Twojay Dhillon

Wow! I did not expect that result!

IT IS NOT TOO LATE TO VOTE!

If you received an incomplete ballot, lost or spoiled your ballot in error, you may request a duplicate by calling TrueBallot at (866) 260-6820 any time during the day or night. A new one will be sent by First Class Mail within 24 hours. Requests made later than April 19 may not be received in time to receive your duplicate ballot and return it. If you feel you are really close to the deadline and want to ensure that your vote will be counted you may choose to return your ballot via U.S.P.S. Express Mail at your own expense as members have done in the past. Be sure that the ballot is mailed as instructed within the secret ballot envelope and the business reply envelope and then placed in the Express Mail envelope with the mailing address on the Express Mail envelope reading:

• IATSE Local 600 Election
  c/o TrueBallot Inc.
  P.O. Box 48902
  Los Angeles, CA. 90048-9137
  
• 
  

Your ballot must be received at the P.O. Box by 11:59 p.m., Thursday, April 25, 2013, or it will not be counted. This means ballots must be in the post office by this date, not just postmarked by this date!

Can we make a sticky so that the newer Ops have something that they can immediately go to?

Twojay-

 

Gimbal position is not relevant to DB, although a very bottom heavy rig can mask the imprecision of less than perfect dynamic balance, or moving the gimbal might make it spin flat but upside down.

 

If the c.g.s of the batts and monitor are coplanar, then the c.g. of the camera is going to be in line with the centerline of the post system. Changing the length won't have any effect on DB. You can think of that setup as two flywheels on a shaft (one flywheel is the batt and monjitor, the other is the camera).

 

Assume your monitor c.g. is raised up when you first get into dynamic balance. As the post system is extended or compressed, that monitor will be raised up to a different percentage of the total length (batt c.g. to camera c.g.). The more the monitor is raised from the battery, the more its height will change percentage wise, and the more you will have to move components (usually the battery and the camera) to get the rig back into dynamic balance.

 

With your own rig and your usual set up, you tend to get a feel for this rather quickly - and again, making some marks on your rig with a practice camera at home will help when time is short on the set.

Copy all of that, Jerry.

I believe you may have answered my question, although indirectly. An example for folks to keep in mind as I work through this: I run a PRO III rig with an XCS TB-6 monitor with the bottom of the monitor being able to sit flat against the ground, along with the two bottom batteries (some may call this coplanar; I just call it awesome).

Now, I also use anywhere from a 4 to 5 second drop time... Sometimes I run absolutely neutral. With that in mind, I *ALWAYS* have my rig in DB if I set my battery hanger out to 2.5 (PRO GEN III Batt Hanger owners know what I'm referring to; For those that don't, that is a pre-marked scale which shows you how far out you have slid you rear battery/batteries). This DB has been verified via both the spin method and the Eric Fletcher "sideways drop method" and both M.O.'s yield the same rear-battery/batteries-to-monitor-relationship.

As an aside, I -- up until now -- have never repositioned my monitor from its "flat" position for reasons of always maintaining my DB. This thread has made me question this choice.

Given the above, if I release the upper-to-lower-post-clamp and extend both sections all the way out *WITHOUT REPOSITIONING MY MONITOR OR REAR BATTERY/BATTERIES* I should still be in DB, despite having to reposition my gimbal lower on the upper post section (effectively raising the lens height from the floor I stand on, relative to the lens-to-floor-height before extending the post sections) to obtain an identical drop-time to the fully-collapsed rig with the same camera/above the gimbal mass(es).

Yes? Because that to me makes sense. And having the rig lose DB because of a simple change in gimbal height does not.

As an example, let's say we take two PRO rigs which are both of the same build and both fully collapsed. DB is obtained (in this example) by keeping the monitor flat and the rear battery/batteries at the 2.5 mark.

Rig # 1 has an Alexa with a Pana G-Series Primo, LMB-5 and one ND and one CLEAR in the stages. 2 Preston DM2's, a BOXX transmitter and an Anton Bauer Dionic HC behind that (yes, a metric sh*t-ton of pan-inertia -- just how I like it).

Rig # 2 has an EPIC with a 135mm Super Speed MKII, one Preston DM2, a BOLT Transmitter, a RED ONE Cradle with a RED BRICK attached to power camera.

For simplicity's sake (and completely innacurate as regards the accuracy of the actual camera-build weights about to be given): The camera setup being placed onto the PRO rig in Rig # 1 weighs 40lbs. The camera setup being placed onto the PRO rig in Rig # 2 weighs 30lbs. The point here is camera setup paced onto Rig # 2 is 10 lbs less than the one being placed onto Rig # 1.

Obviously, if both rigs are kept fully collapsed and an identical drop-time (say of 4 seconds) is desired of both rigs, Rig # 2's gimbal will be lower on the upper post, than Rig # 1's, directly attributable to the lower above-the-gimbal weight.

Using this as an example, why are both rigs, identical except for the weight of camera setups, and the consequent positions of their gimbal relative to the top-stage/upper-j-box, etc.) in DB? Yes, I posit this as an absolute as I have field-tested this very same example and both cameras are in DB with the rear battery/batteries set to 2.5. Yet, when we talk about extending the post, all things remaining constant except the vertical disparity between the two masses, some Ops believe DB will be lost. THAT makes no sense to me. I've been wrong before and I am making no claim to being correct in this case.

If a difference from camera to camera, weight-wise, makes DB change, then sure, a lengthening of the post would also change DB (as these both result in a change of gimbal height relative to top-stage). However, I believe we all are in agreement that above the gimbal masses and distribution thereof will not affect DB should the below the gimbal masses retain their relationship. Ergo, camera weights -- or a weight disparity between two above-the-gimbal setups -- and the consequential difference in gimbal height on the upper post (still using the same PRO rig as an example) should not change DB.

All a lengthening of the post/y-axis should do is make the rig have even greater pan inertia from the greater spread of masses. In layman's terms (mine): the rig is slower.

It's 4:16am PST. It's bed-time for me.

The reason we, as Steadicam operators, became interested in dynamic balance was because the monitors in the Model II and III were raised up from the base for better viewing, The masses of the monitor and battery and base were no longer coplanar as they were in the Model I, and the result were rigs that generally did not pan flat.

 

The model one behaved very nicely in pans, and was pretty much dynamically balanced when it was balanced statically, because all those masses were coplanar.

 

If your monitor and batteries are coplanar (the c.g.'s are on the same plane), as they are in some rigs, extending the post will not affect dynamic balance.

 

However, if your monitor is raised from the battery (as it was for better viewing in those and some other models, Including the PRO), one has to work at little harder to achieve dynamic balance.

 

And, if your monitor c.g. is raised up from the battery c.g. (i.e., not coplanar) for viewing or balancing, then changing the length of the sled will have an effect on dynamic balance.

 

How much of an effect depends on how much the monitor c.g. is raised from the battery c.g. Raising the monitor up more - as a percentage of the total length from the battery c.g. to the camera c.g. - will create more of a difference.

 

It's why the model II and III was typically so out of dynamic balance when dynamic balance was not considered - the monitors were raised quite a lot towards the camera.

 

In practice, in the field, all that one needs to do to achieve and maintain dynamic balance is pretty straightforward, even if your monitor c.g. is quite far up from the battery.

Jerry,

Great explanation. As relates to a system such as the XCS or PRO, with a two-stage post system: If the monitor is left exactly where it was when the post was fully collapsed, would the sled still be in dynamic balance, even though the chances are that you'll have raised the camera's c.g. away from the gimbal to obtain a similar drop-time as you had when the post was fully collapsed?

This seems to be what Jens has alluded to and it's a bit confusing for me to wrap my head around why the DB would be lost by simply moving the corresponding weights away from each other on the y-axis.

Thanks for any insight you can give.

EDIT: did not notice this thread had grown so much and other similar questions have been asked. My bad for the clutter!

Interesting to see that you didn't extend your post, Robert, as I think that would have given you a few inches to move the gimbal down/camera up, and it would have given the Op a much better angle to view the monitor from.

I've always had a thing for built-in superposts, but I have yet to encounter a circumstance where an extremely low or high angle is called for spontaneously. Okay, I lie, a lot of directors want the camera "in the weeds". Being just under 6', I throw the longest arm post in the d-bracket and I'm within 2" of scraping with the arm all the way down. Definitely not an optimal way to Op, though.

Haven't seen an LCD that even comes within spitting distance of a PRO or TB-6. A damned shame they may go by the wayside. Used a PRO GEN II as a result of my slide across 6th street (thanks for the loaner, Scott Coleman!), and I must say, I love the smaller image (and bloody hell is it sharp). I did VERRRRRRY long takes (6FPS) and had to hold very specific pieces of mise-en-scene. Never felt more comfy than with the PRO monitor.

For all of those that want to use the waaaaaaaaay overused example of pushing into a crowd of people and landing on the girl/guy with X-coloured shirt: WHAT A BUNCH OF BOLLOCKS. Many other ways to get the shot other than REACTING to a colour on your monitor.

The forefathers did it for decades before technology "caught up".

My *2* cents.

(Bill insurance out for a new TB-6, bro.)

Do you mean the ULTIMATE 2?

It means hit "record" or flip the camera body to "on" and then -- within a second -- OFF in order to get the slate in without having it get in the way in certain scenes/setups. What? Oh, sorry, thought this was a camera op site.

In the 2 person mode you could have a PA run with the camera, heck you could have the most uncoordinated PA actually holding the rig. As long as he can hit a mark and you have someone operating remotely that has talent your gonna come up with a pretty sweet shot. I hate to say it but the addition of another operator is really not that big a deal. The skill required to hold the device is marginal... if anything. For all of you thinking this isn't gonna take your job as a steadicam operator... your right. it's not gonna take it, it's gonna change it. Eventually.

Also, the M10 is light... I could run around with this thing for a while... Even with the full 13-14 lb set up... It's surprisingly light. It's not gonna break anyones back. The people that are still using large cameras have a while before this infects your part of the industry but not long.

An uncoordinated PA "hitting marks holding a camera". That's the future of our department/niche? Seriously? Let's scale back the fanboy-ism a bit here, please. I'm all for this invention being able to perform some function within cinematography (and it will be limited, just as the Steadicam is limited) but statements like the one above are just plain silly and not based in any real-world on-set reality.

Good lord... the stuff coming out of that guy's mouth are just ridiculous. Hell, he touts no rehearsals as a positive thing. And is anybody going to point out that when they shake and rotate the crap out of those handles (because, you know, we all operate that way), the lens is very obviously being influenced. You'd think they would scale back the arm-cycling a bit, at least for demo purposes.

And he admits that you need two Ops for complex stuff. That means pretty much all the time on a real set. I still think it's a good idea and it's a cool "invention" but it's (as other Ops have said of other game-changers) another invention looking for a shot.

20 rigs, yes TWENTY different rigs and not a single one is upgradable. You buy a tiffen product and you are locked into that sled. Want to upgrade you have to sell it.

 

Why is that? it's the Tiffen business plan, build a closed system, teach your features, advertise on your website that ONLY your gear is the real thing and that everything else is a "Counterfit" product (Steadicam homepage right side of the screen, look for yourself), sit back and Profit!

 

Not only is a non modular closed system next to impossible to upgrade but it's also almost impossible to field repair. Tiffen suggests sending your G-Series arm back to the factory for service one a year. Why? My 14 year old Pro arm has been servied exactly ONCE and that was more of a "Wow this arm is old I've never had it looked at" type of thing. What happens if you are on a distant location and you crash? You are FEDEX away from being whole again with a modular system, with the Tiffen you are at the mercy of the factory and you better hope that they are not taking inventory... Better yet if you are in a city with another guy that owns a PRO sled (Gen 2+) you are in business because you can swap on his parts to make you work again.

 

Here's an interesting thought two friends could form a equipment partnership and buy 1 solid center post and 1 telescopic, one Gen 4 base and one Gen 3m one DB 2 and one DB 3 split the cost down the middle and then swap out gear as need for jobs.

 

With a modular type of system you tailor the rig to the job, with a Tiffen system you buy 20 sleds........

Very solid observations. Also, with a PRO system, you could do like I did a few days ago and eat sh*t in the middle of a busy intersection, get up, straighten all of the off-axis bits, and continue to shoot the day out. At anytime I could have called 4 or 5 other Ops with PRO gear and all I'd need is a 5/32's t-handle and some PRO-provided wrenches and I'd have been as good as new.

Oh, and if it hadn't been for NAB (fist shake) I could have had a PA take it up to the shop at lunch and had replacement parts that afternoon. Does not get any better than that.

That's a really cool setup; I could've def put it to good use a few years ago!

If you pay attention to what is said in the commentary on the 2 Fast 2 Furious clip, you will hear him say that he was in low mode and just walked up a ramp to bring the rig up. He wasn't using gyros on that shot. He said he was using gyros in the wind.

Any links to said commentary?

Don't know how I missed this post, Brad. I'll respond in a PM!

No one idea is stupid -depends on the application. On Robocop we had a custom remote head on a steadicam. To assist in fighting the inertia produced by the head we had a special gimbal designed with built in brake for the pan axis.

 

However, in this instance (kickstarter) it is silly.

I heard about this setup; can't wait to see BTS of it!

I'll take it!

Brad, any pics of said plug? I have a tilt-stage that I use rarely and the extra height was a bit rough. Thanks!

Looking for 2 Kenyon Lab KS6's, w/ inverters. Thanks much!

*2*

Here's how to custom fit any toe-pocket (most common is the second one to accommodate those w/ Morton's Toe) on your Vibram Five Fingers:

http://birthdayshoes.com/got-morton-s-toe-lengthen-your-vibram-five-fingers-second-toe-with-this-mod

BOLT.

Amazing subject, Kenny. Good on ya.

Downton. Downton Abbey. Downtown Abbey is a girl you don't take home to mother.

WOW!!!

I do the food banks on Sundays if I'm not on set and also volunteer at a non-profit a few times a week for a few hours.