Any reason to keep Topaz Photo? I have been using Topaz and like the denoise and sharpening, but...it seems like it's not really optimized for a simple nature photographer. The restoration and recovery features are the center of it and I don't do any of that. I don't find any of the other photo features useful, and don't care for how when I open in Topaz, I have to adjust the lighting (in TP) just to be able to see what I am doing and then reset the lighting before going back to LRC. The updates are often buggy, and while they are quite responsive, the steps they ask me to go through to evaluate issues (the lighting thing, autopilot not applying sharpening) are ponderous. I just need something simple that works. I do like how TP can make a slight focus issue non-visible, but that is a once-in-a-while thing.
So...thoughts? I know Pure Raw is great with NR, but how about sharpening? Thanks everyone!
I do like the results...it's just those issues I mentioned. Just doesn't seem photographer friendly...more like the software engineers just get off on the design process without thinking about the end users. Could be me though. I am going to grab Pure Raw, as it's just not that expensive. I will spend some time with it before I cancel TP. Thanks for your take.
Edit: TP reminds me of Mesa Boogie guitar amps...you have to spend huge amounts of time dialing them in and then they are great. Fenders? Just set everything on 4 and they sing.
You can get a 30 day demo for the DXO products simply with an email address, so try them in your environment.
If the Purely Raw is like the full Photolab I don't think it has a special function, but there are various settings for NR model, sharpening type and amount, and the amount of detail to extract. It also has masking.
