Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sony FX6 - Handheld Shooting Techniques

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #16
    Ah, for roll that makes sense. I think that for tilt the relationship between hand and camera will be linear and not angular in that arrangement. But to be sure, roll shake is generally less preferable than tilt shake

    actually, isn't that only true for force applied tangentially to the handles? If you push in or pull out directly on the handle, then that movement is directly transferred linearly to the side of the camera
    Last edited by ahalpert; 10-07-2021, 06:09 AM.
    www.VideoAbe.com

    "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

    Comment


      #17
      Of course there are many forces flying in many directions. I think this is a simplistic reason that long handles feel good. Probably the main reason is not having to bend the elbows or lift the arms so much.
      http://www.sammorganmoore.com View my feature Film

      Comment


        #18
        at any rate, I think you're right that it's not going to MAGNIFY the movement of the hand, as was the original contention. (you'd need a pivot point for the bar close to the hand for that to happen?) and I think you're right that some of the rotational movement may be reduced
        www.VideoAbe.com

        "In this world, Elwood, you must be oh so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I recommend pleasant." -Harvey

        Comment


          #19
          Originally posted by CharlesPapert View Post

          It's always interesting to see these hyper long handle setups that have become popular in recent years. I do such a tiny amount of handheld operating now that I have never had the opportunity to try that, but it seems a little curious to me in that it would magnify hand movement (acting as a lever), and I also have a hard time understanding how you pivot a camera forward if you have to tilt down radically without the handles preventing.

          Another thing that came up after my time was discarding the viewfinder for the onboard monitor. Heads-up viewing makes sense in that you can look out for obstacles or keep an eye on elements outside the frame, but for me personally that would be mitigated by my need to wear reading glasses rendering the distance viewing blurry. Either way, I am dubious about the loss of that point of contact (head against camera) as a stabilizing element.
          Every time I try a compact rig arms setup I find it less stable. If the handles were closer to the lens mount there'd be the same amount of hand movement but its effect would be magnified when compared to the same amount a few inches further away from the same point, no? 1mm of wiggle at the lens mount equates to a lot more at the lens front element compared to 1mm of wiggle out past that front element. With regard tilting I tend to take the whole weight on the wrists/handles for those brief periods. Not perfect but works. Kind of.

          As a left-eye dominant person onboard EVFs tend to be be a pain for me to use. As you say though the perfect distance for a monitor for us wonky-visioned shooters is a delicate balancing act.
          ----------------------------------------------------------


          My reel
          Website

          Comment


            #20
            Yes Ben, Sam's points above were correct, I did indeed have the maths backwards. I'd never used long handles (have largely been out of operating since they came into vogue) so I was basing it on experiences using long pan handles etc., which are a different type of leverage because they incorporate a fulcrum. We often used to operate Panaflexes handheld by holding onto the sides of the mattebox, so you can imagine how radical these two foot long handles appear!

            I do still have questions about limitations with forward tilt with long handles though.
            Charles Papert
            charlespapert.com

            Comment


              #21
              Originally posted by CharlesPapert View Post
              Yes Ben, Sam's points above were correct, I did indeed have the maths backwards. I'd never used long handles (have largely been out of operating since they came into vogue) so I was basing it on experiences using long pan handles etc., which are a different type of leverage because they incorporate a fulcrum. We often used to operate Panaflexes handheld by holding onto the sides of the mattebox, so you can imagine how radical these two foot long handles appear!

              I do still have questions about limitations with forward tilt with long handles though.
              Tilt really is a non-issue. Whether you're just pulling your elbows back, or (as I tend to) tilting from your pelvis as well:

              DREAMSMITHS | SHOWREEL | INSTAGRAM
              www.dreamsmiths.com.au

              Comment


                #22
                cool, thanks for that illustration! Although I'd be disinclined to want to do that pelvis dance with a 30 lb /2.5 foot long camera payload...
                Charles Papert
                charlespapert.com

                Comment


                  #23
                  All depends on use and environment. Regardless, there does seem to emerge a few common things

                  - balance. get the rig to have the center of gravity where it rests. if the rig is out of balance in the resting position, then the operator is stabilizing the camera with their muscles constantly.
                  - Leverage is good, use leverage where you can. It might be long handles, it might be a third contact point, and it might be a longer camera rig.
                  - awareness. be very aware of how and what is causing bad movement, and what causes acceptable or pleasing movement. Sean hobbit's crash course is fantastic. Grug mentioning that for him not locking his legs or landing on his heels smooths things out. Some talk about their breathing.


                  Inertia can help, but like Grug mentioned, if you have 25lbs out of balance, it will still be bad movement. It may not have micro jitters, but it will still have shakes and wobbles and not-so-micro-jitters.So, I tend to agree, that weight is not the key factor. But I do notice it helps.

                  Camera movement is a language, so learning to articulate is important. And learning what to say and how to say it, seems to be the hardest thing to learn.

                  Comment


                    #24
                    Originally posted by CharlesPapert View Post

                    I do still have questions about limitations with forward tilt with long handles though.
                    Yes it's not ideal but in the age of cameras being boxes with a lens mount it seems every setup is a compromise in some way. Not sure what the answer is.
                    ----------------------------------------------------------


                    My reel
                    Website

                    Comment


                      #25
                      Originally posted by Ben Scott View Post
                      Yes it's not ideal but in the age of cameras being boxes with a lens mount it seems every setup is a compromise in some way. Not sure what the answer is.
                      I found the answer is a traditional ENG camera. https://youtu.be/zPKKCxDn6LM?t=1243
                      Doug Jensen, Sony camcorder instructor
                      HOW TO MAKE MONEY SHOOTING STOCK
                      http://www.dougjensen.com/

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X