Luma updates its video camera app for iOS, adding cinematic image stabilization

http://thenextweb.com/apps/2013/02/25/luma-improves-its-super-smooth-image-stabilization-for-shooting-video-on-ios/

by alexkcd • 13 years ago

70 31 13 years ago

cosbynator• 13 years ago

I'm completely biased in this (I know the founders), but this is the real deal. I've recorded shaky, all over the place video handholding my iPhone on a bike and it came out like this: http://luma.io/v/B2-

It is pretty neat stuff.

samstave2• 13 years ago

That's really smooth. Installed the app after viewing that.

I'd love to see a side-by-sire as well though.

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

Here you go: http://luma.io/v/CIt (thanks to cosbynator for letting me make this)

eclipxe• 13 years ago

This is really impressive. I'd love for a similar Android product.

HorizonXP• 13 years ago

Me too!

hellopat• 13 years ago

Very very cool stuff. I downloaded the app and took this (not the ideal stress test, but the panning is incredibly smooth): http://luma.io/v/CId

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

(Cofounder here.) That's our motion retargeting algorithm at work. It'll fit the smoothest motion to your recording. In this case a constant panning motion does the trick. You can get perfectly stationary, motorized-tripod-like panning shots, and dollies with Luma without any equipment other than your hands.

tuxidomasx2• 13 years ago

Is this a proprietary algorithm? Can desktop video editing software or plugins do it this well? I would love to have this as a quick drop in for Premier or Aftereffects.

Also, are there any plans for motion estimation for achieving super-slow motion, like Twixtor or Timewarp? That would be a neat effect for mobile video.

kybernetyk• 13 years ago

Hmm, the comparison videos are interesting. The one with IS turned on reminds me somehow of a first person shooter video game while the other video feels more 'real'.

Maybe game developers could introduce more shake into their games to make them feel more real?

Other than that: The tech is great. The videos certainly get a cinematic feeling with that kind of image stabilization.

tuxidomasx2• 13 years ago

Shaky cams in video games can easily become a hindrance of a good experience. For example Kane and Lynch 2 was criticized for having a shaky cam that made gameplay more difficult. Its definately a balancing act to get the right amount of shake

joshschreuder2• 13 years ago

Plus, anecdotally, it makes viewers feel 'dizzy'. See criticisms of found footage movies like Cloverfield.

r00fus• 13 years ago

At some point, you want to avoid the "realism" and focus more on the scenery in the video.

I'm entirely impressed with some of the sample videos - I can think of numerous videos I've taken that would have benefited greatly from luma.io's stabilization.

networked• 13 years ago

Digital image stabilization is a fascinating subject. On one hand, the core idea is simple (average out motion over time in some way then pan and zoom the image to compensate for deviations from the average); on the other, it's not easy to get right since outside of random jitter some camera motion, even rapid, can be what the camera operator wants.

Here's an example of an actual algorithm used for digital IS: http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.148....

duncans• 13 years ago

Very nice. It's missing using the volume buttons as a record button though.

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

It's on our todo list :)

diziet• 13 years ago

Very awesome tech! I'm really impressed -- what is the loss in terms of frames/frame size? Is data or missing parts of a shaky frame generated based on previous shots?

Also, another thing that goes with shaky videos is bad or stuttering sound. If you guys handle both, I can easily see you becoming the go-to solution for filming on cell cameras.

rubberbandage• 13 years ago

I’ve used this app since it was called SteadiCam (before that name was pulled for copyright reasons, of course), and there’s really nothing else like it around—long ago I thought of applying 6-axis gyroscope readings in reverse to video, but this dev has done that and more better than I ever could. It’s a fantastic application of amazing technology and crazy math. Major kudos!

joshschreuder2• 13 years ago

Here's a better way of comparing the two identical videos. It's an even clearer improvement when viewing side-by-side: http://goo.gl/xoMgQ

softgrow• 13 years ago

If you want to try it here is an iTunes link http://www.itunes.com/apps/luma-camera

codex2• 13 years ago

If you're clever, you can do this kind of postprocessing without a big CPU hit on mobile phones. Phones compress video in hardware, and as part of that process the hardware looks for blocks of video that are roughly the same across frames. When it finds one, it attaches a pointer indicating where it should go in the next frame.

Taken in aggregate, all of these pointers in the compressed data stream effectively show you which way the image "shook" relative to the previous image (and how far it shook) saving you CPU cycles to determine this yourself. You can even detect rotation. So all you need to do now is compensate for the shake by rewriting the compressed stream, "panning" (and perhaps rotating) in the opposite direction of the shake. In order to have room to pan, you need to emit a smaller rectangle than the original video.

This isn't sufficient for advanced stabilization, but it's a quick first pass.

I took a stab at writing this for the iPhone in 2010, but by that time the writing was clearly on the wall: Apple was soon going to offer this functionality in hardware (and they do, on the iPhone 4S and 5), and they would only do a better job with every phone refresh. The only way one can hope to compete is to perform global optimizations across the entire video clip that the hardware encoder can't do (e.g. dynamic programming), or else apply fancier transforms which are so CPU intense they kill the mobile experience. Good job on the part of the developers; the video looks great. As iPhone GPUs get more powerful stabilization algorithms will only get better.

One business angle here is to give the app. away for free and charge a dollar per video to deshake clips as a web service in the cloud.

mamp• 13 years ago

The app is great.

It seems to take the approach of a post-processing frame shift rather than real-time stabilisation. In other words it lets the phone capture and compress using hardware, but keeps the sensor data separately and shifts the x,y of the video to stabilise. Unlike Final Cut etc. that has to analyse each frame, Luma has the raw data as the video was being shot. So the battery hit would come on export when the video has to be re-rendered I'm guessing.

I think this is the method because the Luma video appears more zoomed in than the original, i.e. they leave some space around so the video is always visible. This means that the Luma output will be lower res than the original hardware captured video I'm guessing.

Still, if it avoids walking around with your phone in a steadicam rig then it's a huge win. I have a steadicam smoothee but the ridicule from friends and family mean I don't use it, the slightly lower res output with Luma is the price my family will pay for their insensitive mockery!

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

Luma applies stabilization on playback. We keep all the pixels we get from the camera, even when you upload to our cloud service. As we improve our algorithms your existing videos will continue to improve with time. There's much more that we can do to help you create stunning videos. We're just getting started :)

koudelka• 13 years ago

How different is this to AVFoundation's stabilization?

There's an example of it in action here, but it requires a login: https://developer.apple.com/videos/wwdc/2012/?include=520#52...

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

(Cofounder here.) Ours is better: http://luma.io/v/CJC

You can think of AVFoundation's as dampening handshake. We retarget the motion to be along the smoothest path possible. So we can often completely eliminate handshake. Luma supports both native and cinematic stabilization modes.

barista• 13 years ago

How does this compare to the optical image stabilization on Nokia Lumia 920?

pavlov• 13 years ago

It's basically like comparing optical zoom to digital zoom.

Digital stabilization will inevitably lose resolution because it needs to crop some data to even out the shake, and also because there is varying motion blur in the images that needs to be cleaned up somehow.

Like with zoom, optical is always a better solution because it fixes the problem before light hits the sensor, but of course it comes with its own tradeoffs involving physical size and production cost.

alexkcd7• 13 years ago

Luma's cinematic stabilization performs much better than Nokia's optical stabilizer in daylight. As sensors get better (more light sensitive, higher resolution), the advantages of optical stabilizers will diminish even further and eventually disappear. (Disclosure: I cofounded Luma).

Luma updates its video camera app for iOS, adding cinematic image stabilization

Related Stories