distributionklion.blogg.se

Topaz studio 2 vs photoshop
Topaz studio 2 vs photoshop




I bought DxO PhotoLab 4 because the noise reduction and lens corrections are unparallelled when they're available and I far prefer the raw output to ACR. But it depends on the details of what you do. YMMV.īut again, even with the new version of PL 4 it certainly isn't a substitute for Ps if you use Ps extensively. And in any case it wouldn't add anything I need to Topaz, Ps and LrC. And I don't like the interface and controls as much, but that's maybe down to familiarity with Topaz now. I did try PL 4, and while it's denoise is better than PL 3, I still don't find it as good for denoising as Topaz is, for me, with my photos. Fun to mess with when I want to go crazy, and I find the layers interface and plugin status with LrC and Ps fits my workflow. Also, Topaz was great about upgrading my older Topaz Studio tools, so I basically got those for a nominal fee too. Or they are just duplicative.īut then I tried Topaz Ai Denoise. They just don't do enough if you're used to the compositing tools, workflow, plugins, etc.

topaz studio 2 vs photoshop

I liked the BW tools it had, but I moved to the Lumenzia luminosity masking panels in Ps and again, just stopped using it.īoth can work in conjunction with Adobe stuff, but really aren't replacements for it. I used it in addition to LrC and Ps, and as those got better there wasn't much going to warrant keeping it.

topaz studio 2 vs photoshop

Camera support issues, and other stuff caught up. I owned PL for quite a while, but got frustrated and dropped it. Very useful for when you weren't in perfect control of the shoot. Topaz Sharpening AI is a useful plugin for improving sharpness/focus but in particular it can compensate for blurred images from subject/camera movement. If I was still on PS I wouldn't be considering moving today I moved to a raw converter 10+ years ago. So my need for PS is only when I want to do extensive cloning, object removal, replace sky, compositing. By edit I mean make tonal changes to the image globally / locally add clarity, structure, have excellent masking (colour, brush, radial gradient, feather masks, copy paste and invert masks, luma masks, luma curves to change contrast without impacting colour. I find that modern raw converters like LR/ Capture One Pro/DXO can edit files without the need for PS. I shoot exclusively raw so switched to LR at V1. I was an old time PS user many moons ago. You would need a very good reason which it doesn't sound like you have What Nigel said, plus changing software is not easy. Thanks in advance for your thoughts on this. Do either of these really make a significant difference over what can be accomplished within Photoshop itself? I'm wondering what others think about supplementing PS with either DxO's PhotoLab 4 or the various Topaz apps. I'm a long time user of Photoshop and expect I will continue to be in the future.






Topaz studio 2 vs photoshop