Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

How Do I get rid of "jello" when stabilizing hand held shots?

Just watched your vimeo clip - I think its a by product of the warp stabilizer causing that look. I've seen it before. The wrap does so much stabilization that lens imperfections around the edges become apparent - more so when it pushed in to avoid overages. It can also miss-predict a camera move across the X axis which makes it look all wonky like that. As a somewhat unrelated side note, use high shutter speeds on footage you know will be stabilized. It will prevent motion blurs on the subject even though they are (now) stationary.
 
I noticed this as well with warp stabilizer when I did a quick test a few months ago. It was not as bad as what you are dealing with though.

This is how it looked with no stabilization:


This is how it looks with warp stabilizer:

 
I just ran it through nuke and it's not the warp stabilizer that's introducing it, if anything it is reducing the rolling shutter effect. Worth running through the CS6 stabilizer to see if it's not improved or The Foundry's rolling shutter plugin as mentioned above.
 
brandon... check out the links I posted on the last page. everyone has this idea that you just drop on your comp and go (yeah, thanks for the marketing adobe). sometimes that does the trick - but i find i almost always tweak things to get better results. you should too, especially if you're seeing problems. i worry that adobe is trying to make things seem simpler than they are. automagic is good for creativity, but it really helps to understand how to get the best results. i don't like how time consuming and convoluted it can be to do advanced trickery in after effects. there need to at least be pro-level overrides on everything... don't hide it all completely. nodes would help...
 
I hate to tell you but that's not rolling shutter. That's the result of warp stabilizer trying to correct some crappy footage. No offense, but it is what it is, not rolling shutter.
 
paulherrin said:
brandon... check out the links I posted on the last page. everyone has this idea that you just drop on your comp and go (yeah, thanks for the marketing adobe). sometimes that does the trick - but i find i almost always tweak things to get better results. you should too, especially if you're seeing problems. i worry that adobe is trying to make things seem simpler than they are. automagic is good for creativity, but it really helps to understand how to get the best results. i don't like how time consuming and convoluted it can be to do advanced trickery in after effects. there need to at least be pro-level overrides on everything... don't hide it all completely. nodes would help...
Click to expand...

Yeah, this was a quick test with the default settings. I'll take a look at the links you posted. Thanks for the advice.
 
Phil Bates said:
Here is some sample footage. The first half is the unstable source, the second half has been stabilized by AE warp stabilizer.
Obviously hand-held aerial footage.

http://vimeo.com/41186806

Specs: Epic 5K 2:1, 30fps, Shutter speed: 1/500, 35mm lens.

Thanks,
Phil
Click to expand...

Phil,

Try resizing the image first - zoom in / magnify by about 20% to start. Then apply the stabilization.

I believe the problem you are experiencing is that the edges are stabilizing to some degree, but there is no extra space for the software to compensate / move into - so the center tries to stabilize to the edge. Turns out, there is nowhere to go so jello in the center results.

That is one of the beautiful things about shooting 5K. You have a larger image plane to work with - so zooming in may drop you to 4 or 4.5K.
I've used that technique a lot when I have been filming submarine aerials - not for the shake as much as correcting a tilted horizon during a pass.
 
There are 4 videos on correcting lens and other distortion on this page:

http://www.youtube.com/user/SynthEyesHQ

SynthEyes was used with AE to stabilize the shots from cars in Dragon Tattoo, all shot with RED.

SynthEyes now reads R3Ds natively.
 
i am getting issue as well using the warp stabilizer ...

is there any top class standalone software that is considered an excellent stabilizer?

thanks
g
 
Gabriele Turchi said:
i am getting issue as well using the warp stabilizer ...

is there any top class standalone software that is considered an excellent stabilizer?

thanks
g
Click to expand...

read my posts in this thread.

there are other stabilizers, what applications do you have available?

if in adobe, you can try out prodad, syntheyes, or mocha - have heard good things about all of them but have not used them. i think prodad makes a standalone version, maybe syntheyes as well. the warp stabilizer is good if you actually use it properly. don't just apply it on there. read my posts and check the links. read your documentation that came with the software, it is good.
 
not arguing that - i'm saying this shot definitely doesn't need that extra processing.

the reason you would do a double pass is to handle different frequencies of noise or to troubleshoot problem shots. but usually if you aren't getting good results with one pass, it's because your tracking is off. if you can, you should do the things i described instead. doesn't mean you can't do it - i'm sure it's probably a good time-saver and it could be a good solution for those that aren't so well versed in post work, but i'd definitely try adjusting at least a few major settings before jumping straight into that.
 
Use a kenlabs gyro next time! two KS-8s work great
 
There is plugins... mostly made for kids...
The real way to do it is to use a 3D tracker like syntheses. Preferably you know your lens, what focal length it has, if not it's possible to calculate. also make sure that you make the footage perfectly rectilinear, this is important, on wider lenses your stabilization will look ill if your image was not flat from the start. So "de lens" the footage first. Then when you have perfect 3D track you negate your cameras interest point and smooth the position of the camera and use a slightly smaller FOV on the VR cam. Then you make sure you have the image projected on a plane in front of the setup. The projector should have the same moment as the original cam and the plane where this image is projected should be set to be locked i front of the real move camera. When this is done you got a setup where you can select how much camera shake you want to let trough or get rid of.

Get the actual image movement and get out the jitter keyframes for Y moments. Use this data for compensating scaling in Y, this gets rid of most of the CMOS wobble. Then use the X gitter to affect skewing. If these two parameters are applied correctly then the rolling shutter issue is at least down to a frame. Whats within a frame is more complex to get rid of. but the above is usually more than enough.
 
Lee Dashiell said:
I hate to tell you but that's not rolling shutter. That's the result of warp stabilizer trying to correct some crappy footage. No offense, but it is what it is, not rolling shutter.
Click to expand...

gavin was correct. the original clip very clearly exhibits rolling shutter artifacts. what you saw was a typical result of applying warp stabilizer without adjusting the settings properly. and the footage is called handheld - not crappy, no offense. it was actually shot very smartly, and i'm sure the original will look even better. obviously

Wendell Adkins said:
I have to agree with Lee. 90% of my shooting is aerials and I have never tried to salvage handheld footage that rough. Stab/RS software has come a long way, just not quite that far.
Click to expand...

really guys? better start rethinking.

attachment.php


once i had it in after effects, figured i may as well color correct it so you can actually see it. whole process took... maybe five minutes. it could certainly be improved with just a little tweaking, but i don't want to re-render - my little laptop is super slow :) enjoy your flight...

 
Brian F Kobylarz said:
Phil,

Try resizing the image first - zoom in / magnify by about 20% to start. Then apply the stabilization.

I believe the problem you are experiencing is that the edges are stabilizing to some degree, but there is no extra space for the software to compensate / move into - so the center tries to stabilize to the edge. Turns out, there is nowhere to go so jello in the center results.

That is one of the beautiful things about shooting 5K. You have a larger image plane to work with - so zooming in may drop you to 4 or 4.5K.
I've used that technique a lot when I have been filming submarine aerials - not for the shake as much as correcting a tilted horizon during a pass.
Click to expand...

Damn, need to quote myself:

Two points: First - take a look at Paul's settings. He chose to manually resize by 15% (Additional scale = 115%). I suggested 20% to start.

I commented that it appeared that "the center was trying to stabilize to the edge"
Reading the Adobe help section:
http://help.adobe.com/en_US/aftereffects/cs/using/WS2bacbdf8d487e582-22f2bd5f12da070c78c-7fff.html

Yep, the software starts with pinning the edges of the frame as default. If you do not give it the space to move by applying the correct type of scaling you are trashed. I suspect that if the original settings were set to "Automatic", there were not identifiable markers for the software to recognize - one tree looks like another. Result: Edges stable, center trying to find it's relationship - looking like jello. So the scaling needed to be set manually - as was proposed.

A thank you to Paul for taking the time to demonstrate the settings necessary to prove out the results.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top