Welcome to Doom9's Forum, THE in-place to be for everyone interested in DVD conversion. Before you start posting please read the forum rules. By posting to this forum you agree to abide by the rules. |
6th January 2020, 23:57 | #441 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
Hi.
Thank you for wonderful work, in a first place. I am just curious: The Deshaker compensates movement against x,y,z axis and rotation z axis. How about rotation x and y axis? This is what I see a lot, when having handheld smartphone... |
7th January 2020, 14:09 | #442 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Quote:
However, as far as I (just another thankful user) know about DeShaker operates in 2D only. It is as your movie shows only flat surfaces, or as if you're using an extreme telephoto lens. DeShaker does very good results for that. Rotation on x and y axis (called panning and tilt) is simply x and y shift then. But the less the condition holds (i.e. you have 3D objects or using a lens that's not telephoto) the operation on the 2D "model" (of the 3D reality) will lead to worse results. (You'll find a note about that in DeShaker's FAQ). So the improvement would be to do DeShaking in 3D. (As I know, DeShaker isn't modified anymore). But there are at least two serious attempts I know about: https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1690146 https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.p...68#post1747268 Last edited by nji; 11th January 2020 at 11:56. Reason: Typo |
|
8th January 2020, 00:18 | #443 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
Quote:
Quote:
Especially if there would be option to limit x and y rotation. Quote:
|
|||
8th January 2020, 08:12 | #444 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Uppsala, Sweden
Posts: 157
|
Quote:
Anyway, nji is right. Deshaker both analyses and transforms the video in 2D only, which means wide angle video will look ugly when there is heavy shaking. |
|
8th January 2020, 11:40 | #445 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Quote:
You are right, I did a mistake in my last post (#442): "Deshaker3D" uses DeShaker pass1 data, too. (So maybe both tools do some kind of "3D-magic"? And then "Lens transform" will be probably more sophisticated with alpha consideration and rolling shutter/ "skew"?) Second: "(DeShaker option to) limit x and y rotation". No, you get DeShaker's GUI wrong. It does only 2D-operations: left/right, up/down, resize and (2D-) rotation. These 2D-operations do ("by chance") match the effects that the corresponding 3D movements would have on the 2D projection (= frame). Thinking it over ... DeShaker very well possibly could take into account the 3D rotation at x- and y-axis (or even an arbitrary axis) too. (Would be a kind of magnifying "above" and reducing "below" the axis I guess). Seems possible, but isn't done (and won't be ... believe me ) But maybe/ probably the other mentioned tools will? Last edited by nji; 8th January 2020 at 12:19. |
|
8th January 2020, 13:38 | #446 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
I do hope it's not too much OT if I post a summary of my (small)
experiences of the filter? DeShaker (VD) Pros: - excellent results on all but wide angle scenes (no 3D/FOV accounting) - optional rolling shutter accounting - optional progressive/ interlaced source - accounting sophisticated border and logo handling (by neighbour frames) - many options to handle difficult source/ get optimal results - excellent description of all that - multithreaded (? nevertheless takes the most times of all filters) Cons: - Bad results on wide angle scenes (even worse than the shaky sources) Lens Transform (VD) Pros: - accounting of field of view (FOV) - accounting of simple border handling Cons: - no accounting of logo handling (have to delogo before) - no interlaces sources (have to convert before) - Rolling shutter accounting ("skew") "not implemented completely" (although active check-box) - Unsufficient description (at least for me) Deshaker3D (AviSynth) Pros: - Accounting of FOV Cons: - no border/ logo handling - no rolling shutter accounting - no interlaces sources (have to convert before) - needs format conversion (= quality loss) - no multithreading (?) Deshaking (Shotcut) Does about the same as DeShaker but with no options and worse results. Conclusion: The best (for non-wide angle scenes) does DeShaker. If results are unacceptable in DeShaker (due to wide angle) the best choice is Lens Transform (if rolling shutter source: try Deshaker before with all smoothness = 0). 4 runners at the launch, each performing good on their respective distance, but some targets aren't reached by only one. Last edited by nji; 10th January 2020 at 12:31. Reason: Changed Lens Transform and Conclusion |
8th January 2020, 23:58 | #448 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
Quote:
I thought if there will be 3D added, there could be these limits added so that it will not lead to worse results ( which I still don't know what you refer to). Quote:
Quote:
Because other projects will not help without better 1st pass. |
|||
9th January 2020, 00:54 | #449 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Deshaker3D and Lens Transform do something like that.
But of course you're free to try whatever you want to. I'm just a user and not the one to answer about the availabilty of source code. Last edited by nji; 9th January 2020 at 18:10. Reason: Changed first sentence |
9th January 2020, 01:09 | #450 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
Maybe I test something in Avisynth.
But first, can someone tell me, how can I get rid of the black frames in the beginning of the video, when I "Use previous and future frames to fill in borders"? Only Avisynth does that, VDub is ok... |
10th January 2020, 23:19 | #451 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
I hope I understand optics roughly correctly.
I played a little with the idea of compensating x and y rotation. I took one frame of my video and tried to find warp with best improvement of OK blocks. Original motion estimation: 28.7% After warp: 62.9% See the pictures. I used avs code Code:
points_f1=" 0,0 0,0 640,0 1,0 640,480 15,8 0,480 0,3 " warp(points_f1, interleaved = true, relative = true) Anyone thinks it has a potential? BTW: "19|1|20|4|1|0|1|0|640|480|0|1|1000|1000|1000|1000|4|1|0|2|8|30|350|4|deshaker.log|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|0|1|15|15|5|15|0|0|30|30|0|0|0|0|1|1|0|10|1000|0|88|1|1|20|5000|100|20|1|0|ff00ff" Last edited by redfordxx; 10th January 2020 at 23:35. |
11th January 2020, 01:04 | #453 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
I would like to mention I've been told
that the equations to determine the 4 parameters are kind of "ill-posed". If you reduce the number of parameters the situation gets better (That's the reason for being able to disable calculate for rotation and zoom in Deshaker's GUI). If you enter two more paramters the problem probably will get way worse? Second: I'm not sure if a better matching of the OK blocks in general means better matching of the actual movements. Don't forget there is no accounting of optical conditions (FOV etc.) |
11th January 2020, 10:21 | #455 | Link | |||
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Praha (not that one in Texas)
Posts: 863
|
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
|||
11th January 2020, 10:21 | #456 | Link | |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Quote:
To my "math intuition" analyzing the 2D data without taking into account FOV (for larger values) is like doing the first step, very accurate, more and more sophisticated ... but into the wrong direction. That's why I was heading for doing something with FOV before analyzing https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1895012 Also ... if you have a look on the example video that the author of Lens Transform did https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.p...55#post1895255 and have a closer look on the difference between Deshaker original and Lens Transform you see that the "perspective distortion from FOV" in the original 2D data are so massive that it doesn't seem to make sense to do sophisticated analysis on them. But ... as said ... just intuition from me, ... maybe completely nonsense. EDIT: Our posts where at the same time .... so I didn't answered on your last. Concerning "ill-posed": Please see the def of it, can't explain better. Last edited by nji; 11th January 2020 at 10:29. Reason: See EDIT |
|
11th January 2020, 10:32 | #458 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Did you import Deshaker.log? (Right click in the graphic)
Did you set the smooth value to say 50++ ? EDIT And it suffices to edit in the lens profiles something like: Code:
[lens] name = "24 mm (mFt)" hfov = 40 Last edited by nji; 11th January 2020 at 10:38. Reason: see EDIT |
11th January 2020, 11:59 | #460 | Link |
Registered User
Join Date: Mar 2018
Location: Germany
Posts: 201
|
Did you checked all points from my last post?
BTW Maybe specific discussion on Lens Transform should be in https://forum.doom9.org/showthread.php?p=1747268 as this thread is about Deshaker related. |
Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
Display Modes | |
|
|