RobVanGelder

I have this EFP training video in my home (Amsterdam) and I tried to convert it to something I could burn on a disc but sofar no success. It´s a NTSC tape and though I can play it on a multistandard player to Pal, it is a pain when put into a computer; the sync is going all over the place. Besides that, I have to keep you waiting: I am not in Amsterdam for hopefully a long time! Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

Hello Erwin, do you have an focus puller next to you?. If so, you should, in my opinion, make VERY clear that HE is the one responsible and you will kick his butt when he forgets. Also, there is no excuse for not watching at the tally lights immedately after turning over. I have even made it a habit to look into the viewfinder monitor before turning over, as I discovered that it was very easy to overlook certain switches that might have been flipped when the grip walks the rig back to the first position (example). Suddenly you end up with +18DB or such. And a few extra seconds of videotape doesn´t count. It´s the same as working with celluloid, the operator is only turning over when that is agreed in certain situations, like filming babies or animals. When you want to be responsible for turning over you might end up wih more discussions than you wished. Of course, in a one-man situation it´s all up to you. Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

Hi Paul, That´s funny, I could not sleep so I sat down and did a similar thing , trying to prove why I think it does make a difference, I try to post it here and I will email it to you. Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

Hi Mitch, This is where I disagree with you and with the theory of Jerry. But at the same time you have made it clear that it is possible to see the whole construction outside the body, be it front, back, side or wherever, can be seen as a load in one point. e.g. center of gravity.Our system works because of our body, one piece of mass with it´s own center of gravity, which is exactly between our feet, underneath our spine is in balance with the other one, the rig+ parts. Now, placing the point of attack in line with your spine, looking from the front or behind, does make a difference than placing the same weight on one side and from that point on divert it into the harnass, thus creating a sideways lever on the spine and hips. Again, my comparison with the fire truck stands and you have to find me a good example to make me understand otherwise. Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Bangkok

After 20 days on the forum still no answer from anybody..... Is it out there, working in the field? Kelly, I heard you tried one, do you have an opinion? I mean, the pictures look good, many configs, but does one need it, or really use it during shooting?. What about altering some things, how quick do you find dynamic balance again? Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

What I am doing in Thailand? , At the moment not much, except going to the Bangkok Film festival. I want to experience the asian film-style. As you might know I have done a big feature last year in Cambodia and Thailand and it has really made me rethink what and where I want to be. So I will this area in the next year. My equipment is already here and I want to explore more of this continent. Basically I will travel wherever there is work, and that is - at the moment - in short supply inHolland and Europe! Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

Well.... I just saw some interviews of the things behind the scenes from Vidocq and there was a lot of detailed info of how they did certain digital effects. It´s not that one could do that on his PC or Mac, but it showed a lot of interesting things. But it was also highly technical so I doubt if the average viewer is so interested. Apart from that there is some, if not all AMAZING steadicam work from an Italian guy, whose name I forgot now but I will get back to that. Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

Sorry Jerry, for misspelling your name several times. Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

At my last HD panavised movie we always had every motor attached and when a zoom was needed we would always give the microforce in the hands of a second AC. Or to the director sometimes, that made it even harder. Generally, I didn´t feel happy with a zoom attached, it messed up the timing and my placement within the shot. sometimes it´s hard to distinguish between your body moving and the zoom, looking at the monitor. The slider is not really a good thing for the zoom, I found. On my set it is still OK, but at this feature we had 5 of them from a rental company (with 6 camera´s) and most sliders didn´t work smoothly. Not enough or too much friction. Ro van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

At the last Workshop I attended last year in Stockholm, led by Jerry Holway, who I greatly respect for his work and search for a better system, I was working met my own DSD harnass. Of course, being a Tiffen workshop, Larry demonstrated the "new" Ultra harnass, which is basically an improved and more rigid IIIa vest, with new technology like ratchet buckles and such. The main improvement to the vest was according to Larry that the chestplate was made bigger and the connections to the shoulderparts were rigid. Also, he had put some extra straps on the waist-parts, to prevent them from sliding down during the work. There were some more minor changes that he made himself, as almost every operator will try to improve and fit his or her system to the body. Larry and I had an interesting conversation about the use and reason for having an arm like the DSD has. He argued that weight doesn´t know how long the distance between the weight and the point of attack on the body is. Therefore, to have a very expensive carbon-fibre arm like that, was not needed. According to his theory we could mount the socketblock straight to the side of the Harnass, as this harnass is so rigid. At that time I couldn´t come up with a proper explanation against it, his point of view seemed acceptable, but it kept lingering in my head. Now I know that it isn´t like that at all. Shifting the point of attack on the body is essential for the distribution of all the forces. To demonstrate it I was constantly trying to find an example of something everybody will understand and I think I found one. Imagine a Firebrigade rescue-ladder-truck (is that the right word?), the one that helps people from high buildings When it comes to the rescue, the driver wants to park it in such a way that it will not tip over when extended. That means he prefers to put the front of the car underneath the working area of the ladder. This way, the whole mass and the distance from the base of the ladder to the front wheels will act as a counterweight and arm. Now, imagine that you could shift the ladder-base sideways . It would immeadiately mean that you need support-legs that would reach out even further to the side. without it, it won´t tip over forward (the frontwheels still prevent that), but sideways for sure! Now here is the big difference with the human body: we don´t have support-legs, which means we have to compensate that with bending our spine/hips to the opposite side(=leaning), or put enormous pressure on one foot (and hip), if possible. Oh, regarding the Fire driver, I am aware that he always has to put out all the support legs, so his working area is everywhere. Safety procedure of course, I am only showing the theory here. So why does the DSD harnass feel totally different than the frontmounted one? I have made 2 sets of pictures with both harnasses and drawn some lines that will show the direction of the forces and were the counterweight and arms are. I´m sure somebody with more theoretical knowledge will find some flaws in it, please correct me where I went wrong. For sure it makes it clear why we experience less resistance or weight-change when moving the camera forward with DSD. It also shows that with a FM harnass, the downward force from the point of attack is between the feet, under the body, while with a BM the same force is behind the feet and behind the body. This means that you will tip over more easily with a FM than with a BM. You have a smaller "foot-print" with a FM! Harnasscompare IIIa+ forces AND THIS ALSO EXPLAINS WHY YOU CAN RUN FASTER WITH A FM!!! With a BM, you will have to overcome 4 points of resistance (e.g. the wheels of the firetruck), : heel-toe-heel-toe, over a certain distance. While with the FM you have: toe-heel-toe (3 points) and at a shorter distance. I hope my explanation is clear but please add to this discussion if you want. Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

Mathias, I tried the server, it worked one time but after that I cannot find or go back to that picture. Also, my Spanish is non existent so that doesn´t help either. Maybe it needs some more explanation? Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

Brian used his own made gear, and from the pictures you can see that he could not really use the monitor a a viewing and operating device, it was more point and shoot and try to stay op on your feet, I guess. It must have been heavy! Rob van Gelder, amsterdam, Holland

it was Brian Goff from Switserland that did this, he was imitating the flight of a bee and it was a commercial for polaroid. It was a rig with a timeslice cameraset and a small 16mm (?) camera. Look at his site. www.actionproducts.ch and you will find the clip and the making of. Very interesting. Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

I have a DSD-vest 079 and I am VERY happy with it. I find myself in much more control of the rig, also on higher speeds. I have done some flat out running with it and find it as ugly as with a normal harnass, but more because of the constant feeling of doom, as I know and have one time experienced that on high speed you only need one pebble or an angled street brick to launch the whole lot. Don´t say that you need a spotter for that, a spotter will not be able to help you anyway on highspeed. As for the DSD, I think it is a real improvement to the "old" style. But for sure, not everybody will get used to it. I did, in a few minutes already. My shots have been improved, more stable when needed, less rolling and swaying and breathing in shot, Easier moves, even if it means you have to stick out the arm more than you would do or could do with a frontmounted vest. Low mode is definately much healthier with BM and at the end of the day I can say I feel tired, but not sore, as I used to feel before. And it is much more comfortable as I don´t sweat as much anymore. Bad things: I´m still scraping some paint sometimes with the knob on the backside. It´s heavier, but that´s mainly a transport problem, I don´t feel it while wearing it. It´s expensive, but the craftmanship is worth it and if you can extend your working life another 6 to 10 years, it is relativily a low investment. Oh, I found another good thing, it easily transforms into a great Hard Mount. Now I have a hard mount that can accomodate a normal Mk3 frontplate (still got the vest, for jungle places) and on the other side a DSD arm. I will post pictures later. Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

Yes, I was looking for a way to keep the center of gravity as fixed as possible, but that would mean that the whole tilting part has to slide back and lower down as it is tilted, but that would make the whole construction much more complex and wider too. That´s why I went for a hinge system as close as possible to the center of the post so that it would not raise the camera too much. The main improvement upon the system that for instance Bearbel makes, is that it tilts the whole top stage, with FF-receiver and it cannot interfere with bars and mattebox from the camera. I might scrape some more metal off but I´m a bit afraid for the stability. At the moment, it is rock-solid and NO-TOOLS! Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

The rates that Richard mentioned are applicable to mor counties I think. Although they tend to go down when more operators are available in a country. In Holland, the "official" rate, quoted by a rental company that has a Pro-system is around ? 1.100 including operating for 8 hours and follow focus+video transmitter. This price has not changed in 4 or 5 years and I also try to hold this as a standard. But for television I have once lost a job where the director specifically asked for me but as the production company had a deal with one of the major ENG suppliers and they could get a cameraman "that could handle Steadicam" for NO extra cost! So it´s hard to make a real balanced rate card here. Also, there are more lower level stabilisers around now and most of the time the production doesn´t give a #$#$&% what you are using, as long as it is the cheapest. :angry: Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland

I got a bit jalous about those high tech tilt plates from the big companies but I had some aluminium left over..... (and some time!) Works as expected, not as sophisticated as Tiffen´s plate, it´s not keeping the center of mass of the camera on the same place, but it´s way better than nothing! Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SQAAANMWb2I.../tiltplate1.jpg http://groups.msn.com/_Secure/0SQAAALQWzVk.../Tiltplate2.jpg

Still in working condition, but needs updating/cleaning: Mark3 electronic base + monitor, with 3 custom made batteries (lead 14 volts) and internally wired for a 12 to 24 volts converter, also supplied. ? 800 + shipping Rob van Gelder, Amsterdam, Holland .