Game changing stabilizing device?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Guest
  • Start date Start date
I got my hands on the Movi M10 this past weekend and I have to say it is nothing short of amazing.

I'm am by no means a steadicam operator, I have tried it a couple times and have had some success.
I feel that I need a bit more time with the rig before I can say that I'm a master.

We were running the Movi with three people. We had a dedicated focus puller, someone running the remote operating pan and tilt, and I was running around flying the rig.
Despite having never used it before within minutes we were obtaining very professional results.

I found it to be a super intuitive and a very useful tool. It was quite freeing, and would recommend that if you have a chance give it a try.
I'm considering picking one up down the road. I can see using it on ton of work.
 
mcgeedigital said:
Thanks Ben,

Just curious, how long were your average takes before your arms wore out?
Click to expand...


The rig itself is super light, not sure of the exact weight but I think it's under 4 lbs. We were running a Canon 1dc with Canon cine primes.
Over all a very light rig, (maybe 12/13 lbs total) I didn't really feel much fatigue even on the longer takes.
It's fairly comfortable to hold and if you do need a break you can just rest your elbows against your stomach.
If you ever held a fig rig before it's requires a similar level of endurance.
 
CharlesPapert said:
This "thing" was invented to mount to RC copters. It wasn't borne out of a dream to replace Steadicam, or solve handheld. It's an evolutionary concept, a moment in time. It's really not worth debating whether it will replace Steadicam in its current form, because that form will be quickly evolved.

Once the larger versions of these gimbals emerge that can handle cameras like the Epic etc., it will be unlikely that anyone will be sprinting around doing long takes with them without some sort of support system. Easyrigs are OK but I think more cumbersome than Steadicam vests and arms, and they don't stabilize vertically.

There's nothing wrong with combining technologies. Modern Steadicam arms represent 30 years of evolution and are incredible efficient at lifting and isolating. They are even being marketed to industry as a way to relieve the burden for assembly line workers. I can't see any reason not to combine forces and improve performance. In the Steadicam world there have been many attempts to incorporate electronic stabilization of one or more axes over the years.

Dustylense, I disagree on the hardline assertion that a gimbal stabilizer will not replace Steadicam in any way. I can obviously see where that tech is lacking in comparison, but the key is this: for a large percentage of those who are using the types of cameras that will mount on these stabilizers, this level of footage is good enough and their purposes, WILL replace Steadicam. It has a fraction of the learning curve and you can pick it up and put it down with ease. It's not about what is better or what is perfect, it's how people will use it, and how content they will be with the results. There are thousands of people who have bought Steadicam-type stabilizers and while their footage is full of what a critical eye would consider fatal operating issues, it likely satisfies them and even their clients. It's very much a relative thing.
Click to expand...


The merging of the two begins:
http://vimeo.com/71889222#
 
In the meantime I made a short video with footage from recent tests and projects with the Porta Head 2 and 5 prototypes. The footage is not stabilized in post to show the actual results of the gimbal. More footage will follow soon and also a test with the gimbal combined with the steadicam.


Best regards
Andreas

www.portahead.de
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top