Software vs GoPro stabilisation

Does anyone know if it's better to software stabilise GoPro video on the computer or turn on image stabilisation?

Thinking of getting a GoPro 5 or 5 session and theres no point paying for the expensive one if better off stabilising afterwards.

Made this the other day on the ancient GoPro and seems a bit shakey.

Select to expand quote

beebee said..
I was researching GoPros last week. Apparently the fairly new GoPro 6 has pretty amazing image stabilisation in the camera. It's supposed to be miles ahead of GoPro5. I saw shots of one mounted to a mountain bike on a forest trail and it was incredibly smooth. Pretty expensive at around $600... but I'm probably going to invest in that one.

$600 is way too much. That's a top of the line second hand kiteboard!

There's hundreds of old GoPros around for cheap.

If it's not gimbal stabilized, then in-camera stabilization is going to work exactly the same as doing it later on your computer: the software aligns the image then zooms in and crops to avoid showing the edge of the frame. Basically a deshaker.

You can do it manually in a video editor using keyframes, which you kinda have to do if there's any rotation, but it's a **** and takes ages.YouTube offers a deshaker stabilization too...This was done by manual rotation of the video, then a software deshaking....You can see how the frame rotates.

?t=2m48s

Sorry the F1 are having their practice session here in Melbourne and it's hard to hear- what's the question again? oh yeh computer for sure - nice boost btw

Select to expand quote

dachopper said..

Kamikuza said..
If it's not gimbal stabilized, then in-camera stabilization is going to work exactly the same as doing it later on your computer: the software aligns the image then zooms in and crops to avoid showing the edge of the frame. Basically a deshaker.

You can do it manually in a video editor using keyframes, which you kinda have to do if there's any rotation, but it's a **** and takes ages.YouTube offers a deshaker stabilization too...This was done by manual rotation of the video, then a software deshaking....You can see how the frame rotates.

?t=2m48s

Are you sure about that? Your assuming that image stabilization process on the GOPRO, is exactly the same as the image stabilization program on the computer. I would have thought a camera would not pack as much processing ability as a PC, so it would make sence for the GOPRO stabilization on camera to be significantly less able , than what a full PC and software would offer.

Something like this stuff looks amazing. www.wired.com/2014/08/killer-software-that-finally-stabilizes-shaky-gopro-videos/

I'm assuming so, but I have good reasons to do so. If you simply look at side-by-side video, you can see the stabilized ones are zoomed in. Pause it and see.


There are "physically" stabilized cameras, but I bet dollars to donuts that digital is cheaper and more robust.

This one says it's done with VirtualDub software and the Deshaker plug in, which has been around for years. It also requires very little processing power to run the software, although the more power you have the faster it does the job. Same problem that rendering video has always had. You have to mess with settings to get it working nicely, so it can be a bit fiddly and needs some knowledge of the software. The following was done by VDub & Deshaker.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Video_image_stabilization.ogv

Same result, zoomed in when stabilized. So to answer the OP, you can do it before or after, but after is another step you have to do, although you get more control over it.

There have been stand alone "apps" that you just drop in the video and it does all the stabilization and color correction for you. The one I used for a while got bought out by the military for drones and public releases stopped :D

I seemed to remember Hyperlapse being developed in the noughties, but it's apparently only 2014. My poor memory. It's different to stabilization, in that it's a stabilized time-lapse, rather than real-time video. If your phone can do it (it's on Instagram) I don't think you need a lot of power for it either.

Gimbals are a different solution. You'd still might need to stabilize gimbled video if it's jerking up and down, like you'd see on the back of the MotoGP bikes...

Select to expand quote

wishy said..
Sounds like I should get the cheaper session model GoPro and run it through some software after. It doesn't need to be production quality, just trying to max out the quality I can get for under $300.

Yeah but :D it's another step you have to do. Every time. If you're going to upload them, try the editor and stabilization at youtube...

Select to expand quote

weebitbreezy said..
Not sure I'd go with a GoPro 6. Sure the stabilisation is good (the best you can get at the moment) but the quality control seems a bit.....poor

Even the cheap gimbals are up there with the best action cam image stabilization. Problem is, the waterproof ones only work (out of the box) with cameras without a housing - which is pretty much just the Hero 5 and 6 at this point.

I have ordered one of those quark gimbals (waterproof 2 axis gimbal). They haven't launched it yet (ETA March sometime) but I'll do a review once I've had a chance to test it. Should work with a wider range of cameras so should be more useful.

Revl have finally launched (or at least are starting to fulfill delivery orders) their action cam. Its the same price as a gopro but has a built in gimbal. The problem I see is with their proprietary mount system. Its a new line mount and a new board mount........ so its going to be expensive and then by all accounts its still not as good quality as the latest generation GoPro.

Most of the post production software is time consuming. Fine for a short clip but you wouldn't want to do an entire session.

well that was interesting.