If you're tired of lugging round a heavy tripod - well, now there's a software solution. Mercalli from ProDad is outstanding and astounding in its capability to smooth out practically any jerky and jumpy and erratic footage - without necessarily having to enlarge the image!!! Not only shakily held cams, it can also smooth out shots filmed from a moving car over rough terrain (you have to see it to beleive it), and can smooth the flight of an airplane, for example, which is always difficult to track and keep steady centre screen. You really need to compare the stabilized results with the original footage to understand just how good this plug-in for Adobe Premiere and Avid Liquid is. (Soon to be available for Pinnacle Studio 11 as well).
I've a review on my website with some before and after examples - and now I've put up a Usage guide, which shows what it is capable of and how to get the best from it - but even using the presets alone, the results are simply amazing. (My website = www.mikeshaw.co.uk).
Check it out. This has to be the best stabilizer around, bar none.
It isn't cheap... but it is worth every penny. IMO of course!
Mercalli Image stabilizer or 'de-shaker'
-
Dave Watterson
- Posts: 1879
- Joined: Sun Jan 28, 2007 11:11 pm
- Location: Bath, England
- Contact:
The demos on your site and the company's website are very impressive.
Like most judges I spend a lot of time urging beginner and intermediate film makers to use a tripod or some other form of camera support. There is no other single, simple thing anyone can do to make such a noticeable improvement in their image quality and the acceptability of their movie to the eyes of an audience.
At least there was not until now.
If Mercalli proves as impressive in real life as it does in demos my advice will have to change. Not only is the product much cheaper than any good tripod - it helps with tracking and travelling shots too.
Advanced movie makers sometimes tell me not to harp on about using a tripod because they say (rightly) that steadiness is what matters. Using a tripod all the time can result in a static feel to a good movie. Mercalli may do away with some of the fuss of fixing camcorders to wheelchairs, carrying them in plastic bags with a hole cut-out for the lens and so on.
Mike tell us more about the resulting image quality because that is hard to judge from web-based demos ...
Dave
Like most judges I spend a lot of time urging beginner and intermediate film makers to use a tripod or some other form of camera support. There is no other single, simple thing anyone can do to make such a noticeable improvement in their image quality and the acceptability of their movie to the eyes of an audience.
At least there was not until now.
If Mercalli proves as impressive in real life as it does in demos my advice will have to change. Not only is the product much cheaper than any good tripod - it helps with tracking and travelling shots too.
Advanced movie makers sometimes tell me not to harp on about using a tripod because they say (rightly) that steadiness is what matters. Using a tripod all the time can result in a static feel to a good movie. Mercalli may do away with some of the fuss of fixing camcorders to wheelchairs, carrying them in plastic bags with a hole cut-out for the lens and so on.
Mike tell us more about the resulting image quality because that is hard to judge from web-based demos ...
Dave
-
Mike Shaw
From what I can see, there is very little, if any, degredation in the quality of the images after a render. There is a quality hit on the borders though - in severe cases, that's because 'artificial' borders are being put in! (The 'black' area that would normally occur as the image is shifted to keep things stable).
Speaking with one of the ProDad people, apparently the program is being used for more than just stabilizing obviously shaky shots - for example, people transferring from cine to video are using it to smooth out and remove the 'flickers'.
It really is an amazing program. I shall think twice about lugging a heavy tripod around when it isn't 100% absolutely necessary now! See how the program smooths out shots from a bumpy ride in a car - who needs a tripod?
Speaking with one of the ProDad people, apparently the program is being used for more than just stabilizing obviously shaky shots - for example, people transferring from cine to video are using it to smooth out and remove the 'flickers'.
It really is an amazing program. I shall think twice about lugging a heavy tripod around when it isn't 100% absolutely necessary now! See how the program smooths out shots from a bumpy ride in a car - who needs a tripod?
I can see this product being used quite alot in the coming years. I`ve never liked useing a tripod, but as i`ve got more into making films, a tripod is really needed.
The downside of useing a tripod is that the shots are a little boring
I now like the `New Look` in films where they don`t even use a tripod, and even `ADD` jerkness in the editing of the film/tv drama. Take `Spooks`, `Battlestar`, and even the latest wars films. Without useing a tripod, a bigger dimention is seen in the film and it gives it more class.
I have spoken of this before on here. You either like the new way of making films, or you don`t. I love the new way 
The downside of useing a tripod is that the shots are a little boring
I now like the `New Look` in films where they don`t even use a tripod, and even `ADD` jerkness in the editing of the film/tv drama. Take `Spooks`, `Battlestar`, and even the latest wars films. Without useing a tripod, a bigger dimention is seen in the film and it gives it more class.I have spoken of this before on here. You either like the new way of making films, or you don`t. I love the new way
Ian Gardner
Film Maker
Film Maker
-
Mike Shaw
Even more versitile Mike! What else will the future hold.
Roll on `Star Trek` with it`s style of powerfull Computer!
Thank you for your input and keeping us informed.
I know you said about there was hardly any quality taken out of the resultant picture quality but...
As on another thread here, we found out that even if you brighten a picture/film up a bit, you introduce noise, which equals grain. Were see if any one uses this softwere on here.
Thanks.
Roll on `Star Trek` with it`s style of powerfull Computer!
Thank you for your input and keeping us informed.
I know you said about there was hardly any quality taken out of the resultant picture quality but...
As on another thread here, we found out that even if you brighten a picture/film up a bit, you introduce noise, which equals grain. Were see if any one uses this softwere on here.
Thanks.
Ian Gardner
Film Maker
Film Maker
-
Mike Shaw
I can't be absolutely certain about this, but I think there is a difference between the stabilizing method used by Mercalli and adding a filter such as 'brightening' to a picture.
When the image is brightened (or has an image transforming filter applied), every pixel (or most of them) is affected - lightened for example. Changing the pixels is likely to affect quality in the rendering process.
However, for stabilization, the 'pixels' are simply repositioned 'en masse' so that a specific target object or area maintains a fairly constant position: shifting the image shouldn't have a quality hit, any more than a pan movement should affect the quality.
That's how I see it however - pure 'surmising'. Someone will no doubt say 'no, that's a load of claptrap!'
When the image is brightened (or has an image transforming filter applied), every pixel (or most of them) is affected - lightened for example. Changing the pixels is likely to affect quality in the rendering process.
However, for stabilization, the 'pixels' are simply repositioned 'en masse' so that a specific target object or area maintains a fairly constant position: shifting the image shouldn't have a quality hit, any more than a pan movement should affect the quality.
That's how I see it however - pure 'surmising'. Someone will no doubt say 'no, that's a load of claptrap!'
-
tom hardwick
- Posts: 914
- Joined: Mon Jan 29, 2007 9:59 am
Can't really agree that using a tripod 'makes the shots boring', Ian. The filmmaker and the editor make the shots boring, all the tripod does is keep the camera steady.
Post op image stabilisation is coming along in leaps and bounds, but as always it's better to get it stable when you shoot if at all possible. Of course it very often isn't (as the tracking shots across the desert show) and in this case post production stabilisation is wonderful.
tom.
Post op image stabilisation is coming along in leaps and bounds, but as always it's better to get it stable when you shoot if at all possible. Of course it very often isn't (as the tracking shots across the desert show) and in this case post production stabilisation is wonderful.
tom.
May be I should explain myself
It`s nice to see nice smooth shots with a rock steady picture but isn`t it nice to see a long continuous shot. For example, the camera follows two people talking along a street, into a shop, and back out along the street back to where the scene started! I saw this once in an episode of `Hustle` on BBC last series. It was great planning, with all the extras doing there thing on cue! The scene lasted about 4 minutes with one continuious take! The BBC could have done it with lots of different shots.
Another example could be that war film as the camera follows the Soldier in and out of holes and you would feel like your running with him!
!
I`m not talking of the shots like on the Enterprise, on the Bridge when there under attack!
The examples i`ve given are so much more fun to watch and make you feel like your there!
It`s nice to see nice smooth shots with a rock steady picture but isn`t it nice to see a long continuous shot. For example, the camera follows two people talking along a street, into a shop, and back out along the street back to where the scene started! I saw this once in an episode of `Hustle` on BBC last series. It was great planning, with all the extras doing there thing on cue! The scene lasted about 4 minutes with one continuious take! The BBC could have done it with lots of different shots.
Another example could be that war film as the camera follows the Soldier in and out of holes and you would feel like your running with him!
!I`m not talking of the shots like on the Enterprise, on the Bridge when there under attack!
The examples i`ve given are so much more fun to watch and make you feel like your there!
Ian Gardner
Film Maker
Film Maker
-
billyfromConsett
- Posts: 489
- Joined: Sun Mar 04, 2007 3:27 pm
- Location: Consett
Has anybody used it and put something on youtube?
Would be nice to a few better quality demos than the ultra low resolution of the few second demo.
I can't test it as I've Prem 6.5.
The plug-ins listed are for:
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.0
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5
Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0
Adobe Premiere Pro CS3
Adobe Premiere Elements 1.0
Adobe Premiere Elements 1.5
Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0
Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0
Canopus Edius 4
Avid Liquid 7
Is there a plug-in for Premiere 6?
I regard stability as being crucial to a professional looking movie, and when you look at tavelogs and see wobbly shots; as the film-maker is trying to get a zoomed shot to stay stable, the Mercelli app would look a real bonus it would seem to me.
It sounds like the app would need pure processing power to cut down on long waits, but hey, core 2 duo chips are cheap these days!
I'm sure the app has its place, if you've got the right editing app.
Would be nice to a few better quality demos than the ultra low resolution of the few second demo.
I can't test it as I've Prem 6.5.
The plug-ins listed are for:
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.0
Adobe Premiere Pro 1.5
Adobe Premiere Pro 2.0
Adobe Premiere Pro CS3
Adobe Premiere Elements 1.0
Adobe Premiere Elements 1.5
Adobe Premiere Elements 2.0
Adobe Premiere Elements 3.0
Canopus Edius 4
Avid Liquid 7
Is there a plug-in for Premiere 6?
I regard stability as being crucial to a professional looking movie, and when you look at tavelogs and see wobbly shots; as the film-maker is trying to get a zoomed shot to stay stable, the Mercelli app would look a real bonus it would seem to me.
It sounds like the app would need pure processing power to cut down on long waits, but hey, core 2 duo chips are cheap these days!
I'm sure the app has its place, if you've got the right editing app.
-
Mike Shaw
I've been in touch with ProDad about Premier 6/6.5. Here is the reply, verbatim -
Due to Premiere 6.5 plugin interface limitations it´s just impossible to develop a Mercalli for this old NLE.
Sorry that I can´t tell something more positive.
Looks like there'll never be a Mercalli version for the 6/6.5 Premier users.
Due to Premiere 6.5 plugin interface limitations it´s just impossible to develop a Mercalli for this old NLE.
Sorry that I can´t tell something more positive.
Looks like there'll never be a Mercalli version for the 6/6.5 Premier users.
-
Mike Shaw
It is compatible with the latest versions of premiere.
Observations:
a) I do not think Premiere is the best editing software by a VERY long chalk. It lacks so much compared with, for example, Avid Liquid when it comes to editing capability. It might be very widely used, but that's a marketing thing. The world's biggest selling video editor is Pinnacle Studio (well over 12 million users): that doesn't make it the best. Liquid is used by Broadcast companies, has its roots in the film industry, is designed from the top down to meet editor's needs, came from a company that only made products for film-makers, and now has a home in a similar film-based company - Avid. Premiere has its roots in software house that makes a wide range of products.
b) When Adobe realised that Premiere could go no further in its (then) present form, they scrapped the code base and started again. Its the old code base that is the fly in the ointment here as far as ProDad is concerned (I do believe that old code-base is V6 ...??? I'm afraid I don't like the Adobe ethos, so don't follow that company's products too closely). Why would anyone want to spend time trying to fit their plug-in into an obsolescent product that simply isn't designed to cater for such a plug-in. It would be like spending time designing the latest gear change system to fit a penny-farthing ...
Keeping up with every latest version of a software product can be expensive and, much of the time, totally unecessary. I invariably do not upgrade to the 'next version' of anything, but tend to leap frog - jumping back in for the upgrade two, three and even four versions later. I think Premiere is now quite a few versions on from 6 (is it?). So maybe, if one wants Mercalli's stabilization capabilities ... ??
BTW - Mercalli isn't available for Pinnacle Studio either - yet. But it will be. Pretty soon, I gather ...
Observations:
a) I do not think Premiere is the best editing software by a VERY long chalk. It lacks so much compared with, for example, Avid Liquid when it comes to editing capability. It might be very widely used, but that's a marketing thing. The world's biggest selling video editor is Pinnacle Studio (well over 12 million users): that doesn't make it the best. Liquid is used by Broadcast companies, has its roots in the film industry, is designed from the top down to meet editor's needs, came from a company that only made products for film-makers, and now has a home in a similar film-based company - Avid. Premiere has its roots in software house that makes a wide range of products.
b) When Adobe realised that Premiere could go no further in its (then) present form, they scrapped the code base and started again. Its the old code base that is the fly in the ointment here as far as ProDad is concerned (I do believe that old code-base is V6 ...??? I'm afraid I don't like the Adobe ethos, so don't follow that company's products too closely). Why would anyone want to spend time trying to fit their plug-in into an obsolescent product that simply isn't designed to cater for such a plug-in. It would be like spending time designing the latest gear change system to fit a penny-farthing ...
Keeping up with every latest version of a software product can be expensive and, much of the time, totally unecessary. I invariably do not upgrade to the 'next version' of anything, but tend to leap frog - jumping back in for the upgrade two, three and even four versions later. I think Premiere is now quite a few versions on from 6 (is it?). So maybe, if one wants Mercalli's stabilization capabilities ... ??
BTW - Mercalli isn't available for Pinnacle Studio either - yet. But it will be. Pretty soon, I gather ...
Thank you for your wisdom Mike.
Premiere is in the Premiere Pro2 latest. I have it, but cannot use it yet because my computer isn`t compatable. New processer needed. Time for an upgrade!
There are many plug-ins for Premiere, The one I like is the Burger Transitions. There are many more plug-ins available.
If some bloke who`s good at programming can do it, I`m sure bigger companys can! Again it`s the `small boys` who keep us all going with new bits and pieces.
I do accept your reply Mike. Premiere does have a good following. People normally only use `Avid` if they can get hold of a cheap `Back off a lorry - cracked) version.
Premiere is in the Premiere Pro2 latest. I have it, but cannot use it yet because my computer isn`t compatable. New processer needed. Time for an upgrade!
There are many plug-ins for Premiere, The one I like is the Burger Transitions. There are many more plug-ins available.
If some bloke who`s good at programming can do it, I`m sure bigger companys can! Again it`s the `small boys` who keep us all going with new bits and pieces.
I do accept your reply Mike. Premiere does have a good following. People normally only use `Avid` if they can get hold of a cheap `Back off a lorry - cracked) version.
Ian Gardner
Film Maker
Film Maker
-
Mike Shaw
Ah, but Premiere and Liquid cost about the same... 
On the 'if some bloke good at programming can do it ...' front, I think you'll find that there isn't any bloke who can produce a plug-in as good as Mercalli for a version of Premiere that can't cope with the mechanics of it, and even if there were someone willing to try, why would he want to write for an obsolete product?
Mercalli isn't cheap (until you realise just how valuable it is) - which suggests to me it was a long time in development, and is quite a sophisticated piece of software.
There are some programs that won't run under the old Windows - they need Win 2000, XP and upwards. There are programs that won't run with anything less than DirX9 - or Dirx10 even. It's the way things develop - sometimes 'backwards compatability' goes out of the window.
There'll be programs in the future that won't run on anything less than Vista, because they need the programming features it offers.
Unfortunately!
On the 'if some bloke good at programming can do it ...' front, I think you'll find that there isn't any bloke who can produce a plug-in as good as Mercalli for a version of Premiere that can't cope with the mechanics of it, and even if there were someone willing to try, why would he want to write for an obsolete product?
Mercalli isn't cheap (until you realise just how valuable it is) - which suggests to me it was a long time in development, and is quite a sophisticated piece of software.
There are some programs that won't run under the old Windows - they need Win 2000, XP and upwards. There are programs that won't run with anything less than DirX9 - or Dirx10 even. It's the way things develop - sometimes 'backwards compatability' goes out of the window.
There'll be programs in the future that won't run on anything less than Vista, because they need the programming features it offers.
Unfortunately!