AI image enhancement software is becoming increasingly common in a photographer’s toolkit. Whether it’s upscaling images, reducing noise, sharpening details, or restoring old photographs, there seems to be a new AI-powered solution appearing every month.
When AiArty reached out and offered me a review licence, I was curious to see how it would perform. The challenge, however, is that I already have access to some very capable tools, including Lightroom Classic, Photoshop, DxO Pure Raw 5, Topaz Gigapixel, Denoise Ai, Sharpen Ai and Luminar Neo.
Please note: All test images used in this review were my own photographs and scans. No manufacturer-supplied sample images were used during testing.
So rather than simply asking whether AiArty works, I wanted to answer a more important question:
Can it do anything better than the tools many photographers already own?
What is AiArty Image Enhancer?
AiArty Image Enhancer [Version 3.12] is a desktop-based AI software package designed to improve image quality through a range of enhancement tools. Depending on the task, it can:
- Upscale images
- Reduce noise
- Recover detail
- Sharpen photographs
- Colourise black and white images
- Improve low-resolution files
Unlike some cloud-based services, all processing takes place on your computer, which is a nice bonus for photographers concerned about privacy or working with client images.
The interface is clean and easy to navigate, making it simple to load images and apply the various enhancement models.
How I Tested AiArty
I wasn’t interested in testing perfect marketing images.
Instead, I threw a variety of real-world files at the software, including:
- Scanned family photographs from the early 1970s and older
- Low-resolution Facebook images
- Portrait photographs
- Wildlife images with heavy crops
- Flower and still life photographs
- Architectural photographs
- High ISO files ranging from ISO 640 to ISO 12,800
I also compared the results against software I already use regularly, including Lightroom Denoise, DxO DeepPRIME, Topaz Gigapixel, and Topaz Sharpen.
Test 1: Old Family Photographs
One of the first tests I ran involved several scanned family photographs from the early 1970s and 1920s.
Restoring old images is one of the most common reasons photographers turn to AI enhancement software, so I was interested to see what AiArty could achieve.
Unfortunately, the results were disappointing.
Rather than restoring believable detail, the software often created textures and artifacts that looked artificial. Faces became inconsistent and details that should have looked natural often appeared overly processed.
To be fair, restoring damaged or low-resolution scans is one of the toughest challenges for any AI software. Once information has been lost, there is only so much any program can recover.
Still, the results here were not something I would personally use. I also ran through Gigapixel AI and Photoshop Neural Filters Photo Restoration, which I think probably did the better job.
Test 2: Low Resolution Facebook Images
Next, I tested several low-resolution images downloaded from Facebook.
Again, this is a common real-world scenario. We’ve all had someone ask if a small image from social media can be enlarged or improved.
The answer, at least in my testing, was not particularly encouraging.
While AiArty certainly made the images larger, much of the additional detail appeared artificial. At first glance the files looked sharper, but zooming in revealed that much of that “detail” had simply been invented by the AI.
If your primary goal is rescuing heavily compressed social media images, I think it’s important to keep expectations realistic.
Test 3: Portrait Photography
Portraits delivered mixed results. This was an image recently taken on Sony AR7V and Viltrox 75mm Portrait lens at ISO640 in low light in the studio. I wanted to see how it handled something I do nearly every day. I tested it against everyday software including Lightroom Classic, Luminar Neo, Topaz Denoise AI and DXO Pure Raw 5
Faces are often one of the hardest subjects for AI software because we are naturally sensitive to anything that looks slightly off.
Some portrait images looked acceptable, particularly when viewed at smaller sizes. However, when zooming in, skin texture often became overly smooth or artificial, and facial features occasionally appeared unnatural.
I also experimented with the colourisation feature on an older black and white portrait.
Interestingly, the software did a reasonable job colourising the subject’s face but largely ignored parts of the clothing. The result wasn’t terrible, but it certainly wasn’t convincing enough to replace manual retouching.
Test 4: Wildlife and Bird Photography
As a photographer, I know how often we crop wildlife images to get closer to the action.
I tested several bird and wildlife photographs using AiArty’s 4K and 8K enhancement modes, along with both x4 and x8 upscaling options.
Some of the results looked promising when viewed on screen.
However, once I zoomed in, feathers frequently became overly crunchy and artificial.
For comparison, I ran the same files through Topaz Gigapixel. Much better on cropped in photos.
In most cases, I preferred the Topaz results, which generally retained more natural feather detail without introducing as many artifacts.
Test 5: High ISO Images
Noise reduction was another area I was keen to test. I had already done a few ISO640, as I often shoot that, but I also tried higher ISO.
I processed files captured at:
- ISO 1250
- ISO 1600
- ISO 12,800
The results were inconsistent.
While AiArty was capable of reducing visible noise, it often did so at the expense of fine detail. Some files looked cleaner, but also softer or more artificial.
When compared directly against Lightroom Denoise and DxO DeepPRIME, I generally preferred the results from both competing applications.
Lightroom delivered cleaner files while maintaining a natural look, and DxO continued to impress with its balance between noise reduction and detail retention. The below images were captured at ISO12800 in a very dark room. And while Lightroom and Deep Prim3 were great, Ai Arty did a fairly reasonable job too.
Where AiArty Surprised Me
After several tests that left me underwhelmed, I finally found a category where AiArty genuinely impressed me.
Buildings.
Architectural photography turned out to be one of the software’s strongest areas.
Brickwork, stone textures, windows, rooflines, and structural details were all handled surprisingly well.
The software appeared much more comfortable working with hard edges and repeating patterns than with faces, feathers, or damaged photographs.
I also found that flower and still life images generally produced stronger results than portraits.
This makes sense. Flowers, buildings, and still life subjects contain predictable textures and structures that AI can analyse more effectively.
This was easily the strongest result from my testing.
Real-World Comparison
After spending time with all the files, here’s where I personally landed.
This table probably tells the story better than anything else.
AiArty isn’t necessarily bad software.
The challenge is that it enters an incredibly competitive market.
For photographers who already own Lightroom, DxO, or Topaz products, it can be difficult to identify where AiArty becomes the obvious first choice.
What I Liked
- Easy-to-use interface
- Local processing
- Fast workflow
- Good results on buildings and architecture
- Reasonable performance on flowers and still life subjects
- Multiple enhancement options available
What Could Be Better
- Portrait results were inconsistent
- Wildlife upscaling often looked over-processed
- High ISO files were generally better handled by Lightroom and DxO
- Poor performance on old family photographs and restorations
- Low-resolution social media images remained problematic
Jump over to YouTube to check out this program in action and to see how to use it.
