Gimbal Side to Side Jerky Motion

Joined
Apr 19, 2013
Messages
104
Reaction score
1
Age
78
Location
Northern California
Does anyone have any stabilized footage shot with the gimbal? Why Im asking is that every gimbal that I have seen has sided to side snaps (yaw axis) in the footage to one degree or another. I realize that these are 2D gimbals, but even without the gimbal, the video does not move in little jerky motions like it does with the gimbals. It's not hard to figure that the video will move from side to side as the Phantom is moves around on the yaw axis, but I can't figure why it does it in little jerks.

I don't imagine it's useful to wonder why, but I'm hoping that what I am seeing can be removed with either FCPX or AE Warp stabilization. I'm waiting for my gimbal, and the prospect of not being able to remove these artifacts is making me nervous. Again, has anyone tried stabilizing any of the gimbal footage, particularly from the H3?
 
GeneL said:
Does anyone have any stabilized footage shot with the gimbal? Why Im asking is that every gimbal that I have seen has sided to side snaps (yaw axis) in the footage to one degree or another. I realize that these are 2D gimbals, but even without the gimbal, the video does not move in little jerky motions like it does with the gimbals. It's not hard to figure that the video will move from side to side as the Phantom is moves around on the yaw axis, but I can't figure why it does it in little jerks.

I don't imagine it's useful to wonder why, but I'm hoping that what I am seeing can be removed with either FCPX or AE Warp stabilization. I'm waiting for my gimbal, and the prospect of not being able to remove these artifacts is making me nervous. Again, has anyone tried stabilizing any of the gimbal footage, particularly from the H3?

oh, it's definitely in there in gimbal-less filming, it's just much more clear/apparent once the brushless gimbals remove pitch/roll movement. (3-axis gimbals apparently are capable of eliminating it of course, but doubt one will ever be made for the Phantom. would require some modification).

But yes, any image-stabilizing software will be capable of reducing the effect. (I'm about to do so this evening in fact)
 
Gizmo3000 said:
GeneL said:
oh, it's definitely in there in gimbal-less filming, it's just much more clear/apparent once the brushless gimbals remove pitch/roll movement. (3-axis gimbals apparently are capable of eliminating it of course, but doubt one will ever be made for the Phantom. would require some modification).

But yes, any image-stabilizing software will be capable of reducing the effect. (I'm about to do so this evening in fact)

Thanks for the reply, Gizmo, and that's good news that it can be dealt with. I thought so, but I guess I'm getting **** about the whole thing waiting for my gimbal, and i couldn't seem to find any examples without it.

Of course, I've always been aware that the gimbal doesn't stabilize horizontal movement, but what was bothering me is that what i am talking about looks more like an artifact than just rocking of the aircraft. Anyway, it doesn't seem to bother some people, or the don't notice it at all. Then again, I hear claims about "broadcast quality" Internet video, too, so it's all in the eyes of the beholder.
 
GeneL said:
Of course, I've always been aware that the gimbal doesn't stabilize horizontal movement, but what was bothering me is that what i am talking about looks more like an artifact than just rocking of the aircraft. Anyway, it doesn't seem to bother some people, or the don't notice it at all. Then again, I hear claims about "broadcast quality" Internet video, too, so it's all in the eyes of the beholder.

I guess the real key is to fly as carefully as possible without touching the yaw (or flying in ATTI mode), so that the craft doesn't try to correct itself.
another trick is if you can use a better Tx that can be programmed so that yaw is much less sensitive (as well as adjusting the yaw gains a little)
 
Gizmo3000 said:
another trick is if you can use a better Tx that can be programmed so that yaw is much less sensitive (as well as adjusting the yaw gains a little)

This didn't occur to me, and I like it! Plus, backing off the yaw gain a little does seem to me like it would not have a safety downside, and I always have a little trouble with the yaw being too touchy anyway when I want to pan a shot.
 
GeneL said:
Gizmo3000 said:
another trick is if you can use a better Tx that can be programmed so that yaw is much less sensitive (as well as adjusting the yaw gains a little)

This didn't occur to me, and I like it! Plus, backing off the yaw gain a little does seem to me like it would not have a safety downside, and I always have a little trouble with the yaw being too touchy anyway when I want to pan a shot.

this will probably not be a popular opinion. I know what you are talking about and it happens to me as well. After careful review of my footage so far, I decided that it's so minor that I won't attempt to correct it in post, and to go farther, that I actually like it.

The slight movement gives the viewer a certain 'you are there' feeling, kind of like the scratch on a vinyl record, or grain on high ISO film photography.

Of course the aforementioned is true only for outdoor, adventure, non-professional footage. If you have paying clients then I imagine it can be an issue. For my uses I decided I like it.
 
I have the same problem, but i fixit when i slow down the movie paste half way. I film in 720 120 frames GP BE

regards

Bjorn
 

Members online

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,354
Members
104,933
Latest member
mactechnic