5 things which should be improved in the Warp Stabilizer

Question

1. Performance.
When stabilizing any footage I always ask myself: "What the heck is he doing there?!" not even a single core is really working hard. It looks like an idle background process  The GPU is idle as well, as the analysis pass is only run on the CPU.
This maybe okay if you still need much work to do in Premiere. But often, the next steps DEPEND on the stabilization and you have to WAIT and WAIT and WAIT...
It's just painful to imagine that, running a machine with 8 cores, more than 8 times the amount of video material COULD be analyzed.
The free Deshaker for Virtualdub actually uses more cores (even though not at 100%) but analyzes at about 20-21fps compared to the Warp Stabilizer at about 4-8fps.
Admitted, the Deshakers results aren't nearly as good (especially with rolling shutter, which can be configured though, but you don't always know the right percentage for the cam you're using).
This also applies to opening projects with much stabilization data. It opens... and opens... rarely any disk activity and rarely any CPU or GPU activity. Again: WHAT IS HE DOING THERE? Just waiting for the clock itself?! Or is he sending it all to the NSA? That at least would explain the unneccesary delay:P (just kidding!)
2. Stabilization data.
For me, I wouldn't have any problem with storing it just inside a project folder or a separate file. Just add a checkbox into the plugin settings:
[x] Store stabilisation data in separate file/folder.
This may be then called [projectName].stabilization
Inside that folder, there will be maybe one file for every effect used in the project.
...or you can use the old way, if you don't have so much stabilization work to do.
3. Small bugs.
When using "stabilize only", the resulting frame, at least in Premiere Pro, has a HUGE "DC offset" sometimes. This is a term from music producing, but exactly fits in here. You can clearly see it when there are still images that shouldn't receive much of stabilization. They're somtimes shifted far out of the viewing frame, leaving big black borders, so you have to manually adjust the frame position to fit back into a "neutral" position. This could be resolved to let the whole correcting curve undergo something like a "low pass filter" which will try to keep the resulting frame SOMEHOW centered.
In this image above, from a longer clip, there isn't much motion at all. But you can see how far the offset from the actual video frame is. I have to do this for almost every video, also after I change the "smoothness" setting.
4. More control
I would LOVE to be able to disable "zoom detection", because it gives me lots of "Vertigo Effects" in many cases.
I heard this has been alredy addressed for CC.
5. Improvements / new features
One thing I always do with every stabilized video:
Instead of synthesize edges, which takes AGES to render, I just do the following:
I place the same clip, unstabilized, behind the stabilized clip (stabilized, borders only) and give the stabilized clip softened borders with "rough edges". This even still renders fine on the GPU.
This would make a great option for the stabilizer. Just call it "overlay over original with blurred edges" or something like that.
This has worked extremely well for any stabilized footage so far and isn't nearly as disturbing as the synthesized edges.
I'm considering to join the Creative Cloud, because unless I do this I don't expect to see any improvements in my old and out-dated Premiere PRO CS6...

Answer 1

https://www.adobe.com/cfusion/mmform/index.cfm?name=wishform to file a feature request... insert a reference to this message link