Mercalli image stabilization - 1st impressions and questions at DVinfo.net

Dylan Couper · May 11th, 2008, 09:47 PM

Just bought and installed Mercalli, running Vegas 7. See my thoughts on the purchase process in another thread.

For now, my reviews... mixed at best.

* Bad The registration is a pain in the butt, and not instant.

* Good It plugs into Vegas instantly

* Bad The manual is... not good. Don't expect any real help. Don't expect any details on what functions are better at doing things than others. Trial and error is your friend... which it shouldn't be.

* Bad Drag the FX onto your clip. Then click the track AGAIN before rendering it. Why the second click? Just to piss Dylan off.

* Good Works FAST.

* Good Stabilization works well, and offers many different types of stabilization options.

* Bad Rendered image is noticibly softer. OTOH, I'd rather have a soft image than a shaky image.

Questions:
Does anyone know where I can find specific details on how each mode works?

Does anyone have a solution to the image softness/deterioration? I've used it with a locked down perfectly still image where no cropping occurs... and it still softens it. I'm not talking about the dynamic images, but the actual picture.

That's it for now.
Overall impressions. It isn't perfect, but it'll bail you out of bad handheld video.

Tony Spring · May 11th, 2008, 11:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

Does anyone have a solution to the image softness/deterioration? I've used it with a locked down perfectly still image where no cropping occurs... and it still softens it. I'm not talking about the dynamic images, but the actual picture.

I add the Vegas Sharpen filter to the clip, set to very light. You must have the sharpen filter BEFORE the Mercalli filter in the filters chain or there are problems when rendering (?!)

Michael Mann · May 15th, 2008, 03:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dylan Couper

Does anyone have a solution to the image softness/deterioration? I've used it with a locked down perfectly still image where no cropping occurs... and it still softens it. I'm not talking about the dynamic images, but the actual picture.
.

I experience the same image softness. So I just asked the programmers at ProDAD about that problem (with Screenshot and detailed description) and will keep you informed.

Bill Ravens · May 15th, 2008, 06:35 AM

My biggest complaint with Mercalli is that it doesn't handle the rolling shutter of the EX1 very well. Stabilized images tend to look like they are made of jello...very wobbly. VirtualDub's Deshaker filter has a switch for a rolling shutter that eliminates this problem. Can't mercalli do the same?

Michael Mann · May 16th, 2008, 03:00 AM

Bill, following your proposal I have started to test DeShaker under VirtualDub (vs. Mercalli) and I am beginning to like it. Have you some DeShaker-presets to share (shooting from driving car, handheld etc.)? Would be much appreciated.

Laurence Kingston · May 18th, 2008, 10:01 AM

I use the excellent deshaker script instead of Mercali when the following is true:

When I have a static background and there is nothing moving at the edges of the frames.

In this instance Deshaker works wonders and you get stabilized footage with absolutely no loss of resolution.

Otherwise, I like Mercali better.

May 11th, 2008, 09:47 PM	#1
Dylan Couper Wrangler Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: Vancouver, British Columbia Posts: 8,314	Mercalli image stabilization - 1st impressions and questions Just bought and installed Mercalli, running Vegas 7. See my thoughts on the purchase process in another thread. For now, my reviews... mixed at best. * Bad The registration is a pain in the butt, and not instant. * Good It plugs into Vegas instantly * Bad The manual is... not good. Don't expect any real help. Don't expect any details on what functions are better at doing things than others. Trial and error is your friend... which it shouldn't be. * Bad Drag the FX onto your clip. Then click the track AGAIN before rendering it. Why the second click? Just to piss Dylan off. * Good Works FAST. * Good Stabilization works well, and offers many different types of stabilization options. * Bad Rendered image is noticibly softer. OTOH, I'd rather have a soft image than a shaky image. Questions: Does anyone know where I can find specific details on how each mode works? Does anyone have a solution to the image softness/deterioration? I've used it with a locked down perfectly still image where no cropping occurs... and it still softens it. I'm not talking about the dynamic images, but the actual picture. That's it for now. Overall impressions. It isn't perfect, but it'll bail you out of bad handheld video. __________________ Need to rent camera gear in Vancouver BC? Check me out at camerarentalsvancouver.com

May 16th, 2008, 03:00 AM	#5
Michael Mann Major Player Join Date: Dec 2005 Location: Kelkheim, Germany Posts: 375	Bill, following your proposal I have started to test DeShaker under VirtualDub (vs. Mercalli) and I am beginning to like it. Have you some DeShaker-presets to share (shooting from driving car, handheld etc.)? Would be much appreciated. __________________ Michael

May 15th, 2008, 06:35 AM	#4
Bill Ravens Join Date: Nov 2001 Location: santa fe, nm Posts: 3,264 Images: 10	My biggest complaint with Mercalli is that it doesn't handle the rolling shutter of the EX1 very well. Stabilized images tend to look like they are made of jello...very wobbly. VirtualDub's Deshaker filter has a switch for a rolling shutter that eliminates this problem. Can't mercalli do the same?

May 18th, 2008, 10:01 AM	#6
Laurence Kingston Major Player Join Date: Aug 2004 Location: Clermont, FL. Posts: 941	I use the excellent deshaker script instead of Mercali when the following is true: When I have a static background and there is nothing moving at the edges of the frames. In this instance Deshaker works wonders and you get stabilized footage with absolutely no loss of resolution. Otherwise, I like Mercali better.