Converting JPEG to RAW (Page 2): I haven't seen a jpg I couldn't make better with Lightroom and PS yet. A jpg made in camera is not that great. Save the money and shoot raw..... If you...

frankraney Loc: Clovis, Ca.

Soul Dr. wrote:

What if you get a once in a lifetime shot with a phone when you don't have your best gear with you?
This program might be able to make that shot better than it originally was.
Nobody knows how well something works until they try it.

I haven't seen a jpg I couldn't make better with Lightroom and PS yet. A jpg made in camera is not that great.

Save the money and shoot raw..... If you use your phone, them do post with LR. We all know how this works and do not need to test it, than you..... This program is all guess work....

Gene51 Loc: Yonkers, NY, now in LSD (LowerSlowerDelaware)

letmedance wrote:

I believe that Adobe’s DNG converter does the same.

Nope!

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

letmedance wrote:

I believe that Adobe’s DNG converter does the same.

Sony's Clear Image Zoom also uses AI for pixel enlargement - these things are all parts of the new "computational" imaging and the future - and do not knock it if you have not tried it !

As for me, I embrace it - instead of sticking my nose up - like most here on UHH will do .....

..

imagemeister Loc: mid east Florida

frankraney wrote:

I haven't seen a jpg I couldn't make better with Lightroom and PS yet. A jpg made in camera is not that great.

Save the money and shoot raw..... If you use your phone, them do post with LR. We all know how this works and do not need to test it, than you..... This program is all guess work....

This is the typical response I would expect here .....

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

imagemeister wrote:

Sony's Clear Image Zoom also uses AI for pixel enlargement - these things are all parts of the new "computational" imaging and the future - and do not knock it if you have not tried it !

As for me, I embrace it - instead of sticking my nose up - like most here on UHH will do .....

..

Actually, Clear Image Zoom is not using AI. It is only math algorithms where it computes new pixels from a certain number of neighboring pixels. Just a basic resizing program. And it does resize very rapidly.

JimH123 Loc: Morgan Hill, CA

Soul Dr. wrote:

Just got an email from Topaz Labs. They are toutin... (show quote)

Found this review, and it seems fair.
http://www.northlight-images.co.uk/topaz-jpeg-to-raw-ai-review/

Says that the key features are:

Recover shadow / highlight detail and expand dynamic range
Expand bit depth from 8-bit to 16-bit, color space from sRGB to ProPhoto
Remove JPEG compression artifacts
Fix some common issues caused by small sensors or low camera quality, like noise / chromatic aberration
Convert the actual file format to DNG (or TIFF)

Also mentions that the main use of the SW is to take phone pictures or old digital images, and make them more editable.

Other than that, it mentioned no use case for switching from shooting RAW to shooting in JPEG. Continue doing things the way you had been doing them.

Update -- read a few more reviews, and it looks like it does a great job at what it does. Again, targeted at individuals with significant older JPEGs that they want to look better.

I liked the demonstration on removing JPEG artifacts.

rook2c4 Loc: Philadelphia, PA USA

bsprague wrote:

A JPEG is made from discarding light data from the RAW and then discarding the RAW, all in camera. Topaz may be able to simulate the tossed light data, but it can't be put back. That said, Topaz is pretty good at inventing things!

That is not exactly how JPEG compression works.

User ID

Soul Dr. wrote:

[something provocative and
easily misunderstoood]

Thank you for teasing several of
our most amusing members. It
was getting kinda boring around
here for a while ....

.

Dngallagher Loc: Wilmington De.

CHG_CANON wrote:

P. T. Barnum seems to have joined the Topaz Marketing team ...

And I say that as a happy Topaz user for multiple modules. If I want the best result, I shoot with the best technique, using my best equipment and capturing the image in RAW, not using my phone and thinking I can "AI" the missing data back into the JPEG.

kels7200 Loc: Maryland, USA

I shoot sports so I tend to shoot just in JPEG for that to avoid my buffer filling up. While this software is never going to be as good as a true RAW I could see it helping me to get a little more quality out of my shots. Obviously it's best to shoot in RAW when you can (and I do for everything else) but sometimes you just can't. I'll definitely be reading up on this more and probably giving it a try.

AlMac Loc: Newcastle Upon Tyne - UK

I think if I left the house without my D 800 with the 24 - 70 f2.8 attached I would tilt to one side, I am that used to carrying it.

kd7eir Loc: Tucson, AZ

I cannot believe that anyone is taking this seriously. You CANNOT put data BACK into an image that was NEVER THERE to begin with! My opinion of the collective intelligence of UHH has just dropped several notches by reading that some of you are actually believing this.

rmalarz Loc: Tempe, Arizona

Paul, thanks for my first good chuckle for the day.
--Bob

CHG_CANON wrote:

P. T. Barnum seems to have joined the Topaz Marketing team ...

And I say that as a happy Topaz user for multiple modules. If I want the best result, I shoot with the best technique, using my best equipment and capturing the image in RAW, not using my phone and thinking I can "AI" the missing data back into the JPEG.

BlueMorel Loc: Southwest Michigan

My Galaxy 6 cellphone camera has a pro setting that you can set to RAW. So if it's a planned shoot I can set it ahead of time. I hardly ever do purpiseful cellphone shoots where I don't have time to change the settings if I were so inclined. I don't carry my DSLR with me everywhere so I guess I run the risk on missing out in a prize-winning shot, but unlikely that will happen.

jerryc41 Loc: Catskill Mts of NY

I got that email, too, but I don't expect to buy the program. At first, it sounds like an impossibility - like the silk purse and sow's ear. On the other hand, AI is so competent that it's scary. Elon Musk and Stephen Hawking were on the right track when they warned us about uncontrolled AI. I'm looking forward to reviews of this product.