when and use that one for that image. Well that's my two cents 😅. Thank you for the video and giving a fair comparison between the two. Stay safe.
Hi. I did mention it and said it didn’t work for my workflow and I didn’t (me personally) find the results any better than what I’m using. I understand it’s different for everyone but it’s just not for me.
@@MattKloskowski The professional community, stock photography sites, peers..... I'd like to be a professional photographer some day in the not too distant future; and noise is one of the issues I struggle with. My current gear does not perform well in low light situations; and I've been trying to find some sort of compensation. Through personal frustrating and disappointing experience, I've learned that underexposing and trying to fix my images in post production is probably the worst thing I can do, worse than pushing my camera/lenses past their ISO limitations. By the way, I liked your video. My comment was no reflection of my perceived validity of your review. Actually, I only made my comment in support of you; because I got the impression that a little bit of noise doesn't bother you, so much. I'm one of your subscribers; and I appreciate all that you produce. I plan to dive back into Photoshop; but, right now, I'm doing all of my work in Lightroom. Ahh..... a pretty wordy reply to a quick question. 🥴
Thanks, Matt. Very well done and very fair to both products. I did the same process with several images and found that, in the majority of cases, Topaz was preferable to ON1. But, the differences were not significant and if speed is critical, ON1 is an acceptable choice.
Sorry for what Carlos? You have no reason to be sorry. You have a workflow you like and that’s all anyone can ask. Glad to hear what you have works for you. Best!
One of the best comparison-type videos I have seen. Very fair and enough information for individuals to make an educated decision. Great work Matt!
Thanks for the comparison. I was curious about this exact thing!!
Matt you are the best in explanation. Thank you. Baroness Danuté Photo journalist.
Love your comment about making a choice and sticking with it. Then getting out there and taking photos. I just updated my camera and a lens and its really easy to get lost in the gear (software in the case of this video). Best to forget the gear and focus on the images and the art of it
Coke is better than Pepsi. Good review and this tells me what I wanted to know. Like you, I'll be sticking with Lightroom/Topaz/Photoshop.
Sorry this is so late; I hope you'll eventually see it.
Matt, at 11:17 when you are comparing NoNoise on a raw file vs Topaz, is the Topaz picture from a raw file or or a processed file in your normal Topaz workflow?
It's always been about the fine feather detail for me. Looking at NoNoise, it seemed to leave noise between the feathers on the top of the head and smoothed out some of the fine feathers on the back of the neck. But, I personally haven't tried it. DeNoise has been awesome and yes, a few times I've had to run it a second time over selected areas but I'm good with Topaz. Thanks for the comparison, Matt!
4-6 seconds in Topaz? On my 2019 mac mini i7 with 64G memory, it's in the order of 3 to 5 minutes for the preview generation. Still get the same speed as you in ON1 NoNoise.
Your Mac Mini doesn't have a graphics card that meets Topaz recommendations. Maybe you already knew that, but just stating in case you didn't.
nice tuto. Any update ? Still happy with latest version of Topaz denoise ? Is ON1 no noise still considering only dng files ?
Hi Marc. I haven’t tried any other versions. I have software I like, so not much reason to spend any time on others :-)
You should also consider bringing Topaz Gigapixel Ai in to your workflow especially as you crop your wildlife .
Thanks. I dont typically need to upsize so I don’t use it often.
Very interesting comparaison, Thanks!
But on what version was this NoNoise you just talking?
What about: ( no body talk-about)), ths NoNoise effect will be on old 35mm noisy picture and on the old B&W 400 ASA negative film? What about the result from a low light picture from a celle phone?
Thanks!
Hi. I don't think anyone talks about that because most people aren't using it that way on those types of photos (you are the minority if you are). For me to talk about it would be disingenuous because I don't have personal experience with it. But here's the great news... it has a free trial so you're welcome to download it and give it a try yourself on the photos that you have. But don't assume that most people have or would desire to use this on "old 35mm noisy" photos. This is current technology/software that is meant to help tackle problems in current cameras - not for decades old technology. Hope that helps. Thanks!
@@MattKloskowski / Finally, I've bought the NoNoise and tried on old 35mm and 220 rolls of positives pictures. It work first class to improve the quality on those pictures. It is worth a WOW!
Matt, could you make a video for multiple images into one. I watched the one with Jared, but it isnt working. He said to copy the bottom layer onto the layer above, but he didnt say weather or not to do it with EVERY layer. Please help. Thank you so much.
I think I'm still team DxO, but I'll test NoNoise with my older RAWs which DxO doesn't read
I started LR and didn’t do any of my editing and instead clicked on edit in On1 Nonoise. Then was asked to edit with LR copy and made the choice to be a Tiff file. The app did the file change and never left LR, but stopped and did nothing. I deleted that file and went to file clicked on plugins and clicked on transfer to ON1 Nonoise. That did open Nonoise and worked. So it seems this is operating as a stand alone program within LR. What is disturbing is hearing you say that in the fall the upgrade On1 Photo Raw will include Nonoise, That means I will pay for Nonoise twice when paying to upgrade. So, Nonoise needs a lot of work. As it is now once getting it to work it is pretty good. I already have Topaz Denoise and even though it is slow it does a good job and I will continue using it.
And how is it compared to NIK Dfine?
Looks like ON1 NoNoise at 11:11 opened your shadows better than Topaz, subtle but you can see it close up. I have about the same work flow but use Topaz De-noise with Sharpening turned up.
Thank you Matt for the video. I have both and find in a lot of situations that Topaz is better. But I had great luck with a JPEG file in NoNoise. It is funny how programs handle different images differently. To me it is faster once you are in NoNoise but man the wait to get in there seemed like a life time. In Topaz your in quickly but have to wait sometimes on the program after that but seems to even out in the end. I think that it is really going to come down to the image you are working on in some cases let's say image A Topaz is going to do better and on image B NoNoise is going to do better. In time I guess we will learn which is going to do a better job when and use that one for that image. Well that's my two cents 😅. Thank you for the video and giving a fair comparison between the two. Stay safe.
Interesting, BUT, I am surprised you haven't mentions DxO Pure RAW - so simple to use, so effective, and well outperforms Topaz DeNoise AI.
Hi. I did mention it and said it didn’t work for my workflow and I didn’t (me personally) find the results any better than what I’m using. I understand it’s different for everyone but it’s just not for me.
In what universe are coke and Pepsi comparable?
ALL
I prefer good texture with as little noise as possible. The only reason I'm so picky about noise is because I know I would be judged for having it.
Quick question based on your comment… judged by who?
@@MattKloskowski The professional community, stock photography sites, peers..... I'd like to be a professional photographer some day in the not too distant future; and noise is one of the issues I struggle with. My current gear does not perform well in low light situations; and I've been trying to find some sort of compensation. Through personal frustrating and disappointing experience, I've learned that underexposing and trying to fix my images in post production is probably the worst thing I can do, worse than pushing my camera/lenses past their ISO limitations. By the way, I liked your video. My comment was no reflection of my perceived validity of your review. Actually, I only made my comment in support of you; because I got the impression that a little bit of noise doesn't bother you, so much. I'm one of your subscribers; and I appreciate all that you produce. I plan to dive back into Photoshop; but, right now, I'm doing all of my work in Lightroom. Ahh..... a pretty wordy reply to a quick question. 🥴
Thanks, Matt. Very well done and very fair to both products. I did the same process with several images and found that, in the majority of cases, Topaz was preferable to ON1. But, the differences were not significant and if speed is critical, ON1 is an acceptable choice.
I tested against DxO Prime. Still the king, sorry
Sorry for what Carlos? You have no reason to be sorry. You have a workflow you like and that’s all anyone can ask. Glad to hear what you have works for you. Best!