Copy link to clipboard
I know this is an issue for a while now - but why?
Copy link to clipboard
First thing to understand about Warp is it was created to rescue short bits of clips where there wasn't any way to re-shoot. Never intended for the way so many use it, giving it long pieces of every clip in a project at times.
So ...knowing that ... and the ton of computer resources it demands to run ... the more productive means of using it are to cut your long clips into logical but separate segments. The analyzation process is far simpler then, takes less time, and the creation of the media after analyzation also shorter.
Use the least changes you can get by with.
And as soon as you've stabilized a clip, do a render & replace to a good "digital intermediate" codec like Cineform, ProRes 422 (or higher), or DNxHD/R. This way, you never risk nor push Premiere into re-analyzing it. And you can always revert to unrendered if you need to re-do.
Neil - I actually had a question about stacking LUTs the other day and found a community topic where you 'answered' that question as well. It, along with the 'answer' here did not even attempt to answer the question the user had but rather was demeaning and condescending in the tone of 'you're using the software wrong.' So thanks for shouting down from your high horse and otherwise being completely useless.
I am using warp stabilizer on 2-3 second clips. There are maybe 10-15 of these clips in my 4 minute video that I have decided to use WS on. The issue is that the clip will analyze but when I go back to said clip moments later in my edit, it has now reset and requires analyzing again. Despite your claim that the effect is cpu/gpu intensive, it is not, spiking to a whopping 20% of cpu usage and less on the GPU. Additionally this is just NOT the issue I'm having.
"Use the least changes you can get by with?" HUH?
Rendering out sections of a 4 minute video to avoid having to deal with a bug that should be fixed is an assinine and time consuming fix.
So let me repeat. Why does this happen?
What kind of footage, Grant? Is it Long GOP? That may be at the heart of it.
Footage is 4k ProRes 422 HQ in various frame rates from my Z CAM E2M4 - *.mov file type.
Thank you for responding
Copy link to clipboard
Sorry if you found the answer demeaning, but really ... it wasn't.
This forum has people of all knowledge levels and capabilities participating. Some people asking are so noob they barely can create a first project. Some have done the major lifting on several long-form full Hollywood productions. No one popping in to attempt to help has any clue what your level of experience is, so especially first responses tend to be designed to fill in what may or may not be useful information across those what will be reading this thread over time.
Which is exactly what my initial response was. Nothing was intended to be demeaning about it.
Look back at your initial post ... there was absolutely nothing in your initial post to give any indication of your knowledge, skills, experience, and media at hand plus hardware (all of which are important) to actually answer such a question. A rather non-specific question too. Which is fine. When something like this pops up, it's pretty natural to ask the question in our heads, and not think of the background info others actually need to answer that question.
And yes, for a TON of the questions that have been asked about Warp here over the last 5-6 years, my initial post would resolve the majority of them. That was the entire point of my response based on information available at the time.
As to the comment that supposedly I'm telling people 'they're using the software wrong' ... whatever. I tend to give practical what I know works answers. Which ticks off people who think it should work different than it does, and then assume I'm defending the way it works. Not at all ... I'm just thinking you have work to get out the door, and this is how it can be done now with this software as is.
Like anyone who spends hours a day in this app, I've got plenty of complaints about the way it is. The engineers know 'em too. I'm not quiet about what I think could or should be different, plus I'm rather quick to jump on and push someone elses' interesting ideas even if I don't use that section of the app hardly at all.
That said I also assume that someone will respond with more information and further requests as their situation needs.
So ... back to your situation. Trying to sort out when in the workflow this happens. Say if you analyze a clip, and it 'gets' a result. If you do nothing further with the clip, does it still lose the analysis? Or is it when you say close the project, and then re-open it?
I saw the Z-Cams online, they look interesting. Hope it's a good to use as it is cool to look at. Are you recording then to the Ninja unit they talk about on their page? I've seen a couple people with A7siii that use a Ninja for ProRes recording who've had issues in PrPro, that might be one thing if so.
If someone changes much on a timeline, especially trimming or extending something before the Warped clip, so that it's place on the timeline changes, that can at times cause Pr to "lose" the Warp somehow.
It's these sorts of things that can be useful to know.
No hard feelings - just wondering why this is happening. Using it across a large or a small clip shouldn't matter. Even if the results are stupid on a long clip. If the organic camera movement is subtle - WS will work on that clip regardless of length. When I first started using WS on my noob clips I would use it intensively in a project but then it wasn't having this bug so....
It's a combination of issues. I'll wait for it to complete and get a result then come back and it's asking to be analyzed. Sometimes I'll play roulette and just click analyze and continue editing. It seems to happen regardless of any of these variables. I'm usually not using the clip with WS applied and moving it around. WS will typically be the final move before an export. In those situations if I go and apply the effect to a few clips before I export - it will almost always come up with a few shots that need to be reanalyzed.
So I dunno really...
The zcam has been good. The e2m4 I have is a pretty damn good camera for the money maybe only being beat by the GH5s which is slightly more expensive and actually uses the same sensor supposedly. Factory support with LUTs and firmware updates are regular and the forums are fairly active with diagnosing and fixing issues for a non-mainstream brand.
Warp is one of the more complex mathematical formulas in the code, and it seems to have fits at times. One of the reasons short anayzing works better in general. And why anytime I do Warp something, I immediately render & replace.
It leaves me with less time wanting to yell at the screen. 😉
And while Warp is being run, I don' touch nuttin not no way not no how ... bad karma, that.
So, what have you done to kit-out that Z-cam?
Yea the don't touch nothing approach is definitely a help but hard to do when you have sh!t to get done.
ZcamE2M4 w/ small rig cage, smallrig wooden handle, atomos ninja V, samsung t5s, metabones nikon F > MFT speedbooster and sigma 18-35 1.8 is on there 90% of the time.
Copy link to clipboard
After applying Warp, either nest the clip (works somewhat) or render & replace to new media. It's what works. Because yea, you need to get stuff done.
Thank you for answersing this question. However, I've tried this technique of render & replace with ProRes and afterwards, I'm immediatelly prompted to re-analyze warp stabilizer.
Is there something I'm missing?
If you've had the clip fully analysed and you did a render and replace, did you select "include effects"?
Good question. I made the mistake of selecting "Individual Clips" as source instead of "Sequence". It sounded more logical to me, but now I realize it greyed out the "Include Effects" selection.
Thank you, Neil!
Because, clearly, I was answering Alex's post. Ahem ...