A whole new crane Axis

Paul F said:
You're in the clear for the first patent link that Keylight provides. The most important part of the patent is the claims section. In fact, it is really the only part of a patent that matters in the courts. That is the back section of the patent. In this case, the first claim discusses an electronic means of backpan compensation. The other claims discuss the compensator and other features. So it does not cover a mechanical means of doing the same thing.

This is a poorly written patent. Patents should make the broadest claims possible. It should have the first claim as being a backpan mechanism, without specifying how it does it. It has left open that anyone coming up with another means to accomplish backpan can do so without infringing on the patent. The patent was filed in November 1998, so it may only have 3 more years of life (patents filed after 1995 live for 17 years after being granted or 20 years after being filed, whichever is greater).

I wasn't able to read the second link to provide commentary.

My background - I have several patents and have spent years reviewing patent applications with patent attorneys, so I have some minor experience with this sort of thing, but for sure, I am no expert on the subject. You should do your own research and make your own judgements.
Click to expand...

Great perspective on this Paul! I'm not sure if they messed up on their patent, because the kind of backpan compensation Jeremy (and the rest of us) have been talking about isn't really what the patent seems to be for. What we're talking about is refer to in the patent as "one to one backpan compensation" and there probably was prior art for this that would have prevented them (or anyone) from patenting it. There's probably a rejected patent application out there somewhere that tried and failed!

Of course, I could be wrong, because the mention that "If it is desired that the camera remain pointed at a fixed compass position in space as the arm is panned in an arc as shown in FIG IB the camera operator must make a compensating reverse pan of the camera perfectly matched to the speed and direction of the arm. This process is known as backpan. [Editor's Note: Later they describe this as "one to one backpan compensation".) Generally only operators skilled and practiced at this maneuver can accomplish it perfectly and they require several rehearsals with the operator of the arm to synchronize their respective movements." The fact that they didn't mention any kind of mechanical device to do this is interesting. But then again, no manual device for doing this has since been patented either!

So in the original post, Jeremy says:

Jeremy_Sawatzky said:
As all cranes keep the head level weather moving up or down, None of them keep the head aiming straight ahead when moving side to side.
Click to expand...

That's a description of "one to one backpan compensation".

The "backpan compensation" in the patent is actually for "variable backpan compensation" which keeps the camera focused on a fixed object. There's a big difference between those two things. Here's an illustration from the patent that shows what I mean.

Figure A is what all jibs do (no backpan compensation)
Figure B is what Jeremy proposes (one to one backpan compensation) that keeps the camera pointed straight ahead. This could could easily be done (and has been done) with cables because it's one to one, and does not seem covered by the patent.
Figure C is what the patent covers, keeping the camera pointed, not forward, but at a fixed object.

jib.jpg

And this is from the Description section:

Accordingly several objects and advantages of my invention are totally automatic correction of backpan perfectly synchronized with the movement of a crane arm or jib even in the event of unplanned or unrehearsed movements of the arm.

Further by incorporating a ratio adjustment which allows the operator to overcompensate the pan of the head in relation to the pan of the crane arm the camera can be made to point at an object in near space as the arm swings as shown in FIG 1C.

This overcompensation or Autopointing is of great benefit to the camera operator since it causes the camera to remain centered on any stationary actor or object without effort on the operator's part.

Further by undercompensating the pan of the head in relation to the pan of the crane arm the camera can be made to backpan at a slower speed than the arm for artistic purposes.

An important feature of the backpan compensator is that it can be turned off or on or the compensation ratio can be varied as desired during the shot.

All this is accomplished without losing the intended functional capability of the remote pan head.

Still further objects and advantages will become apparent from a consideration of the ensuing description and accompanying drawings .
Click to expand...

Sorry for the lengthy post! Very interesting topic!
 
Thanks Paul for the explanation! And thanks Keylight for clearing that up. - I am confident i can do it without using cables. But just this evening i finished up about 80 hours of solidworks modeling to end up with my final crane design. I am going to start work tommrow!

So il take a break before i take a crack at the backpan :)
 
Keylight, Indeed, there may have been a reason, such as prior art, that prevented them from making a broader patent. All the more reason for Jeremy to do a patent search.

Jeremy,

Even if you do find that there is a patent covering your idea, you should see what shape the patent is in and who owns it. They may no longer be interested in it. They may be out of business. They may be interested in licensing the intellectual property to you for a reasonable fee.
 
I did a search of U.S. patents for the word 'backpan'. Only two patents came up. The one sited by Keylight and one that was granted in 1997, also by Romanoff. So there may not be anything else covering this topic.
 
Andy (Romanoff) is a longtime colleague, I've sent him an email to see if he can offer a clarification on this and will let you know his response.
 
Cool. Thanks Charles. It would be interesting to hear first-hand about those patents and any other intellectual property on the topic from Mr. Romanoff.
 
BrianMurphy said:
Advantajib? Fully mechanical, portable, made in Canada.
Click to expand...

thats a pretty cool design. I tend to steer away from cables in my designs. From the footage on the site (which they should really really update) It looks smooth. - i like the hydraulic tilt on the head unit. - I still think i can do it without cables but i dont know if i could achieve 360 degrees.

made in Canada: Huuurra
 
I look forward to seeing what you come up with. I tried several jibs a few years back looking for something that would give me the same smooth work that I got out of the Jimmy Jibs that I used for years in studio and the field. I needed however that the unit be light and easily transported around the globe. Eric Kessler's jib ended up being my choice. I combined his jib with PT20 head that he was selling at that time and it was excellent. All the others I tried just didn't cut it or were so finicky that you needed two weeks of practice with the jib to do a smooth shot so you could learn all the little surprises they had in store for you. Even after choosing the Kessler, portable was somewhat of a sacrafice. It was the most stable but I still ended up flying a box large enough to hold two sets of golf clubs, a pelican 1550 for the head, a tripod that could handle the weight, and a battery pack Not light but lighter than a Jimmy Jib setup.
The moral of this story is you can make the jib light and stiff but you still need to support the weight and counterbalance. So even with the Advanta Jib which some of my friends swear by, you need a Manfrotto 528XB to sit it on. Unless you are flying a GoPro.
Cheers
Brian
 
BrianMurphy said:
I look forward to seeing what you come up with. I tried several jibs a few years back looking for something that would give me the same smooth work that I got out of the Jimmy Jibs that I used for years in studio and the field. I needed however that the unit be light and easily transported around the globe. Eric Kessler's jib ended up being my choice. I combined his jib with PT20 head that he was selling at that time and it was excellent. All the others I tried just didn't cut it or were so finicky that you needed two weeks of practice with the jib to do a smooth shot so you could learn all the little surprises they had in store for you. Even after choosing the Kessler, portable was somewhat of a sacrafice. It was the most stable but I still ended up flying a box large enough to hold two sets of golf clubs, a pelican 1550 for the head, a tripod that could handle the weight, and a battery pack Not light but lighter than a Jimmy Jib setup.
The moral of this story is you can make the jib light and stiff but you still need to support the weight and counterbalance. So even with the Advanta Jib which some of my friends swear by, you need a Manfrotto 528XB to sit it on. Unless you are flying a GoPro.
Cheers
Brian
Click to expand...

You sound like the perfect candidate for my jib.

-zero assembly. and i mean zero.
-(not written in stone yet but) 10 lbs total weight. - around 7lbs for a carbon fiber version.
-able to handle cameras up to (estimated) 15-20lbs
-ability to shorten ( again with zero disassembly) by 2.5feet in mere seconds, making (the first version) 5 feet from tripod to camera instead of the 7.5feet which is standard.
-and the best part is it packs down into size that can fit in a duffle bag, a small one - again zero disassembly. No parts to lose or keep track of.

Finished the 3d modeling a few days ago and I am machining parts right now - so next prototype is well on its way. - i would love to do a kickstarter campaign but as stated earlier, I am a Canadian so thats not possible.
 
Hola este es mi segundo video, ojalá les guste y quisiera oir sus valiosas opiniones, saludos Jeremy!!!!
Gracias

 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top