Upscaling: restoring detail versus inventing it
Improving image and video quality goes in two directions: recovering information the original implies, or using generative models to add detail that was never captured. Both look like 'it got sharper'. They are usable in different situations. Prices checked November 2026.
AI Tools Hub Editorial · published · updated
The difference
| Restorative | Generative | |
|---|---|---|
| What it does | Denoise, deblur, interpolate resolution | Infer and draw detail that is absent |
| Information not in the original | Not added | Added |
| Suited to | News, records, product shots, evidence | Illustration, concept art, creative work |
| Risk | Limited by how bad the source is | Things appear that were never there |
| Typical tools | Topaz Photo / Topaz Video | Magnific and other generative upscalers |
Restorative processing stays within what the original pixels mathematically imply. Enlarged four times, it does not invent pores or letters that were not captured. Generative processing draws from learned priors — 'there should be detail like this here'. For a poster, the second looks better. For a news photograph, the second is unusable.
Where generative upscaling must not be used
Generative upscaling makes things appear that were not in the frame: facial detail, text on a sign, digits on a plate — replaced by something plausible and different. When that happens the image stops being a record.
- News and journalistic photography
- Evidence for accidents, insurance or litigation
- Product photography showing the actual item
- Medical and diagnostic imaging
- Photographs of people used for identification
Product photography is the one people miss. A generatively enhanced texture makes the delivered item look different from the listing, which in many jurisdictions is a misleading-representation problem. For e-commerce images, stay restorative.
Topaz products and pricing
Topaz Labs is the main restorative family, and it runs on the desktop. Products are split by use, with a bundle available.
- Topaz Photo: $199/yr — denoise, sharpen and enlarge photographs
- Topaz Gigapixel: $149/yr — enlargement specifically
- Topaz Video: $299/yr — video enhancement, enlargement, stabilisation
- Topaz Studio: $399/yr — the bundle, with 300 monthly cloud video credits
- Topaz for Web: $109/yr images, $199/yr video — browser versions
Running locally is the practical advantage: material is never uploaded, so the tools can be used on work under NDA. The cost is hardware — processing 4K video takes several times longer without a capable GPU.
A decision procedure
- 1. Decide whether the image is a record or an expression
- 2. If it is a record, use restorative processing only — generative is off the table
- 3. If it is an expression, generative is fine, but treat faces carefully
- 4. Tell the client that AI processing was applied
The fourth is routinely skipped and routinely becomes a problem later. Being unable to answer 'is this part generated?' after delivery is a bad position. Keep the unprocessed source and a record of what was applied.
Frequently asked questions
Can restorative upscaling be trusted for evidence?
It is the safer of the two because it does not add information, but any processing should be disclosed and the original retained. Whether processed material is admissible is a question for the relevant jurisdiction, not for the tool.
Can the two be combined?
Technically yes, and then the result inherits the generative risk. Once any generative step is in the chain, treat the output as an expression rather than a record.
Related
More articles
Opinion
Why AI rollouts fail in Japanese companies — four structural reasons
For business
Enterprise AI rollout checklist — SOC 2, ISO 27001, DPAs and personal data
For business
Japanese-developed LLMs for business — ELYZA, Sakana AI, NTT tsuzumi and PLaMo
Comparison
AI coding tools compared — Cursor, Copilot, Claude Code, Windsurf and Codeium