Steadicam question???

New_Zealand

New_Zealand

Veteran
Got a question about using a Steadicam. I notice that Steadicam operators has the monitor on the low end of the sled isn't it a bit hard to use the monitor that way vs having it up by the camera? I haven't started using mine but will be test running it by next week. The system weight is about 45lb before camera. Thanks for any feedbacks
 
this is easier to see were you walk and this is also an optimization to get wheight where it is needed.
for sure if you find easier for you to have the monitor to another place, go your way.
most of stabilizers with camcorders use the integrated LCD from the camera, so it is definitely possible that way.
 
Nosy is correct, the weight distribution is one consideration with regards to putting hte monitor at the bottom of the sled. It definitely takes a lot of practice to operate with the camera far away from the monitor especially when doing reverse moves. Personally most of my steadicam work consists of improvised movements and my sled is usually fully extended so I find it easier to just use the camera's monitor, however, using the on camera monitor can pose challenges to properly see the frame depending on where your camera's monitor is located/configured and if you are operatoring low mode or at another odd angle. The truth is you can put the monitor anywhere you like (even the middle of the sled) but you have to static and dynamic balance properly.

The original steadicam that Garret Brown built implemented a video headset, which from what I understand, really disorients the operator.
 
egproductions said:
The original steadicam that Garret Brown built implemented a video headset, which from what I understand, really disorients the operator.
Click to expand...

One of the prototypes had a fiber optic eyepiece, but the original "working version" that he used on 'Bound For Glory' did not.

5692d1199437278-how-would-you-recommend-i-attach-monitor-battery-my-indicam-prototype.jpg

MV5BNmExNGU1ZjEtYzY4OS00NGRmLTljZGYtZjdkYTQwNjMzMjJjXkEyXkFqcGdeQXVyMjE5MzM3MjA@._V1_SY1000_CR0,.jpg
 
rob norton said:
I would definitely wear an EVF on the head, I wish they made them like that today.
Click to expand...

I've said before that I'd like to try a head mounted EVF, as well. If just to see for myself if it's 'no good'. Some of the conversations I've had with people about VR, it's very possible that it is, in fact, very disorienting and can make you queasy.
 
Run&Gun said:
I've said before that I'd like to try a head mounted EVF, as well. If just to see for myself if it's 'no good'. Some of the conversations I've had with people about VR, it's very possible that it is, in fact, very disorienting and can make you queasy.
Click to expand...

Good point. I guess it'd have to have the ability to flip/move to another place, or have an easily accessible button to disable it to use your eyes as normal.
 
Hiya.

It may seem unintuitive to have the monitor down below, but it is actually pretty easy to get used to and MUCH better for seeing the terrain in your peripheral vision. This is something that few if any gimbal operators have figured out. The top mounted Steadicam monitor lasted for a very short time, between the prototype seen above on Bound for Glory through the first production model, the Steadicam-35 as used in Rocky (a few years back I made a blown-up set of clips of the various times in that movie you could see Garrett actually in the frame here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Cr3PvQQ5w9E). By the time the Universal Model 1 was released less than 2 years later, the monitor had moved to the bottom of the sled where it remains to this day, 40 years later. Now that the monitors are no longer CRT's that weigh 5+ lbs, the mass is less of a concern so theoretically the monitor could fly in a different spot--but it still makes the most sense to keep it low.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top