Good resource for handheld stabilizer info

T

TeamJoeDawn

Well-known member
http://www.glidecam.com/gcMediaPlay.php?file=vid/mov/lg/stability_of_balance.mov

Perusing over the net, I came across a nice little video from the Glidecam website that graphically shows a lot of the balance and weight issues that hand held camera stabilizer makers deal with. If you are thinking about making one, designing one from scratch, or modifying instructions that you have already procured, have a look at this video. It explains a lot, and also has some pretty good detail of the Glidecam mechanics, clever implementations.


I especially like the way the sliding plates adjust the CG quickly and pain free. Something about drilling forty holes into a baseplate never seemed the most efficient way to me.


Also, the bottom weights on slots to move to and fro. Nice touch.




I just received the “Killer Camera Rigs That You Can Build,” by Dan Selakovich. Great base reference, and he is incredibly clever at going the Lowes-Depot route. But taking his base plans and modifying with some of these easier ideas for adjustment and practical use, i think you can make incredible equipment, without having a CNC lathe.. not that I am NOT jealous of those that do..


hahaha


Anybody want to volunteer to lathe some slots in metal for me? :-)




J
 
Also, just an observation (take it for what it is worth, I have built NO stabilizers up to now.. I have two half-finished ones in the corner of my editing room), but I don't understand why some of the DIY and the $14 steadicam have the arm shooting off to the side.

Most test videos show that there is a kind of lateral shake in the footage as the appendage that you hold the handle with.. (take any you want, hand, foot.. or worse) appears to influence the rotational axis of the stabilizer. Being that rotating the camera takes almost NO force, I don't know why you would need a foot long handle.. its not like you need the mechanical leverage.

Just food for thought. I keep reading that a light touch is the best, a loose grip, etc... but having this handle seems counter-intuitive.

J
 
If you are talking about the vest mount point, I guess is for keeping the weight from stressing the operator's back less than having it munted on the front. If is something else, disregard my note.
 
dan said:
If you are talking about the vest mount point, I guess is for keeping the weight from stressing the operator's back less than having it munted on the front. If is something else, disregard my note.
Click to expand...

Sorry, I probably wasn't clear.. I shot off at a perpendicular line of thought... but if you look at the "$14 steadicam", you will see a "T" shaped handle coming out of the side of the primary post... that is what I was talking about.

OK.. I've had my caffeine now.. I think I am calmed down. :-)

J
 
bgundu said:
that voice over was hilarious! Sounds like it was done by spock.
Click to expand...

I know,.. I wonder if they were trying to do it as a parody,.. or did they really take themselves that serious?

I think it sounds like a takeoff from "2001, a space oddesy"

"Yes, Dave.. all things seem to be in working order... the camera is in balance, Dave."
 
I think the long handle out the side is in fact a balancing mechanism. It seems like I've seen a clip somewhere and that's what it was for.

Keep in mind that these stabilizers are hell on your back. I'm a bit older now, but I've taken the stabilizer off my vest before to use it in real fast situations and after about 5 minutes you really feel it. Just a note.

It may sound like a joke, but doing some simple back exercises can make a big difference for longer shots.

best,

J.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top