Analyze ALL footage for Warp Stablizer??

[1johnricca]

FCP 7 had a way to analyze every imported clip for the "smoothmotion" effect, which is Apple's identical twin to the "warp stabilizer" effect in Premiere Pro CS6.

Does anyone know a way to do this or a workaround to achieve the same basic thing? Simply making a sequence with every clip in it and adding the Warp to all of them makes my Warp stuff kind of glitch out. Clips lose their analyze data, warp stops functioning on some clips even if I re-analyze, and they don't always auto start the analyzing.

The way to do it in FCP was to actually add a new column in the project browser. There was kind of a hidden smoothmotion column. Add that and right click it, it gives you the option to analyze for smoothmotion in background. Select all clips, right-click, and boom. Leave it over night.

If someone could show me a way, you are a god!

[Jim_Simon]

Effects can only be applied to clips in a sequence.

[1johnricca]

I am not talking about applying effects. I'm talking about telling PP to analyze all clips. You could do this in FCP 7. It was not applying an effect there either. It was right clicking the files and analyzing that way. This way, when you slap Warp on a clip, it's already analyzed. It writes a file somewhere with that analyze data. There should be a way to do this.

[Jim_Simon]

The "analysis" is part of the effect.

[1johnricca]

Sorry, but no it is not. The effect analyzes it. But the analysis data is not part of it. That is stored either in the project file or in the xmp data associated or in a custom file elsewhere. And it is a built in effect. There should be a way to "analyze for warp stabilizer" the same way you could in FCP and the same way you can analyze for other kinds of footage interpretations in PP right now. For instance, you can right-click a file in the project browser in PP and "analyze content" or "interpret footage". This is the same exact concept but seemingly missing for "warp stabilzer" in PP.

[Jim_Simon]

What I mean is that the process of analyzing is accomplished only after the effect is applied.  And you can only apply an effect in a sequence.

Trust me on this.  It can't be done the way you want.

[1johnricca]

So your answer Should have been "No, not yet, hopefully soon." Because this is completely accomplishable. They did it in an inferior program half a decade ago and PP already has other "effect" analyses that can be done ahead of time with yet applying the actual effect.

[Jim_Simon]

I'm curious what analysis you think can currently be done without applying the effect?

[1johnricca]

See above^

Also, you can take warp off an analyzed clip and add it back on days later and the analysis is still there. The data is obviously written to xmp or the project file. As a coder, I simply know this as an absolute fact. So Adobe should add this capability just how FCP did it or, very easily, better than FCP. Hell, I could write it in a day if I had the source. This feature would be invaluable to my company and to restore a step of our workflow that we lost from the transition. I never had to wait for a single second to see my stabilized footage in FCP. I would ingest all clips, select all clips, and click analyze for smoothmotion. Come back in the morning and it was all done. The data for those was stored in the xmp data if I recall correctly.

[Jim_Simon]

See above^

See what?  In post 6 you claim that PP can already do other effect analysis pre-effect, but don't specify which analysis, or for which effects.  I'm wondering just what you meant by that.

[1johnricca]

For instance, you can right-click a file in the project browser in PP and "analyze content" or "interpret footage".

This is an actual thing that exists in CS6 dude.

It's just that neither of those two things analyzes for warp Stabilzer.

[Jim_Simon]

Neither of those are effects.

[1johnricca]

Does anyone else have any input on this?

[Personal comment deleted]

[Jim_Simon]

You'll get the same answer.  You can only apply an effect in a sequence.

[Jeff Bellune]

Jim's correct.  If you want background warp stabilizer analysis, you'll need to file a feature request.

Adobe - Feature Request/Bug Report Form

And if you wish to continue participating in this forum, you need to stop the personal insults.

Jeff

[1johnricca]

The sky is blue. Correct but not answering my question at all. Thank you for a real response. I already made this feature request.

[1johnricca]

Has anyone else experienced any of these glitches with Warp when trying to analyze multiple clips? Seems like 1 to 2 clips at a time is the only thing I can reliably get away with.

[Jeff Bellune]

Also correct.  Warp Stabilizer in its current state eats up huge chunks of memory and creates huge, bloated project files.

Jeff

[Jeff Bellune]

Here's a link to an After Effects blog post that may help.  Much of the info applies to Premiere Pro as well:

Adobe Blog - memory and storage tips for Warp Stabilizer and 3D Camera Tracker « After Effects regio...

[1johnricca]

Yeah. We've got 24GB of RAM and definitely don't even hit 5,000 frames total in any given project. SSD's and a GTX 670 4GB edition, the works. Never had a memory issue. That was a really good article though. Extremely informative about what's going on under the good. Definitely a system to be improved upon by Adobe. That said, I prefer the end result of WS over any other competitor and will continue to just rock WS on one clip at time, only when needed and wait the few to ten minutes and try and find something else to do while it goes. I do just miss that instant gratification of smoothmotion. Imagine only having the orange ribbon. That's how it is in FCP.

[eschelar]

Geez. What is worse Jeff? Retarded, half-baked answers about a half-baked module in Premiere or snarkiness?

Personally, I'd rather someone was nasty and called me names, but answered the actual question.

This is still a problem in 2015. And since CS6 appears to be the last real version of Production Premium and I'm not budgeted for Master Collection/CC subscription pricing BS, from where I stand, this problem needs to be addressed.

I have a sequence that has an A-Roll talking head main line in 74 different segments/clips. I have shot many videos like this, but for some reason, today, my camera decided to lose control of its IS while on tripod and the image drifts all over the place. No problem, easily fixed with warp stabilizer right? Yeah, sure, no problem. Oh, but you need to click analyze for every single individual clip. And you have to wait until each clip has finished analyzing to begin the next one. WTF?

Why is there no way to just say "ok, analyze everything" and go do something else? Why do I have to sit on my butt and babysit my computer to analyze every single thing sequentially? That's Windows Movie Maker level performance.

Absolutely this is Adobe's responsibility to keep up with the curve. I'm getting so tired of people on these forums just making excuses for Adobe's mistakes and incompetence.

I've paid quite a lot of money for Adobe software and just because I refuse to chain my wallet to paying for CC does not mean that I - or anyone else - should have to settle for amateur "features".

The OP's question is not at all a stupid question. In fact, it's the most obvious question to anyone who is using this program. Why it would even render out with blue bars on the clip (yep, it's happened to me too) instead of just doing the analyze during the render in Media Encoder is beyond my understanding.

[Jeff Bellune]

I wish I had better answers for you than what's been posted in this thread already, but I don't.  WS isn't what it could or even should be.  But if you work within its limitations, which are very real and annoying to many, it produces excellent results.

There is a very slim chance that WS will be fixed for CS6.  But I would say that chance is about as close to zero as you can get without saying, "never".  It may be fixed for CC going forward, but that will likely take a Herculean effort by a huge number of users filing feature requests.  Selective background analysis from the Project panel, like can be done with Interpret Footage, would be a great feature. So would a safety net that won't allow export with un-analyzed footage. Neither you nor I can speed the adoption of such features/fixes by ourselves, but the user community as a whole could do it by flooding Adobe with feature requests.  It all depends on how important it is to the community. 

If you are at all interested in third-party stabilization solutions, pro-DAD Mercalli v4 can do batch processing. They have a trial version available. I'm pretty sure you don't want to spend any more money on this, but I included the info just in case.

Cheers,

Jeff

[eschelar]

Yeah, in the end, I just left the IS image drift in the video. I lost 2 hrs of productivity today because of WS. First because it was taking forever to do one clip at a time while doing other editing, then because it kept hitting parts of clips that would cause the stabilizer to crash and for some reason, it was tracking my subject's hand and shaking everything all over the damned place. +1 for Adobe. So far, in my experience, WS does a good job in roughly 30% of the times I need it. That's pretty underwhelming and is pushing me towards trying to find another NLE.

Also, I do understand that there is a very slim chance that CS6 will ever be updated, however, I will never pay Adobe for CC unless they unveil some level of perpetual licensing, so it's kind of moot. At this point, I'm considering selling my legitimate copies to try to get my money back out of it and just switch back to pirating. I've been voting with my wallet ever since the disaster that is CC descended upon Adobedom, but I guess they don't give a damn. Doesn't matter to me. I paid good money for what I bought and I expect it to work properly. When it doesn't, it gets me angry and makes me want to go to a different platform. And find a way to get the money I paid back out of Adobe's pocket for giving poor support to expensive product.

Eventually, I'll move on to something else. I also have a fully updated legitimate copy of Vegas Pro 13 which I paid for simply because they didn't go with a subscription payment service. I get a lot of crashes on my system using Vegas, but I'm hoping to switch to a new system this autumn, so who knows. Between features not working very well

As to paying money, no, I'm certainly willing to pay money. I have budgeted around $500 USD per year for software at this point and $800/yr for camera gear for the past 5 years. Of which, $225/yr was going towards my upgrade path for CS5.5 and CS6... and CS7... Sony got that money last year. That also goes towards plugins for my audio workflow as well. If Adobe wants to be part of my budget again, they are going to have to start offering value instead of a leash around my neck.

I'll also be looking into Hitfilm in the near future as well. Adobe had better pick up its pants and stop trying to screw us freelancers in the dank. Better, cheaper solutions are on the horizon and Adobe has certainly been working overtime to sour customer relations.

[Ste777]

eschelar wrote:

[...] I will never pay Adobe for CC unless they unveil some level of perpetual licensing, so it's kind of moot. [...] I've been voting with my wallet ever since the disaster that is CC descended upon Adobedom, but I guess they don't give a damn. [...] As to paying money, no, I'm certainly willing to pay money. I have budgeted around $500 USD per year for software at this point and $800/yr for camera gear for the past 5 years. Of which, $225/yr was going towards my upgrade path for CS5.5 and CS6... and CS7... Sony got that money last year

Hey, eschelar‌, not to go off-topic here, but to quickly argue in defence of CC--I was paying for CS licenses in the past and if you were a Master Collection user (the equivalent of a CC license now), the CC route is much cheaper than upgrading your license even every second major release in the past. Although I do concede that this logic only works if you plan on continuing to upgrade...

Back on topic--this still bugs me. I think I will submit a feature request formally today, to Jeff's point.

[eschelar]

Yeah, I know, Adobe CC is really good for companies who buy seats of Master Collection and have a policy of keeping their software up to date. And it's good for literally *nobody* else.

If a company like that goes under, it has no need of project files. If you're an individual, not a company and your circumstances change so you can no longer budget for $600/yr for software that contains a bunch of stuff you don't actually need, you lose access to your project files. I would lose access to my XML work in ACR for 2500 pictures plus an hour or so of edited video for my sister's week long island wedding retreat. I would lose access to 75,000 pictures taken over the past 8 years that I've been using PSD format. I would lose access to my portfolio of work-related content, including 9TB of video footage and video projects. That's especially useful if I, as an individual, were to have to change jobs and start handing out resumes and couldn't access my own portfolio. But it's not about me, I know *hundreds* of other freelancers, even small businesses that simply cannot afford the jump to CC. Especially small video production companies and AI users and specialists. In fact, of all the professionals I know (I'm picky who I add to my networks and it's currently 324 people in places like Taiwan, Japan, HK, China, Vancouver, Victoria, Edmonton, Toronto, the UK, Johannesberg, Italy, Mexico, Brazil, Seattle, California and Texas), I'd say that less than 5% of them are in a position to use the subscription model that makes sense over a span of a 25 year career. Many of them, like you, don't realize it yet, largely because you are probably thinking about the next 1-2 years, but believe me, the vast majority of those people are going to be hating life because of Adobe's subscription model at some point over the next 25 years.

The only people that CC is good for are people who are unable to plan beyond 5 years or expect to be dead around the same time that they stop using Adobe (ie a business). I've been using Adobe for 11 years or so. Planning beyond 5 years is not difficult for me.

And even for companies... Loads of printing companies around this part the world (Asia) that typically upgrade every 3 versions or so. The printing world right now is much more competitive here than it is in the West.

Plus there's all those Suite users (ie me), who were paying $375/yr or $250/yr if doing every other upgrade (ie me), plus the fact that if you're a freelancer or if you get sick or you have to ratify a budget with a boss for software costs for a year, you're basically screwed. Or if your career takes a slightly different path and you no longer use Adobe at work and keep a personal copy to work on personal projects. In my case, I work for a company and I use Master Collection at work. And I have a personal copy of Production Premium too. No way in hell I'm going to start paying 2-3x more for software for my personal use and freelance work just because Adobe thinks they want more money for less relevant updates and think they can get away with holding my project files ransom.

Granted, I can open .prproj files with Vegas, which isn't a subscription model...