Here is my DIY figrig solution...it rocks

tomk358 said:
I've seen this question asked on this thread like 5 times with no response, but will ask again- does anyone know the dimensions of a real figrig? 19" on the outside of the circle? And how high up is the crossbar?
Click to expand...

Part of the information is at Manfrotto's:

weight 1.0000 kg
diameter 475 mm
color black
material aluminum
leg cross section round
quick release yes
secondary safety system yes
plate type quick release - with 1/4-20" and 3/8" screws
legs tube diameter 25mm

There's also a site dedicated to the Figrig:

http://services.manfrotto.com/figrig/
 
Tom,

Just so you don't feel ignored, I'll answer your question: I don't know.

But I've been using 19" as my guide and it sounds about right. When I do my rig (hopefully this weekend) I plan on eyeing the crossbar. I imagine the closer to the middle you place it the more support it will have, although you'll want to make sure to not limit the open space for the camera and any add'l equipment. These are probably all conclusions you've already come to, but they are my thoughts on the subject.

E
 
IBEJohson,
not sure if closer to the center would give the bar more support. Also keep in mind that the bar is below the center as you mentioned for space for the camera, but also I assume is there for balancing. bringing the center of gravity of the whole rig down.
Good luck with your rig.
 
I moved this message from another thread I opened not to hijack this one. But I brought my needs back here.

The starting point for my project was this:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/shygantic/129121710/

After finished it would become this version:

http://www.flickr.com/photos/vincekeala/144675653/

The X shaped tubes in the base will help shooting from a table, from the floor or from any surface.

Besides that I am thinking of doing several improvements to that design:

1) Accessory plate.

While I was going to bolt an aluminium plate to where the camera is, JMC suggested why not put that plate over the X base, which I found it to be a great idea. So there it goes.

2) Modular system.

It's worth it considering some way to make the wheel and other parts dismountable. I'm thinking of two immediate possibilities:

a) The upper half of the wheel. It can be secured by a through-screw and bolt.

b) The center camera assembly. There are no pulling strains on it, so it could be popped in and out. That would allow different balance arrangements.

3) Padding system. I would like ideas to pad all of it or part of it, for looks and/or silent handling. Remember a mic will be gripped to the wheel.

4) Damping. The tubes should be damped or will resonate when handling the wheel. Styrofoam, in pellets or spray, might be an option, but will it damp? Cement powder might damp well, but won't it be a bit heavy. Sand will certainly damp it, but it will be heavier. Other suggestions accepted.

5) Suspension. The ultimate improvement. Suspending the wheel from something like the TurtleX. I'm working on it.
 
Last edited:
Carlos,
That sounds like a good idea. I had thought of doing something like the TurtleX before they came up with it. (or at least before I ever saw it.) you snooze you loose.
Good luck.
 
I've never used an actual figrig, but my assumption was that you would try to keep it perfectly balanced from left to right, and that the vertical center of balance would be either just above, or just below where your hands go. Is that a correct assumption?

I was planning to use that as my guide for where to place the crossbar.
 
Fortunately we are not on the "first come with the idea" competition, but on the collaborative one. Your improvements to the basic shoulder mount are certainly impressive.

It's quite likely I am one of the oldest chaps in this forum, and you realize that when you see you have stories from the film times to tell. IMO the TurtleX concept comes from an old concept I saw in American Cinematographer in the '70s, a few years after the first Steadicam was released.

I can't remember the name, but it basically consisted of two long aluminum rods, that pivoted over two shoulder supports. Up front they held the film camera, and on the back there was a rubber spring rope, forming a V. The upper points were tied to the rods, and the lower point was held by a hook on a belt. So the camera floated over it.

The other thing was a rubber spring support they used to hold multiple cameras shooting at the same time and for Imax cameras. It was used on the back of a pickup truck so it could move around and still be floating.

The interesting thing was when I crossed my two cloning ideas, figrig and easyrig, and thought about what might be an integration of them. Lighter than a steadycam and certainly cheaper.
 
maybe "DC" could answer this better he has a figrig himself. but my common sense (as much as it has been wrong many times I still listen to it) would be that the center of balance should be below where your hands are. Kind of like on a Steadyarm. by lowering the center of balance, your rig will be much steadier.
 
oh yeah Carlos, I'm sure thousands have thought of the idea of hanging the camera. Its funny how people think alike.

Not sure how impressive the shoulder mount is, but thanks for thinking so. :)

One thought i had was to grab 2 powerbars from my old bowflex and set them up from shoulder width apart on my back to them meet at the top to a point. but I'm not sure if this would make the rig too bouncy. if its just being used to assist the handheld, then it might do the trick.
 
Yeah the rig I built, I found out that the side to side axis works fantastic, but up and down is difficult to control. So I moved my hands above the center of the camera, and mounted a weight to the bottom. Much better
 
Kdawg said:
Yeah the rig I built, I found out that the side to side axis works fantastic, but up and down is difficult to control. So I moved my hands above the center of the camera, and mounted a weight to the bottom. Much better
Click to expand...

What rig is that? Can you show any pictures or explain a bit more?

If it's like the figrig, from "dry-handling" mine I find it will favour doing chest-high shots.

Putting it at a head-height forces your arms up, so you will have to rest them against your chest, which forces rotate all your body for the movements.

But it's great for doing low angle shots and, helped by the base I added, lay the camera over a table. You can even come moving, lay the fig on the table, then keep moving, shooting all the time. This maybe difficult to do with other supports, only a steadicam type should, but it's a lot heavier to use.

BTW: I didn't know the name Figrig came from director Mike Figgis, who suggested the design to Manfrotto. So we should find our own name for ours. Shall we do a contest?
 
How do you mount the quick release base to the fig rig? I've actually never seen a quick release plate so I don't know how it works very well.

If I were to be moving the camera back and fourth between the fig rig and my tripod, would I need 2 bases of the quick release plate?
 
bballplaya283 said:
How do you mount the quick release base to the fig rig? I've actually never seen a quick release plate so I don't know how it works very well.

If I were to be moving the camera back and fourth between the fig rig and my tripod, would I need 2 bases of the quick release plate?
Click to expand...
If you have a tripod head, it should have a quick release system built in. You want to find a base and plate that work with what you already have on your tripod. The base should screw onto your rig.

The thing jsinicropi is talking about mounts the entire rig to the tripod, for even quicker transitions from tripod to handheld. It all depends on your needs.
 
So if I buy a bogen 501 or 503 and get the Manfrotto 577 quick-release plate, is that all I need to be able to quick release back and fourth between the tripod and my DIY figrig?

Thanks jmc.
 
Here is a pic of mine. It has a walnut platform with a $3 window sash routed in for the quick release mount.

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