sgreszcz Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Been looking at this for a while. https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1091165875/steadxp-the-future-of-video-stabilizationEdit: €115 for GoPro, €180 for other cameras. Flynn 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Chris Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 This looks really good, but there's quite a crop in the after footage. I guess that's the price you pay. This looks like a great alternative to gimbals with any 4k to 1080p project. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kristoferman Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Pretty clever. Wonder how much it crops the footage Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I wonder how it will work with cameras that have IBIS. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuickHitRecord Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I still don't get how the stabilized frames aren't incredibly blurry but to my eye, they aren't. If this works as advertised it will be incredibly useful. I backed it. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michael Ma Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I might get some heat for this but I am pretty sure some of their samples are faked. The kickstarter video, you can see some before and after videos (the girl running) are shot with 2 different cameras at a slight different angle.Also, if you've ever warp stabilized really shaky video, you get some artifacts due to blur from camera shake and rolling shutter. You just can't stabilize the frames with that level of crispness if you don't have crisp frames to begin with. Undoubtedly, if they have a real product, it will be of some use, but they are making it seem like you can replicate what a 3-axis gimbal can do with this little device and software. My guess is, it will be slightly better than warp stabilizer, with the same artifacts. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 their originals are shot with a fast shutter speed to keep motion blur to a minimum. which is likely why they've included post option blur in their app. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Don Kotlos Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I might get some heat for this but I am pretty sure some of their samples are faked. The kickstarter video, you can see some before and after videos (the girl running) are shot with 2 different cameras at a slight different angle.Also, if you've ever warp stabilized really shaky video, you get some artifacts due to blur from camera shake and rolling shutter. You just can't stabilize the frames with that level of crispness if you don't have crisp frames to begin with. Undoubtedly, if they have a real product, it will be of some use, but they are making it seem like you can replicate what a 3-axis gimbal can do with this little device and software. My guess is, it will be slightly better than warp stabilizer, with the same artifacts.You are right in a way. They can never achieve the same quality as with a stabilized camera. The reason is that there are perspective artifacts that cannot be accounted for (no depth information) and even if they were it would require a very fancy image synthesis algorithms and again it wouldn't look as good. This method works by actually measuring the motion directly instead of inferring it from the data. So crisp images are not necessary for that. What they do need is images with very very little motion blur, cause the motion blur will have artifacts from both camera motion and rolling shutter, but it is nearly impossible to compensate. As you see in their site, they have just one cross for that exact reason. This is a great solution for wide angle shots, with most objects in far distance. You would not be able to create such a good footage with a normal/zoom lens and close focus. But I guess how many people run like that? Its a great product, but for a limited use and I think they don't make that clear in their kickstarter page. The truth is that if you do any action shots like the ones that they show, then yes it will most definitely work great. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cassius McGowan Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I might get some heat for this but I am pretty sure some of their samples are faked. The kickstarter video, you can see some before and after videos (the girl running) are shot with 2 different cameras at a slight different angle.Also, if you've ever warp stabilized really shaky video, you get some artifacts due to blur from camera shake and rolling shutter. You just can't stabilize the frames with that level of crispness if you don't have crisp frames to begin with. Undoubtedly, if they have a real product, it will be of some use, but they are making it seem like you can replicate what a 3-axis gimbal can do with this little device and software. My guess is, it will be slightly better than warp stabilizer, with the same artifacts.Or maybe it actually works and it will save a lot of people money on not buying a overpriced gimbal. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I might get some heat for this but I am pretty sure some of their samples are faked. The kickstarter video, you can see some before and after videos (the girl running) are shot with 2 different cameras at a slight different angle.Also, if you've ever warp stabilized really shaky video, you get some artifacts due to blur from camera shake and rolling shutter. You just can't stabilize the frames with that level of crispness if you don't have crisp frames to begin with. Undoubtedly, if they have a real product, it will be of some use, but they are making it seem like you can replicate what a 3-axis gimbal can do with this little device and software. My guess is, it will be slightly better than warp stabilizer, with the same artifacts.i downloaded their video and the side by side comparison of the girl running isn't made from slightly different angles, it's got a 1 frame offset so the frames don't match up unless you step thru frame by frame comparing to the frames before or after.here I fixed the offset. what *really* concerns me is the affect their post processing might have on color. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanveer Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I might get some heat for this but I am pretty sure some of their samples are faked. The kickstarter video, you can see some before and after videos (the girl running) are shot with 2 different cameras at a slight different angle.Also, if you've ever warp stabilized really shaky video, you get some artifacts due to blur from camera shake and rolling shutter. You just can't stabilize the frames with that level of crispness if you don't have crisp frames to begin with. Undoubtedly, if they have a real product, it will be of some use, but they are making it seem like you can replicate what a 3-axis gimbal can do with this little device and software. My guess is, it will be slightly better than warp stabilizer, with the same artifacts.Hehehe. In a Lot of NAB/ CES made videos for stabilisers the warp stabilizer imprint is clearly visible. People making gimbals exaggerate its effect. Some camera mobile manufacturer (was it Nokia?) Shot with a DSLR and claimed it shot with the mobile phone.I with these guys would state the amount of cropping it does. It's the same as other stabilizers, but it uses the gyro in the camera along with information on the gadget on top, which has all sorts of gyros a and all sorts of instruments inside, and then syncs the two, and uses the help of very high frame rate to fight the effecrs of things like the jello effect. What resolution videos have they uploaded? I am on a mobile device so I couldn't figure out. i downloaded their video and the side by side comparison of the girl running isn't made from slightly different angles, it's got a 1 frame offset so the frames don't match up unless you step thru frame by frame comparing to the frames before or after.here I fixed the offset. what *really* concerns me is the affect their post processing might have on color.Just curious. Why do you feel thr colours may be affected? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 because the sky is purple in the version processed by their app. sanveer 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanveer Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 because the sky is purple in the version processed by their app.hahaha. You're right. I Just noticed. And the frames are more than just one. Her hair is still not in the same movement. Hmmm ... I hope it doesn't ruin the codec. Just mild purple that can be corrected in post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
QuickHitRecord Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 Here's Dan Chung's take on it: http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/09/10/steadxp-kickstarter-launched-next-generation-image-stabilisation-unleashed/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sanveer Posted September 10, 2015 Share Posted September 10, 2015 I read Dan Chung's review. I realised it would release anytime during today. These are the issues I noticed:1. "My 4K footage had a final output in 1080 HD and still looked a little soft in parts. In the future I imagine that 6K or 8K video will give a much better results."It crops like all software based stabilizing software. It probably needs to be tweaked so as not to crop this much. 2. "I opted for to switch between 1/250th and 1/500th speeds with the lens at about f4, using the ISO to control exposure. You can use lower shutter speeds but the results aren’t so impressive."The higher shutter speeds means lesser light (1/5th to 1/10th), which, quite frankly is fine in broad daylight. Though Indoors this may not be a very good idea. 3. "Because SteadXP uses both audio channels for its recordings you will lose any sound recorded unless you have a professional video camera with four channel recording."Inability to record sound on most cameras. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 yeah, I pledged early at the most discounted level for DLSRs but cancelled it the next day after researching things a bit deeper. This isn't for me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zak Forsman Posted September 18, 2015 Share Posted September 18, 2015 no, i mean the restrictions, like having to shoot at a high shutter rate for it to be effective. and I can fix rolling shutter in after effects when i need too. Julian 1 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Flynn Posted September 22, 2015 Share Posted September 22, 2015 Holy crap, I really undermined After Effects. My main concern is that is there a way that it can be cropped up to 3%? Well I found something even better than this, ReelSteady.Yeah, I read this article about Reel Steady and was very impressed. More interested in the SteadXP though.http://www.newsshooter.com/2015/08/28/reelsteady-for-after-effects-is-warp-stabiliser-on-steroids-plus-can-it-cure-rolling-shutter/ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.