Old stabilization method is much better! Thank you. You save me a lot of time.

What is build 3.4?

3.4 of VEGASAUR.

Old stabilization method is much better!

For the record, this statement is simply not true. The new stabilization uses far more sophisticated technology and is far more powerful. Perhaps you just need to learn to use it properly. Like any complex tool, it takes time to learn how it will work for your specific situation.

That said, if the results you get from the old one are adequate for you, there's no reason not to keep using it. Just please be clear when making statements like this that other users will take as fact when at best your results are specific to your situation and what you're trying to accomplish.

Again, I suggest that all users learn to use the new tool properly and in the long run it will benefit you greatly in far more instances than the old one can.

I do agree that stabilization results will be specific to the individuals situation. So far I am one of the users who get better results from the legacy option especially regarding rotation elimination from the image and the way the legacy one can float the image smoothly when removing shake at high zoom. I have mercalli v4 as well which has many options to play with but I neary always use the legacy. What I like about the legacy version (mercalli v2?) is that it works really well with the simple default setting. The current new version does not seem to completely remove the rotation element. Also there are not that many options in the new version, the profiles just seem to move the two sliders to different positions. As long as the legacy option remains available if you want it then we will all be happy.

...better results from the legacy option especially regarding rotation elimination from the image and the way the legacy one can float the image smoothly when removing shake at high zoom.

What I like about the legacy version...is that it works really well with the simple default setting.

Extremely valuable feedback. Thanks for that!

The new version does best at dealing with rotation when using similarity and static camera as an option. Still leaves slight movement but is not far off.

Old stabilization method is much better!

For the record, this statement is simply not true. The new stabilization uses far more sophisticated technology and is far more powerful. Perhaps you just need to learn to use it properly. Like any complex tool, it takes time to learn how it will work for your specific situation.

That said, if the results you get from the old one are adequate for you, there's no reason not to keep using it. Just please be clear when making statements like this that other users will take as fact when at best your results are specific to your situation and what you're trying to accomplish.

Again, I suggest that all users learn to use the new tool properly and in the long run it will benefit you greatly in far more instances than the old one can.

Not true. It is unable to work with subspaces. If some bigger object is moving in front of camera, all frame is going to follow this object after new stabilization method.

Example:

Very

The new stabilizer of vegas Pro 16 is still under development and correction. It's still not as good as the old Vegas Stabilize (at least not for me). If you want to get back the old Vegas Stabilize in Vegas Pro 16 follow these steps.

1.Press SHIFT

2.Go to Options / Preferences / Internal

3.Search for "Expose Legacy Stabilize"

4.In Value Write "TRUE"

5.Press Ok

 

 

Very helpful and very easy. THANKS.. And thanks to Magix for making accessing the old stabilizer so easy. Thanks!!

Old stabilization method is much better!

For the record, this statement is simply not true. The new stabilization uses far more sophisticated technology and is far more powerful. Perhaps you just need to learn to use it properly. Like any complex tool, it takes time to learn how it will work for your specific situation.

 

Hello @gary-rebholz ,

I appreciate the efforts to improve stabilization within Vegas. I have tried it and in my (very) limited testing it seems the legacy is performing better (in my opinion) than the new. Please have a look at this example (walking with people and landscape scenery in background). All settings were default.

No stabilization: https://drive.google.com/open?id=13viLAQpuA-TDqB5KMYV_ze_skmps3AsS

Legacy Vegas Stabilization: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1GaB4nVIpaW1DzfigmbZdq8Gzhp3KeFiQ

New Vegas 16 Stabilization: https://drive.google.com/open?id=1N2YcqIkDtfG4i5irVE_jbkJnplTOQbZj

Best Regards,

Jamie

Don't just slap the effect on and go with it, try to tweak the settings and see if you can find a sweet spot for your needs, and then save a preset with those settings.

That particular example is pretty bad, the entire image looks like jelly. It's honestly hard to tell which one is better because they're both bad.

In some simple test I made, using Vegas Stabilize in defaults did just a good a job as Vegas Video Stabilization (set for Accurate & Similarity), maybe a bit better. Neither as good as Mercalli 4 Plugin. Letting Vegas Video Stabilization Avoid Black Borders, performs a huge unnecessary crop compared to Vegas Stabilize and Mercalli 4 Plugin, requiring to manually set the zoom and perform a critical preview to get it just right, maybe several times.

Thank You set and Joelson.

I downloaded the file with the intention of testing different stabilizers, but....

I would like to gently and politely suggest that the footage is not a good candidate for software stabilization of any kind. It's just too far gone.