[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: Film registration

Ok I will throw myself into the battle and defend our DIS digital image
stabilizer in the DVNR.
What do you people mean by "not that impressive"......... Ok it is not a black
box with SDI in and out which puts out rock stable video, that will not happen
within 5-10 years from now given a large enough commercial interest, which I
doubt because the world will be having a lot less problems with unstable
film/video at that time anyway.

The DIS is a device that looks at a user selected reference and measures the
instability, and then applies opposite compensation signals to a subpixel,
subline compensator which moves the image back to where it is supposed to be.
Sounds simple, but it is not. Also the first units worked quite bad which made
us all depressed - we had our hopes high.

That has now changed, while the DIS works for many types of instability it has
found its real nische in packshot stabilisation. I have a feeling that the users
of it are quietly keeping their mouths shut, it is that good (yeah I am the
marketing guy) . Here the demand for residual instability is practically down to
parts of pixels. We can get it down to about 15-17 nanoseconds in theory, that
is a very small part of a pixel and also a very good result given that the
electronics you use every day has that type of jitter in itself. The beauty of
it is that it corrects both in vertical and horisontal domain and it takes care
of instability introduced by both camera and TK plus if the film has other
printed in instability.

The DIS can compensate for +- 8 pixels and lines per frame. It does not sound
much but it actually is.
Anything moving at higher rate would be deemed unusable simply because such
movement introduces the wellknow effect of loss of temporal resolution, it
appears blurred or defocused. Hence stabilising at this rate will uncover a
totally new can of worms......

Anyway, I will tell you about our Dutch customer who have a very creative
colourist who was asked by a client if he could do something about his footage
of an ICEbear on a piece of floating ice while the camera, equipped for the day
with tele optics,  was safely far, far away on another floating piece of ice.
Well the instability was so bad that it was "unwatchable", after 3 (three)
digital passes through the DIS the customer was suitably pleased, with blanking
comming down into active video and all.  

While the DIS is technically much better know with this latest revision, we are
replacing all current users FOC, it still requires, in my mind, some
improvements with respect to the actual operation of it. I can not avoid to
think about poor Channel Four doing a number of restoration jobs on Errol Flynn
type film on the old DIS version, my thoughts are with you.........

Mike Reichel, Digital Vision