Stabilize multiple clips sequentially on the timeline

[jovannig]

I have 20 4k clips on the timeline, I made corrections to them and at the end, I want to apply "Warp Stabilizer".

If I do it at the same time for all the clips my iMac is not able to do it.

Often some of the clips are not stabilized and I have to press "analyze" again.

Even worse, sometimes the computer hangs because of the hard work because it tries to apply the "warp stabilizer" effect to all the clips at the same time.

I need to find a way to overcome this issue. The best thing would be if Premiere would apply the effect to the clips sequentially, but I don't know how to do it.

I hope you can suggest a new way to solve this problem, thanks.

[R Neil Haugen]

Every clip needs Warp?

I would suggest modifying the shooting process, as a heavy lifterclike Warp is designed to fix problems not be the standard effect on every clip.

That said, you're going to have to do this one at a time.

Neil

[Mo Moolla]

20 4K clips needs warp stabilizer? Wow thats a lot of work for even a high end machine to manage. And it will be tremendously time consuming even if you were using proxies. May I ask why so many clips need stabilizing? And what cam were they shot on?

[jovannig]

Sure...

I usually shoot short travel clips (20-30 secs) with Nikon D850 without a tripod and all the clips need to be stabilized.

That's why I have a lot of short clips to work with.

My iMac needs about 2/3 minutes for every clip and I don't want to stabilize a clip, wait and then stabilize the other.

What I need is a process that stabilizes all the clips sequentially, not all together.

So I could run this process and just wait for it to finish. In the meantime, I could do other kinds of works and I won't lose precious time running each clip manually.

[Mo Moolla]

In my experience there is only one way to "batch stabilize" as I term it.

Edit your sequence with all the clips that go into the edit.

Nest the sequence and then apply the stabilizer to the nested sequence.

The disadvantage to this is you will NOT be able to adjust stabilizer settings per clip as to will affect all clips in the nested sequence.

How long it will take to analyze is anyones guess. Also please note that varying degrees of judder will need fine tuning and this method will not allow you to fine tune per clip unless you somehow managed to shake your camera in the same way for every shot lol.

Best of luck and let me know how it goes

Mo

[excited_Genie16B8]

I usually shoot...without a tripod

You should solve that.  Tripods, monopods, stabilizers, gimbals, and lenses with OIS are all better options than post-processing.

[jovannig]

I will try to nest all the clips in the sequence.

After stabilizing the nested clip (containing all the clips in the timeline), how can I separate it into the clips again?

[Peru Bob]

giovannig6622250  wrote

how can I separate it into the clips again?

You can cut the nest at the clips, but you won't be able to edit the clips without analyzing again.

[Mo Moolla]

Double click the nest sequence in th project window and it will open up the nest in a timeline I all individual clips inside it.

[jovannig]

I tried your tip but when I go to the nested clip all the clips are not stabilized

[Mo Moolla]

Giovanni how many of the clips in the nest were stabilized. If an effect is dropped on a nested sequence it all affect all clips within it.

[jovannig]

Do you mean that the clips are stabilized using the same parameters?

And in this way the system use a king of average stabilizer parameter?

If this is correct I cannot do it because I get clips not correctly stabilized.

[Mo Moolla]

Yes as I mentioned previously if you nest and add the stabilizer you will NOT be able to control each clips stabilisations individually. Unfortunately you are going to have to stabilize each clip one by one or next time use a Steadicam type rig.

[daveblaircameraediting]

Who are you to tell someone to modify their shooting style? So what if every clip needs a bit of stabilization? I put 2% on all of my handheld shots not shot with a lens with built in stabilization to smooth them out a bit. I don't ever post here, but this reply was just so rude I had to.

[daveblaircameraediting]

That's because this was misleading advice. If you nest the clips and then apply stabilization, it will stabilize that clip (the clip containing the nested clips) not the original clips. I wouldn't work this way. Sure, you no longer are clicking stabilize individually, but you now have a huge block of clips all stabilized together that can't be changed at all without re-stabilizing the who thing. Plus, I would think that some strange things might happen at the cut points.

[R Neil Haugen]

Dave ...

I have trouble seeing a polite, realistic response as "rude". And yea, I've had to modify my own shooting "style" because of reality numerous times.

Warp was built to be a last-ditch salvage operation. It rags the computer resources terribly. It is not the same as in-camera stablization just flipping a switch.

So ... can you use it say for every clip of a 40 clip sequence? Of course. Feel free. But ... it will take a lot of time to apply, and the processing time will be LONG. That's your choice of course. Make any change to any of the clips, that clip needs re-analyzing. (Which is why it's better to Warp and then render/replace that clip immediately ... )

Is stabilizing 40 clips on a sequence a practical or a best-choice option? I don't think it is either, as it does slow down the editing dramatically and introduces all sorts of potential issuers. There are other options out there.

That's just the reality.

Neil

[Dexter Golden]

Hey Guy

I noticed in the 2020 verison of premier pro, I was able to put the warp stablize on all my clip BUT I didn't analyze until I was ready.

Once I was ready to analyze them I click on each clip and clip on ANALYSE on each clip.

When I came back a bit later they were all stablized per my specs. Granted some of them need to be modified but the process worked fine.

I know that trying to get stable footage in the field is always a challenge. And the times you thought you had it and your find you get a shake clip is just sorta the nature of what we do.

I hope this was helpful.

David

[Mikhail Ivanov]

I agree with Dave.

For example right now I'm editing ~15 min project with more than 200 segments of which about 100 requires stabilization since it was shot on handheld camera. It would be much more better of course if I could re-shoot all the scenes from that trip with some kind of tripod, but I CAN NOT.

And I was really frustrated las time when I re-edit a large part of the project and on compile step I received a message with about ~40 timecodes for the segments that require "stabilization". I HAD to stabilize it all either way and right now I have only one choice: click "Cancel" an MANUALLY click-click-click all the enlisted segments. It is really painful. Instead there might be third button "Stabilize it ALL and continue". It woult save me a lot of time spent on tremendeously dumm work.

Sorry for bad english and have nice day!

[R Neil Haugen]

First, my reply that Dave Blair found offensive wasn't at all ... suggesting things that can improve the process is a normal part of any workflow discussion in any field. And as an adult, everyone is welcome to choose what they want to do. Period. And yes, sometimes you can't reshoot, that's generally understood.

Mikhail ... the Warp process as noted in so many places is incredibly resource-demanding. I understand your problem, I've of course had situations like that.

Would it be useful if we could tell Premiere to batch process a selected group of clips in Warp? Most certainly, and if it already isn't a request on their UserVoice system it should be. Feel free to go check there, and whether you upvote one already there or create a new one, post the link back here for others to upvote it.

I found two ... the first is about having clips already analyzed, that somehow lose analyzation during export ...

https://adobe-video.uservoice.com/forums/911233-premiere-pro/suggestions/38171392-option-to-automati...

The second one is about having Warp simply start analyzing when you apply it to a group of clips ...

https://adobe-video.uservoice.com/forums/911233-premiere-pro/suggestions/38245702-warp-stabilizer-pr...

Now, having either feature would mean of course that when you applied them, you'd pretty much lock up your computer for some perhaps extended period of time.

That said ... at the current time, with that many clips needing Warp ... it's still a one-off process. And yea, that's a pain.

Neil

[b i g b o i]

Nick, you did sound like a dick in your initial reply. Who cares how the stabilization issue happened? They came here with a question about what to do in post. We're all just here to be helpful, man.

[R Neil Haugen]

Everyone is welcome to their own opinions, including workflows. I've never seen two editors who work alike, even when one was mainly the student of another. Which is a fun and fascinating part of working this trade.

As to my original post ... I gave two responses in the first post ... first, that wow, a project built entirely of clips needing stabilization could have been better handled in the shooting. I've got 40+ years of making pro images for a living. Yea, I've got a ton of experience in both stills and now video ... and it's the same in both: the better the image in the original, the better the final product will be ... and the less work needed in post.

As in trying to look "filmic" ... realistically, if you light and shoot a scene as it was done for film, you're about 85% of the way 'there' as noted by quite a number of colorists. If not more. The same with image shakiness. Fixing in post is never as good as fixing it in-camera.

And I gave a direct answer ... no, you can't batch Warp in Premiere, you have to do each one individually.

So ... I offered advice based on 40+ years of making image, and a direct answer to the question raised. The OP as anyone else is welcome to do as needed. And yea, editors who don't shoot their own material are at times stuck working with crap media but ... you still have to make it as good-looking as possible.

Which would also involve suggesting to the DP (if one was used) that maybe they could consider working with stabilizers, tripods, whatever on the next shoot.

In my years of experience, helping both with the immediate issue, and offering advice on eliminating the problem in the future, is a good practice.

Neil

[Aaron Ncz]

I like premier pro, and I generally really appreciate the whole adobe creative cloud solution, but just saying that this is a joke. I'm not a programmer or anything, but I just don't believe you can't put a button something like "analyze and stabilize all clips" when you select the clips. This is especially a joke, because the video was stabilized a few days ago, and now i have to go through it clip by clip. If my understanding is correct, this is an industry standard professional video editing application that millions of people use. Hope u guys solve this problem soon.

[R Neil Haugen]

Warp has to re-analzye if you do about anything to the image ... so 'leaving' Warp on a clip and moving on is problematic to begin with. And given that Warp is by nature a massive computational sink, when you've got a bunch of clips as is noted in this thread ... if you are requiring it to re-analyze, well ... you're going to continually lock up that computer re-working the same dang clip.

I would recommend what I know a number do ... apply Warp, then render & replace the clip with the 'corrected' version. Now use that in your project moving forward. This way you get one analyzation and have a stable clip to work with.

Neil

[orfeas76]

not making another thread, any other software or any other way inside premiere

for BATCH STABILIZING clips?

Right now, for family videos I use Google Photos on Android, which has a fabulous Stabilization method, but gives a rather compressed export...

[Jules Palmer]

Hi Dave,

   I feel I found this to be a little of a head scratcher. But I feel like R Neil Haugen meant to suggest his method of resolving the issue, in him saying "I would suggest modifying the shooting process,". And thanks for the briliant idea of 2% over non in cam stabilization =P  June 2021 too ><  lol

[Jules Palmer]

b i g b o i, he was suggesting his method of resolving the issue. Which seams to be considered appriciated in communities like this one. It's not a command, it was not an insult, nor was it rude at all. I do like that you try to keep things focused.