Workflow for using the Warp Stabilizer

[William Robinette]

What are you all doing for workflow in projects where you have to warp-stabilize many clips and they are not at the timeline resolution? Just making a sequence for each clip and doing it there and then nest that sequence? I have a 90 second spot that needs the stabilizer on many shots and this seems cumbersome. I'm working with 3k and 4k footage on a 1080p timeline.

Any ideas as to the fastest way to do this?

I think it's a ridiculous limitation of the effect.

 

[Phil Holland]

Apply the effect to each individual shot that needs correction otherwise the procedural logic the effect employs will get confused by tracking onto content in the next shot. This can negatively effect the previous shot's analysis. I don't know why it appears too cumbersome. You can make a preset with the effect and apply it to a multiple selected clips. It does take a moment to analyze the content of 3k, 4k, and 5k material though. Especially if the take is really long. But this all happens in the background and you can keep working.

If you are working in a 1080p timeline and using the effect I recommend employing the "scale to fit" option and if you want to zoom in on a particular shot that's 4k or something customize your digital zoom or pan from there.

 

[Bob Gundu]

Apply the effect to each individual shot that needs correction otherwise the procedural logic the effect employs will get confused by tracking onto content in the next shot. This can negatively effect the previous shot's analysis. I don't know why it appears too cumbersome. You can make a preset with the effect and apply it to a multiple selected clips. It does take a moment to analyze the content of 3k, 4k, and 5k material though. Especially if the take is really long. But this all happens in the background and you can keep working.

If you are working in a 1080p timeline and using the effect I recommend employing the "scale to fit" option and if you want to zoom in on a particular shot that's 4k or something customize your digital zoom or pan from there.

Phil, I think you meant to not use the Scale to Fit command as it becomes 100% scale effect in the 1080 timeline. If you ever want to scale clips within your 1080 project bring in your shot and scale down using the transform tool for better quality.

 

[Phil Holland]

Correct. I should have said transform for digital zooming and such.

 

[William Robinette]

Right, thanks for the replies guys but perhaps I phrased my problem wrong.

I have a 1080p sequence.

The source material is 3k and 4k clips.

If I try and place the "warp stabilizer" on any clip I get this:

Which I would understand to mean this clip needs to sit in a 4k sequence (source clip is 4k) in order for the warp stabilizer to be able to work. It won't do anything in the 1080p sequence I'm working in. If I place this clip in a sequence that matches its native dimensions and stabilize just this shot then nest that 4k sequence in the 1080p sequence I'm cutting the project in I achieve the desired effect (warp stabilizer works fine) but to do this with many clips would be a pain. I would end up with many sequences each with one clip in them. Just wondering if there is a better way.

I understand about the correct way to digitally zoom in PPro.

 

[Michael Romano]

You could try "replace with After Effects composition", do the stabilization in AEFX and either use it as a dynamic link (kind of ugly come EDL time) or render it out if the cut is locked up. Haven't tried myself but should work pretty well.

 

[Mark Toia]

I havent been getting great results with WARP Stab of late... lots of distortion, but then again, thats how it works I suppose.
Sometimes a simple 2d track works alot faster if the shot is short.
Sounds silly, but the stabilzation tool in FCPX is amazingly better.

 

[William Robinette]

Thanks guys! Looks like work-around galore.

Adobe, if you're listening - you have to make this thing work on clips regardless of timeline dimensions. Heck, Sony Vegas does this better then you.

 

[Gabe Conroy]

I would recommend doing the main edit on a 4k timeline simply because playback is better than a 1080p timeline with 4k shots scaled down. As a side effect you'll also only have to nest the 3k shots now. Fastest way to do the nesting is to duplicate your last nested shot (setting a keyboard shortcut helps, I like ctrl+d because that's the same shortcut AE uses), delete the previous shot, copy paste the new shot, then alt+drag the comp onto the shot in your main timeline (or just put it on the video track above, so you retain the original shot if you need to make edits).

I havent been getting great results with WARP Stab of late... lots of distortion, but then again, thats how it works I suppose.
Sometimes a simple 2d track works alot faster if the shot is short.
Sounds silly, but the stabilzation tool in FCPX is amazingly better.

Make sure to play around with the Warp Stabilizer settings...I've come to realize there's a lot that can be done to make the stabilization better. For example you can have it do the stabilization by only moving the frame around instead of doing the warp effect, so it essentially works like a 2d stabilizer. Sometimes just using a really low stabilize number (like 5%) can get the shot under control without introducing artifacts. And there's also a high quality track option if you go into the advanced settings drop down at the bottom of the effect.

Of course there are some cases which never work...like if the tracker latches onto the subject instead of the environment, and then the stabilization is done relative to the subject. Adobe really needs to have an option for garbage masks. It's kinda ridiculous to have any kind of tracker without a garbage mask option.

 

[William Robinette]

I would recommend doing the main edit on a 4k timeline simply because playback is better than a 1080p timeline with 4k shots scaled down. As a side effect you'll also only have to nest the 3k shots now. Fastest way to do the nesting is to duplicate your last nested shot (setting a keyboard shortcut helps, I like ctrl+d because that's the same shortcut AE uses), delete the previous shot, copy paste the new shot, then alt+drag the comp onto the shot in your main timeline (or just put it on the video track above, so you retain the original shot if you need to make edits).

I'm editing 4k HD (should have mentioned) so it's binning easily down. Would a native quad-HD timeline be just as fast for playback and rendering to 1080p as well? Also for reframing and post zooming purposes would it not be better to do that in a 1080p timeline if that's what my deliverable is?

Thanks

 

[Kyle Gentz]

Im having the same issue.

Gabe,
My Black Magic card wont play anything larger that 2K for playback. this method wont work for me if I want to use a REAL monitor.

 

[Ben Scholle]

I've been creating a 4KHD (or 5K, depending on what I'm shooting) sequence for the stabilized clip, applying the effect, and then nesting the 4KHD sequence in my 1080p timeline. It's still a workaround, but I think it's a lot less awkward than the AEP link.

 

[Matt Gottshalk]

I've been creating a 4KHD (or 5K, depending on what I'm shooting) sequence for the stabilized clip, applying the effect, and then nesting the 4KHD sequence in my 1080p timeline. It's still a workaround, but I think it's a lot less awkward than the AEP link.

Same here.

 

[Cory Petkovsek]

If I place this clip in a sequence that matches its native dimensions and stabilize just this shot then nest that 4k sequence in the 1080p sequence I'm cutting the project in I achieve the desired effect (warp stabilizer works fine) but to do this with many clips would be a pain. I would end up with many sequences each with one clip in them.

This is the way to do it. Replacing with an AE composition will also work, but is less clean and possibly slower to render.

Just wondering if there is a better way.

Yes there is: use a steadycam, tripod, jib or other camera support.

Nesting clips in order to stabilze them isn't a big deal. Create a bin to "hide" the junk you don't want to see in the project. Modify your keyboard shortcuts (and learn the existing ones) to make nesting fast. I have one for nesting the clip, for renaming clips which I use on clips in the project panel and the timeline, and of course I use the shortcuts that switch focus between the project panel and the timeline.

 

[Wes Howell]

Considering how render intensive the warp stabilizer can be, I prefer to "bake in" my stabilization by exporting the clips.
I usually just output 1080p and then use them in the project in PR. In the rare case that I need Pan / Scan, I export a 4k prores or DNXHD file.

YMMV,
Wes

 

[Gabe Conroy]

I'm editing 4k HD (should have mentioned) so it's binning easily down. Would a native quad-HD timeline be just as fast for playback and rendering to 1080p as well? Also for reframing and post zooming purposes would it not be better to do that in a 1080p timeline if that's what my deliverable is?

Thanks

Well I didn't try it with Quad HD, but I was scaling by 50% to crop out the sides to get a final 16:9 so theoretically it should be doing the same kind of scaling. Yeah, it seems wonky to reframe by scaling something way up in 4k which'll just end up at 1080p, but I need the performance boost. I haven't noticed any artifacts yet, but I haven't conducted a proper test of IQ yet.

 

[Will Keir]

Mark,

You should give After Effects a try. Best stabilizer and it won't take you long to learn. I need to do the same. Warp stab can be perfect in Pr but too often for my taste the picture distorts/warps.

I havent been getting great results with WARP Stab of late... lots of distortion, but then again, thats how it works I suppose.
Sometimes a simple 2d track works alot faster if the shot is short.
Sounds silly, but the stabilzation tool in FCPX is amazingly better.

 

[Will Keir]

yeah, no kidding.

Thanks guys! Looks like work-around galore.

Adobe, if you're listening - you have to make this thing work on clips regardless of timeline dimensions. Heck, Sony Vegas does this better then you.

 

[John Tissavary]

I would recommend doing the main edit on a 4k timeline simply because playback is better than a 1080p timeline with 4k shots scaled down.

If you ever plan on going out to a color grade in Resolve, Baselight, Scratch, etc... then I do not recommend this workflow - it will cause nothing but problems (i.e. cost lots of time and/or money to work around). Stick to 1080p (or whatever your delivery dimensions are), and use RMB > scale to frame size. This will get you the best performance, and will ensure that the conform in an online system will also be relatively effortless. Do not use effects motion scaling.

Working at 4k for a 1080p finish is something that seems to be popular with PP users until the situation I'm describing above, where none of the sizing info from the XML is useable in the grading session and all has to be manually matched, taking quite a lot longer at an hourly rate.

JT

 

[Gabe Conroy]

If you ever plan on going out to a color grade in Resolve, Baselight, Scratch, etc... then I do not recommend this workflow - it will cause nothing but problems (i.e. cost lots of time and/or money to work around). Stick to 1080p (or whatever your delivery dimensions are), and use RMB > scale to frame size. This will get you the best performance, and will ensure that the conform in an online system will also be relatively effortless. Do not use effects motion scaling.

Working at 4k for a 1080p finish is something that seems to be popular with PP users until the situation I'm describing above, where none of the sizing info from the XML is useable in the grading session and all has to be manually matched, taking quite a lot longer at an hourly rate.

JT

You can still do the edit in a 4k timeline, and then copy it into a 1080p timeline and scale everything to fit. (There won't be any problems if there haven't been any motion adjustments)