I am aware of the option to choose GPU over CPU. Sorry for the long delay in my response, I had no idea anyone had responded (I never got notifications). The GTX1650 runs lower power than most (therefore is pretty quiet) and draws this power from the PCI slot. My choice of GPU was really dictated by the need to pick one which did not have an external power connector as it would have meant replacing the PSU on my PC. I only use the Topaz plug-ins after I have cropped the images to viewing size (1800x1200), Denoise AI and Sharpen AI never take more than 10 seconds, although times vary depending on options chosen. I then installed PL4 under WIN10 and this cut the processing time of a RAW file using Deep Prime to around 15 seconds.
This was recognised by PL2 and cut the processing time for a raw file under Prime to around 1 minute 15 seconds. This was not recognised by PL2 so processing defaulted to the CPU and was taking 5-7 minutes to process a 16mb RAW file under Prime.Īt the beginning of the year I managed to get hold of a 4Gb Nvidia GTX1650. I was running Photolab2 under WIN7 with a fairly old GPU (Radeon R7240). This is especially important when the image is tightly cropped as is often the case with macro work.įor night and low light photos, I find Topaz DeNoise AI invaluable as it is rare that a night photograph is taken without having some noise (be it from high ISO, or thermal / sensor noise from long exposures).I have a CPU which is probably about 8 years old (Athlon X4740). This often includes Topaz Adjust AI to bring out the colors, clarity and detail.įor the macro work, Topaz Gigapixel AI has become a great tool within my workflow as it allows me to really increase the resolution of the image. I usually start off with Lightroom as a digital asset manager, from there I begin to work on the photo using a range of different photo editing tools. I use a number of different tools based on the style and look of the photo. I think photography is a great tool that really allows us to share the fascinating world with others who may not always be able to see / experience these things. I like showing the detail within a scene or flora or fauna, which can include things like the structure, but also equally the colors. I have an interest in the natural world, and I think to a certain extent my style came from that. Start off with simple still objects (pepper, soap bubbles, kitchen items etc.) and progressively move through to leaves, flowers and then to other things such as insects. Essentially though it comes down to practice (there is no shortcut). This is especially important with macro photography as this has a shallow depth of field and can be less forgiving than other styles.
The benefit of digital photography, in general, is that you really get the chance to see what is working and what is not working as you go, so then start to adjust your technique as you take your photos. It may be worth considering extension tubes, which are a cheaper alternative to a macro lens, but eventually the lens is the way to go if you can fit it in your budget. In terms of macro photography, that is much easier to get started in.
I have an article on my specific microscopy setup and some on focus stacking (which is generally required for microscopy due to the shallow depth of field). a microscope) to get started and is, in my view, the more difficult of the two. There are two areas to look at microphotography usually requires some specialized equipment (e.g.
0 kommentar(er)
