![]() That IS significant, although after giving to my clients and waiting some time, I'll probably want to save in a format that takes less space. The LRC DNG output files remain about 1/2 the size of the Topaz DNG output files my original 50Mb RAW file becomes 160Mb after processing in LRC and 291Mb with Topaz deNoise. ![]() Note, we always want to do denoise early in the workflow - certainly before texture, curves, dehaze, clarity or sharpening. One apparent advantage that LRC has (over just the Topaz RAW model) is that you can make some adjustments before denoising, which you can't do with the Topaz RAW model (you CAN do it with the other models). After processing another 20+ files in Topaz and LRC, I've concluded that LRC does a very good job and is comparable to Topaz.Still 6+ minutes per file, but hopefully the new graphics card will make that tolerable. It's a different process (not the "sync settings" that we're used to, but instead one selects the group of files, moves the slider as desired, then processes. Another user corrected me to say that LRC DOES allow batch processing of denoise files.(Of course, we shouldn't have to spend hundreds of dollars on new hardware to make this new feature work - especially if the competition can do it faster on the same cards we have now.) I'm going to do the same upgrade and will report back. Topaz deNoise is still 9x faster, but the 6-minute processing for LRC is now under a minute. One of the other people with the 'slow processing' problem upgraded his graphics card from a 4G to 12G and reports that processing times are now at least, tolerable.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |