Gimbal Project 2025!

rob norton

Veteran
Not to be confused with the GP2024 megathread, which is about a handheld gimbal rig in the mirrorless/micro cine cam space, I believe this topic is different enough for its own thread.

Since diving into the gimbal life, my stance has been that unless the image is really worth fighting for, or you're operating for someone else at a more traditional film crew level, it's better to just take the IQ hit and use a rig that truly allows handheld operation without problematic amounts of fatigue (very small camera package), with no supporting rigs like easyrig/ready rig, antigravity cam, steadicam arm/vest etc.

However, with a limited opportunity described below, I believe an additional support rig is warranted, which is the whole point of the thread.

I have a Red V-Raptor [X] for a two month passion project. I'd like to use it with a gimbal. Like always, this isn't a steadicam vs gimbal thing, if this were a more established project then I'd work with a Steadicam Operator the whole time. The goal is to avoid renting a large gimbal, but I still need to figure out the supporting rig to hold the gimbal.

I've got a few pieces on their way, final weight TBC, but I'll end up with a camera package on the gimbal, which will be 500g short of its capacity of 4.5kg/9.9lbs. I'm under no illusion that the Rs4 Pro (attn: @CharlesPapert, the prosumer line!) is better than a Movi Pro or Ronin 2 in terms of stability. I've said before the Rs4 pro smoothness is just OK. But, it should be a good enough starting point to then let DaVinci Resolve finish the rest of the effect, depending on the shot. I'm not after absolute smoothness, I'll also be handholding the camera while walking too, but I'd like a smoother than handheld option.

While the gimbal itself is under capacity, this is excluding the weight of the gimbal, monitor, gold mount battery, handles etc. There's no way I can handhold the above RED gimbal set up and here's where I'd like to run an idea to the forum.

We've discussed this before but just reiterating:

Antigravity cam/Steadicam - very cool, excellent results, but too expensive/likely impossible to rent

EasyRig - excellent for panning, awful max height

Check the shot at 00:34, that's the maximum height! I don't know why people pretend this is acceptable. Think about how hard we work to eliminate the double chin effect, often at the expense of a more interesting background, now with gimbals it's all sky and people don't look their best.

ReadyRig - I hate how wide it is, and two mounting points means you're fighting to pan. But it allows for chest and above shots.

@Grug mentioned this in the 2024 thread, but this is where blkbrd (blackbird) mantis comes in - https://blkbrd.film/, which makes panning with the ready rig less of an arm wrestle. It's not free flowing like an easyrig pan but the range is definitely increased. See 11:47 (mantis) and 15:00 (stock ready rig) for the difference in pan range between the two

The bungee system looks fantastic in terms of making the easyrig and ready rigs what they should be, but because the Mantis design is so simple and effective, you're really just using the easy rig and ready rigs to provide mounting points. There's obviously more complexity with the ready rig arms being able to adjust, which is closer to having two products work hand in hand. For the easyrig, the very expensive vario 5 simply provides a way to properly position the mantis arm - most of the tech is thrown away. By thrown away, I mean the vest/waist straps are solid, but the majority of what you're paying for is in the overhead arm. If an operator uses the rig for handheld in addition to gimbal work that's fine, but for a gimbal only project, to only be providing the mantis a mount, potentially feels like money not well spent.

So, why not use something like:
- external frame backpack
- vertical speed rail along the backpack and continuing above head, horizontal speed rail via a 90 degree connector
- blkbrd mantis dual or quad tube, connected to speed rail via their speed rail adapter
- easyrig easy tilt

You'd end up with a rig that freely pans and tilts, while choosing your height via appropriate vertical speed rail. I'm just thinking that a 1+ month rental of either easyrig vario 5 with G2 or G3 stabil arm, or ready rig with mantis, vs. cobbling together the speed rail back pack and buying a blkbrd mantis dual or quad tube, the DIY might win out this time. I'm always careful with DIY but this is a hybrid DIY where you're giving the mantis tech a better starting point than any (I think) off the shelf options. I'm aware of height restrictions of moving through doors etc that this custom rig would be guilty of, but just wondering if anyone has any initial thoughts.

With my current rs4 pro gimbal rig, to attach to ready rig, I would need to provide vertical tube in the same way most movi pro or ronin 2 rings allow for a mount. This means adding lightweight tube horizontally to more closely match the width of the ring, as well as a couple inches of vertical tubing. The monster ring width was one of the major goals I was avoiding in my own build (!), although it'd be worth it in this case to comply with the support rig.

Also, is speed rail in line with the neck a safety concern? If yes, maybe it's a speed rail pair goal post on the backpack side, before extending horizontally as a single rail.
 
Just to chuck in my worthelss miles.

Im rigging myc200 and movi pro.

My 'big deal' has been to make a 'belt pack' that will hold 2 vlocks that will power the rig and camera and focus motor this presents a major saving of mass on the rig.

Where I am is..
1) minimise the camera - lose everything and underplate
1a) I have single 15mm rod for focus motor - not a basebplate/rods horror
2) handhold - no robo cop suit
3) short takes
4) combo stand on wheels or suchlike to rest really easily between takes.

(4) - I do not have yet and consider to be very important.

5) steadicam arm vest and movi on spear.. a very different build!
 
Thanks Sam,

Yeah I’m anti getting strapped in, then once everything reaches a certain point I’m anti bare rig that can’t be held!

Your c200/movi pro sounds like a great set up, and you can probably operate longer than most.

The 7” red monitor with full camera control is very handy, this alone probably makes the support rig worth it in this case.
 
Last edited:
"No rig" vs. "needs rig" mostly depends on the weight of the rig and length of time that you need to support said rig, in my opinion.

Anyone can muscle up an overly heavy rig a time or two, but then peformance and quality of shots will start to suffer as you tire.

Smaller rigs had better be very small, otherwise fatigue is still a factor during a long shooting day.

The bigger, more robust supports systems are in use for very good reasons, as they alleviate the stress that the weight and extended time/takes place on the body.
 
"No rig" vs. "needs rig" mostly depends on the weight of the rig and length of time that you need to support said rig, in my opinion.

Anyone can muscle up an overly heavy rig a time or two, but then peformance and quality of shots will start to suffer as you tire.

Smaller rigs had better be very small, otherwise fatigue is still a factor during a long shooting day.

The bigger, more robust supports systems are in use for very good reasons, as they alleviate the stress that the weight and extended time/takes place on the body.
We are on the same page!
 
It has been an interesting journey watching the body-mounted gimbal go through so many iterations. When the gimbals first emerged and the intrepid camera bros with their flat brim trucker caps were running around carrying full size Movis and Ronins, all I could think was "better them than me". Especially since the monitors were always too high, forcing necks upwards and creating blind spots--it should be noted that while the first production model of Steadicam had a monitor mounted up by the camera (see: Garrett Brown captured on camera circling the ring in the final fight of "Rocky"), the model that immediately followed in 1978 had the monitor down below, where it has remained for these past five decades.

I'm still not fully convinced that the ideal form factor for a body-mounted gimbal has been achieved. It is interesting to see gimbals atop Steadicam posts (javelin style), but the process of booming up from floor to eye level requires some interesting flipping-over gymnastics that the gimbal-only mounts that boom straight up may improve on. The tricky part with many of them seems to be keeping the profile low enough that the operator can get through doorways or tight spaces easily enough.

The mechanics of cantilevering weight off the human body while allowing for freedom of movement is a complicated piece of engineering. Even within the relatively mature universe of Steadicam vests, what is comfortable for one operator will be unpleasant for another (the Exovest is a good example of that). A lot of the gimbal supports are way behind the curve in terms of the biomechanics of weight distribution.
 
I agree.

Ready Rig could be more narrow IMO. The arms don't swivel/pan at all, they're fixed at the same angle, which I assume was reverse engineered to work with movi rings. But there's room to not have the gimbal ring so wide. It's a shame that the entire rig footprint bent the knee to the width of the ring. If the ring were narrower, when initiating a pan, the camera is turning away from the handle that's getting pushed towards it anyway, it's not like the camera is stationary then narrower handles would get in the way of the rig, plus width is the least likely axis a camera package will increase when being built bigger. As well, a non-linear pan initiation (probably more accurate terminology here) could help too. I just think if the ready rig wasn't as wide by way of a narrower gimbal ring, then this wouldn't be a bad place. Not necessarily ideal, but better.
 
the body-mounted gimbal go through so many iterations. ..

I'm still not fully convinced that the ideal form factor for a body-mounted gimbal has been achieved. I

The mechanics of cantilevering weight off the human body .. e biomechanics of weight distribution.

Its time for an SMMoGram. I think the ideal way for the human to carry mass is directly over thier CofM/Spine. this is demonstrated by the african woman with water.

A-B is the distance of the mass from the spine/centre.

We see that a typical gimbal AB is large..

Wiith the 'javelin' of gimbal and countermass AB is smaller.. its a marginal difference but I think that the marginal difference is actually huge.

I used to laugh at Chris Fawcett operating with no sleeves as It made him look like a member of a bad heavy metal band.. but over time I have come to understand that even moving the rig 10mm closer to the body centre is a huge gain.. the flappy jacket must go.

The eng camera on the shoulder is close, the steadicam in a typical garret build is good, but compromised by the thickness of the sled and body.. and the javelin is .. actually really really good.

Thats why Im happy to de battery my movi and start to play with the batteries as counter mass.

IMG_6850.jpg
 

Attachments

  • fawcett.JPG
    fawcett.JPG
    19.5 KB · Views: 1
I used to laugh at Chris Fawcett operating with no sleeves as It made him look like a member of a bad heavy metal band.. but over time I have come to understand that even moving the rig 10mm closer to the body centre is a huge gain.. the flappy jacket must go.

Nah, you got it right the first time. It is not typical for the proximity of the camera to one's upper arms is the deciding factor in keeping a Steadicam close to the body. One's legs tend to swing out further than one's upper torso, so generally the distance one holds the rig is based on avoiding banging into the batteries on the base of the sled. I don't recall Chris stating his preference for sleeveless shirts was based on camera clearance, I always assumed it was a fashion/comfort (for him) choice. I can chide my own preference for cargo shorts when operating in warmer weather in the aughts, in that those extra pockets were a liability for camera proximity, even as they provided fantastic storage utility (tools/sides/snacks).

More than once I'd hear assistants or grips comment on my seemingly uncanny ability during a shot to fly the camera in an arc around my body maintaining a buffer of merely an inch or two--I'd always point out that it was basically a skill learned out of laziness. Whatever made the rig seem less heavy, won out.
 
The important part of my waffle was how a javelin design can keep proximity and stop the sled bashing the feet/cargo pants.

And is therefore very interesting
 
Thats a good question. Im so used to not tilting i rarely think of it.

My build has a second operator or stays straight

Ive been on to movi to change some firmware things to dial in a tilt., no luck yet.
 
Sorry - you can tilt down bit must adjust (operate) the angle of the spear.

It cant be trimmed like a steadicam can be rebalanced to hold a tilt with no input of the operator.
 
Its time for an SMMoGram. I think the ideal way for the human to carry mass is directly over thier CofM/Spine. this is demonstrated by the african woman with water.
It depends what you're carrying. If the load is heavy enough then you have to take the neck (and being directly over the spine) out of the equation. The weight would go in a pair of straight arms by your side. This still allows for a neutral, vertical spine, which might be the more important criteria.

If I had to invent a ceiling to head height boom range body worn gimbal rig, I'd see what that looks like first then see if it can be tweaked to be safe and comfortable enough. As I recently discovered, Garrett Brown was quite uncomfortable as he moved through iterations of the Steadicam.
How is the camera controlled in one-person operation with a javelin setup? Joystick for both pan and tilt?
Surely your design, if worked on by a company like Arri or high end Sony etc. rather than DJI prosumer department, could work well with a single gimbal op? But maybe the most ideal design would be purely mechanical and that's why you're saying it hasn't been done yet.
 
Im a a fan of pure mechanics to move stuff gimbal always felt floppy.

The tilt is fine not operated but set/offset.. just as if one had a steadicam shop of a chapel roof you woulod offset it to create a defaul postion.

The movi could probably have a ps handle bodged on but that would miss 'elegance'

Ive gotta play more with my rig.
 
Edit - re mechanical only, I couldn’t quite remember and checked the 2024 thread, Charles’ circular control device would have encoders for adjustments. My last post should say a design advance could also include “smart” pieces, no point getting hung up on mechanical only!
 
You get that a mechanical steadicam you can yank a whip pan or go into slow lover mode with no menu work, just the fingers. Thats what we like!
 
I ordered a couple of Nisi Athena primes (800g) with DJI focus pro, I need to get my head around the new pieces then will keep progressing the body worn element.

I went with RF mount - the RED PL mount feels rock solid but adds too much weight, which would likely be the difference in exceeding the poor RS4 Pro's capacity.

Stay tuned!
 
Back
Top