-
Apple’s slapdash approach to image processing
As I have pointed out here:
https://forums.creativecow.net/readpost/344/27093
… there is a really basic flaw in the way that the much-touted FCP X (and Motion 5) keyer handles the blur component of the light wrap function.
The more closely one looks at Apple’s image processing offerings the less impressed one is likely to be.
it is very odd that the keyer, which in many respects is quite powerful, should exhibit such a schoolboy error.
It really does look as though the development team is a little short of qualified talent in some key areas. Or they are really hard pushed to get stuff out of the door without adequate QC.
Anyone with even a basic knowledge of compositing will know how embarrassing this mistake actually is.
Definitely symptomatic of a weakness in the development pipeline.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
27 Replies
-
I don’t know how the keyer got so much hype to begin with.
Sure, it’s convenient, it’s fast, has some cool controls, it’s fast, is fast, and it’s fast, but I can’t get more than a passing rough cut quality out of it.
But it is fast.
And fast.
Jeremy
-
Quite so.
Yes, it’s very fast, but I’ve read countless comments about how it’s so much better than Keylight, for example!
It’s very handy if you need a quick result that looks OK, but otherwise it’s not really much use.
All that said, the point is that no-one at Apple (even after all this time) spotted a really obvious and easily avoided error!
What does that say about their attitude to image processing in general?
Discuss.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “What does that say about their attitude to image processing in general? “
Fix it in post?
-
I should add that their Unsharp Mask filter in Motion 5 (not available in FCP X for some odd reason) exhibits the same error.
Shoddy quality control … or is it ineptitude?
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Simon Ubsdell] “Shoddy quality control … or is it ineptitude?”
I don’t think it’s ineptitude, necessarily. I do think quality control and probably sample size is lacking. It’s the same as it’s always been with FCPX. Some things are amazing, some are not so amazing. It takes a while for programs to mature, especially when we have had such a performance increase and gut rehab of an already new system. It seems that Apple is doing this across the board. They are preparing for some sort of future by rewriting and stripping down all of their applications. Pages, their word processor, is kind of bad.
Not that this correlates, but there’s even typos in the keyboard shortcut editor:
Jeremy
-
I suspect it’s the Costco effect in action.
The sweet spot is 80% of the quality for 40% of the price. That drives success most often, methinks.
In keying, doesn’t edge detection and light wrap involve pretty massive numbers of pixel calculations in a universe of rapidly increasing raster sizes? Particularly when those edges are in motion? Given that X is raster independent and as happy to work with 4k as HD, at some point, aren’t you chasing a massive amount of image processing to do this with high precision?
And if so, might one way not to bog down system performance – particularly in a world where there are a lot more laptops running this than well-stocked MacPros – wouldn’t installing an 80% quality keyer be pretty smart – at least until the computational horsepower catches up?
I’m just surmising here, but it’s easy to want high-end features in every area of the program – but given the level of smarts in the Apple organization, I wonder if this is an omission or a decision.
Then again, I’m not a raster processing expert in any way shape or form, so I could be TOTALLY wrong and it certainly could be just a plain old-fashioned screw up as Simon implies!
Personally, I’ll still forgive them since X costs way less for the whole program than I paid for a one seat license of Ultimatte back in the day. ; )
YYM (certainly) V
Know someone who teaches video editing in elementary school, high school or college? Tell them to check out http://www.StartEditingNow.com – video editing curriculum complete with licensed practice content.
-
As Jeremy and I have both discussed in the past, key light is much better. I get amazing results with transparency of things like motion blur and intricate hair detail. With apples keyed, it appears amazing at first. As if it just needs a tweak to take it over the edge to a wonderful key. But no amount of tweaks work to get rid of the halo around motion blur or the harsh edge that exists around compared to keylight. I’ve found Apples keyer to be well suited to slow moving bald subjects. Of which I’ve had a few. The light wrap idea sounds great, but never looks anything but blurry. Probably for the reasons posted.
-
I just hope everyone concerned has provided feedback to Apple to fix this.
-
[Bret Williams] “With apples keyed, it appears amazing at first. As if it just needs a tweak to take it over the edge to a wonderful key. But no amount of tweaks work to get rid of the halo around motion blur or the harsh edge that exists around compared to keylight. “
Indeed.
I think what we have here is yet another case of an Apple image processing offering that is just “good enough” but no better.
The reason I wanted to raise this issue here is that I think it bespeaks a certain development philosophy and attitude to the marketplace.
Good marketing (hey, have you seen the cool new keyer in FCP X!), less good delivery.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com -
[Bret Williams] “The light wrap idea sounds great, but never looks anything but blurry. Probably for the reasons posted.”
Incidentally building a light wrap is really very straightforward.
It involves blurring the matte and then combining the blurred version with the original of the matte in order to create a edge that overlaps into the foreground. The amount of the blur determines the depth of the light wrap. This matte is then used to composite a blurred version of the background image back over the foreground.
This simulates the effect of the light from the background encroaching over the foreground edges as it does in the real world. It can really help a lot of green screen composites – but as with all things to do with keying it needs to be used with discretion.
The problem is that Apple haven’t executed the blur properly so as to crop it at the edges of the frame – as I say, it’s a really easy fix.
And pace Bill, not remotely computationally expensive.
Simon Ubsdell
http://www.tokyo-uk.com
Reply to this Discussion! Login or Sign Up