Jaron Berman

I bought my rig second hand from Robert Starling, and while on the whole it has treated me very well, there are 2 arm issues I can't seem to get past. First - from the day I got it, the outboard post (that goes into the gimbal handle) will not turn without a lot of stickiness. It moves smoothly and then hangs up, and then smoothly again. And no, it's not the thumb screw that varies the friction, because it still sticks when that screw is removed. Thoughts??? Also - anyone hear of Tiffen possibly offering other lengths of posts for the G-50? I'm a short guy, and it does get tiring to always have the arm up to get my lens height right (and also lose travel).... anyone? Ok, now the non-critical but still annoying problem - its completely rusted! I was working in New York from the time I bought the rig till I moved a couple days ago. I worked in many locations outside the state, but never in a salty environment, never near water or other corrosive chemical. Still - every external bolt on my arm is rusted and starting to show pitting. I called Steadicam, and the response was "oh, yeah...it's bare metal. we don't really coat those.." If it weren't leaving smears on everything, or starting to pit I would have less of a problem. But it's a $10,000 arm that's about 1 year old... anyone else think it should probably not rust under normal usage? Is there a reason (beyond cost) to use mild uncoated steel instead of another material or a treated material? I could understand if I had abused it or subject it to water or salt or both... but just from being in the air?

I agree. This past week, I finally got a chance to test it in "game conditions," and found it to be less than convenient, but not horrible. The people I shot for seemed to thrilled to have playback, they didn't mind the tiny screen. But I 100% agree that the manner of getting between playback and record (plugging or unplugging the av in cable) is a bit backwards. Unfortunately, my computer is REALLY showing its age, and I'm not even able to view my clips... but when I looked at them on a friend's comp, they looked quite good. considering the price), the only problem being slight moire. I was shooting video, so the DOF wasn't doing the codec any favors. I'd imagine that with any kind of selective focus it would be much better. I tried recording off a DVD and it looked fantastic. Its an interesting unit, and now that I've played with it a bit, I'm going to rip it open and see if I can upgrade the critical switches and come up with a simple solution to allow it to flip between modes. Should be a pretty easy fix, but I'll post photos and info if it works. If not....well

well, I can happily say that while the unit is about 2-3x as thick as an archos, the quality is as good, and this is SO much simpler to use. One button records, when hit again it stops and starts a new clip. I went into the file inspector, and checked the actual specs, because like most of these bizarre off brands, the manual says nothing about the av-in recording format. Sure enough, it's H.264 720x480 @ 30fps. I was pretty blown away, because for $169, it shouldn't be anywhere near this nice. And again, my favorite part - it uses a minijack to get AV in!!! It has an internal lithium battery, but takes a standard mini-usb power plug. I'll be on the lookout for cheap USB mini - lighter jack adapters to power it off the sled - should be no problem. Also, it can fast forward and rewind on recorded clips, and shows the live image on screen while recording. So, first impressions - sweet little toy.

Ran across this item, and it looked intruiging. It's a palm sized solid-state 720p camcorder that shoots to SD cards (up to 8gb). More interesting is that it can record 720x480 video using the h.264 codec. Also the interface cable is standard minijack split out to RCA's, and the charger is standard usb. Now, the interesting part is that with the AV-In cable attached, it automatically switches the camcorder off and enters record mode. One buton starts and stops - apparently creating new clips after each stop. It's $169. I ordered one to try it out and I'll get back with notes on quality and feasibility in terms of Steadicam usage. If the footage looks good, it should be pretty easy to find a cellphone 12v lighter plug to rip apart and make into a power adapter, and minijacks... Also, if it looks promising, I'll rip into it and see if I can find all the important pins, incl. run/stop. Well needless to say - if this works, it'll be a great and cheap recording tool. For $169 my hopes aren't too high, but who knows... Oh, and it's NTSC or PAL - switchable in menu.

That would be a better question for Chris, though as far as I know it was bone stock. The deck itself draws >8 amps continuous off of 12v!!!!! That's the main reason (from what I'm told) the Genesis is such a beast to power, and apparently this is worse. Luckily, if you need to fly it 1-piece, there are workarounds. Between a p-tap cable and a few rubberbands, you could make it work on a G-50....not the best setup though. 2-piece would certainly be more comfortable all day long, and give more options for accessories. If you do intend to do this combo often, it would be worth at least calling someone to see if you could modify your connectors to the larger lemos. Also, Chris came up with a pretty slick 3rd battery mount that goes on the lower gyro dovetail, and can feed either 12 or 24v power up the sled, to deal with high-draw cams on standard batteries. You have the C24 though, so you may be better off just getting a few powercubes. As for the weight difference between the Clipper and Archer, I'd be surprised if you could in fact fly more weight on an Archer. The majority of the weight of the clipper is already at the base, and it telescopes the weight further down than the archer (even modified), so it's basically a wash. More importantly though, with the standard modification people are doing to the Archer - hanging more weight off the inside of the rails, the moment on the rails is FAR greater than with the clipper, possibly allowing more flex and vibration. I can't confirm it, but I know that with 2 batts on the back of my Clipper, the rails are almost all the way in, and by basic physics there is a lot less leverage to flex them. Not saying it doesn't work on an Archer, just that in theory the clipper should be stiffer. for the same given weight capacity. Again though, this is stepping into the "it doesn't REALLY work" territory. Sure it can be done, but if I'm flying F23's daily in 1-piece mode, I'm going to upgrade everything to make it less stressful on my mind and rig.

I was at Panavision yesterday with Chris Konash trying out the F23 in one-piece mode. He weighed the setup - stripped camera, deck, digiprime (10mm), clip-on mattebox, rods plate (no rods) at 51lbs. On his clipper 2, with 2x dionics on a hotswap, and a little additional weight at the base, the sled was not terribly long, but the arm was definitely maxed. As a last resort, it could be flown on the G50, perhaps with a few rubberbands, butit's definitely above the limit even with no accessories. But, the bigger concern was that with the Clippers / Archer / etc... the lemo at the stage will likely be overdrawn by the current demands of the camera and deck combo. Chris suggested that to actually fly this setup, you would have to split the sides and power one item off a p-tap running to the sled base... just so you don't fry things. So basically, if you want to fly this camera one-piece on a Steadicam, you need a big arm. And large power connectors.

FYI Shure makes a helical antenna, 500-900mhz for $449. http://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/4215...al_Antenna.html

I honestly don't know what area to post this under, but Peter Abraham and I thought it may be nice for ops to know. I visited ProSound on 43rd in New York today to have a hrs4 to Bnc/power cable made and the grand total was.......$36! Very nice guys, and they did it in under 3 hours. For 6-pin or other non-audio hirose connectors they may have to order the parts, so add a day or two, but I was a bit shocked by the price to say the least. Certainly worth talking to them if you're looking for cables, they seem to be eager to do more steadicam business. www.pro-sound.com

Truthfully, amongst the 27 pages in this tread, there is a lot of good, first hand information regarding a LOT of topics. I admit, I initially had no interest in the system at all, and read for the entertainment value alone. Like Robert, I went back and did some research on a lot of the issues and technologies brought up, and out of curiosity, even learned a bit about patent law. Interesting stuff! Has this thread outlived its usefullness? Perhaps. I'll admit, I don't have hands-on experience with the Alien, AR, Revolution, etc... but even I could put together a pretty exhaustive and current list of the positives and negatives of the system simply from these pages. It's a discredit to those who HAVE shared their experiences to simply say "ok, NOW let's hear what people have to say." This fourm exists as exactly that - an open forum to share ideas and opinions, and there is no lack of either concerning this system. Sometimes we can use the forum to get quick answers or favors, and sometimes the information takes a bit more digging to come up with. But the fact remains that the forum is not, nor has anyone ever claimed it to be a replacement for personal opinion formation or further research. Face it, we spend too much money on very specialized products to simply rely on the opinions of faceless names online. By using our real names, we basically agree to a convention of shared knowledge. If after reading this thread, one seriously feels like AR will enhance his/her work, the $50,000+ invenstment may be worth a couple phone calls or detailed emails to current/former owners, and some hands-on time with the rig. One of the beautiful things about Steadicam is that every user approaches the whole gamut of steadicam-related issues differently. We don't all look at shots the same, we don't all operate the same. And therein lies the paradox of it all. Steadicam is still essentially (to quote Jerry) a Circus Act. Beyond an outside limited understanding of our craft, there is an inside lack of beta testing ability. There are simply too few potential users to make it economically feasible. So that means as users, we find all the bugs in the system. Some are certainly larger than others - I won't rehash, but there's a lot of info on those bugs concering the AR system here. Obviously, after spending that kinda scratch, one would certainly try to be positive about the system and live with a few.. but there are also opinions from users who pushed things and found glaring limitations. Basically, it's all here. We can't wholesale dismiss the forum as useless or ridiculous on account of personal attacks between members. It did its job allowing an open arena to share experience and character.

I just got off the phone with a company called FPDGROUP. They are a large manufacturer of military and OEM LCD panels, etc. One of their services is a transflexive modification to existing monitors. Basically, any monitor from 3" to 100" they can do the mod to. I found this place through a friend who had a cheap 7" panel done with their mod, and the result was incredible. SO, I'm the lab rat now. I have a Marshall V-R65p-HD monitor to send in and have the modification done. The monitor is just under $3000 at B&H and has component, composite, and HD/SD-SDI inputs (as well as 3 color tally). This particular monitor is interesting because of the size, inputs, and decent resolution (800x480)...but also because it has framing guides. They aren't true, adjustable framelines, but there are a number of options including 2.35:1. I believe this is the exact same monitor as the steadicam HD-Brite 7" HD-SDI. SO, the nitty gritty - the mod costs $195 per monitor when you get 10 monitors done at the same time. At first, they refused me when I asked for one. They apparently stopped doing single monitors for lack of profit - it's a cleanroom procedure. BUT, I managed to get the guy to agree for $950. So, all-told, it could be a daylight viewable hd-sdi/component hd/composite monitor for about $4000. Or it could be a total waste. If it works though, the price could easily be about $3000 flat if someone does a bulk buy. In the meantime, I'm hoping I didn't just throw away a grand... but I'll keep people posted.

Shameless plug, but I may have a Flyer that needs a new home. berman@trueentertainment.net

I have a wevi i'd be willing to part with. And yes, they claim it will be software upgradeable to HD-SDI. Lemme know, Jaron photo@jaronberman.com

Apologies, I definitely lead things off topic a ways. Open mouth, insert foot. I did fly the HVX recently with the Movietube, and have to admit that from an operating standpoint it's a bit easier than the mini35. The C.G. is quite a bit higher, and it feels heavier as well. I think the best thing about the Movietube + hvx is that it angles the camera up quite a bit, so the whole unit stays fairly compact in length. The times I've used the Mini35 it always seemed pretty long. Just my 2c.

A lot of people have been talking up the RED, but the fact of the matter is it's not real, not yet. It may or may not deliver what they say. Personally though, I'm sick of HD discussions ending with "yeah, but the RED blows all that away." Some day, it may... and it may even be soon. But as of now, it's a chip on a test bench, some ridiculous CNC millings, and a few thousand people who have formed a religion around the RUMORED specs of this thing. Those who think that a $17,500 camera body is the magic bullet that's going to make their projects leap from home video to the big screen... I'm sure that 35mm-like D.O.F. and 4K resolution are the only things stopping them. Don't get me wrong, I think it's a great idea to try and stir things up. I'm just curious how a company with no experience is going to do everything (chips, form factor, lenses, batteries, storage, mounting) better than all of the individual companies who have spent years and billions of dollars specializing in getting one or two things right. I'm sure Zeiss/Arri agree that sunglass lenses are in the same realm of complexity as master primes. It's obvious that cameras like the D20 or Genesis are so big and expensive because Arri and Panavision are simply not thinking outside the box. Lower-cost digital aquisition will be the reality, just not quite yet.

Lukas, you have some interesting points. But still, I don't think anyone's directly comparing DV to Digibeta, or an HVX-200 to an F950. What has happened is a pretty widespread acceptance of lower quality because of the consequent lower price. TV used to be dominated by Betacam and veteran ops. That was before reality. And unfortunately, low-end reality has sent a ripple of bad ideas upstream. Ideas like: underpaid, inexperienced crews, consumer gear, unsafe situations, and lackluster editing. But it's cheap and sadly, money talks. So a lot of the comparisons "as good as 35", "same codec as" and "looks close to as good as" are used VERY subjectively to try and justify the fact that a $5000 camera looks good enough. HD is a HUGE catchword right now. The HVX has a lot of clever features, and uses a proven codec, but like you mentioned, it lacks a true HD lens and chip. Still - noise, color response, latitude, and resolution actually do have a lot to do with the chip, and the HVX chip is more super-dv than mini-hd. About the only thing that the HVX and Varicam have in common is DVCPRO-HD... it's not just the lens. As for the HVX+mini35 as a great alternative to 35mm..... that's also pretty subjective. If you're referring to the D.O.F., then yes, it's a pretty good approximation. If you're talking about latitude or resolution - it's still an HVX, minus a bit of resolution at the adapter. Also, that setup is (rental-wise) close in price to a proper camera and lens. The HVX, as well as all the HDV cameras are definitely going to be more and more on our radar. And yes, eventually some sort of digital medium will replace film. But saying that film is dead because the HVX (with enough tricks) can get the same D.O.F as 35... well that's kinda crazy. It is a proof of concept that digital aquisition is getting better, but there's a LONG way to go at the bottom end. And as for the RED abortion, it doesn't exist.

cinematography.net has a pretty decent selection of film camera manuals, as well as larger video cam. manuals.

Cool, very good to know. Thanks for sharing your experience.

Wow, how simple and elegant. One quick suggestion: If you split the mount, and screw it to itself, it won't mar your rods. Obviously, you're not tightening the screws too hard, but for version 2.0... So, does anyone know exactly how much the gimbal can take? I've been asking around, and the Tiffen people are pretty tight lipped. Basically, with this mod, can the sled balance and handle the weight the G50 can?

I'll preface my opinions by saying this: I'm a newjack. My experience in the field is limited, though when I'm not shooting, I spend a few hours practicing each night on the line. At this point, through workshops, practice, asking all you guys (dumb) questions, and watching tons of footage, I'm starting to understand what makes good shots as well as solid operating. That said: I went to see Curse of the Golden Flower today. It was the first use of the AR system I've seen outside of the demos online. I read the american cinematographer article on that movie (after seeing it), which mentioned the specific challenges of shooting the steadicam scenes, and why they chose AR. Specifically, they said it was due to the confined sets full of horizon references, as well as the speed at which the op had to run. In their case, AR was used to ensure level horizons and square doorframes while running. The first thing I noticed was... that I noticed...every AR shot. It looked different,..pretty jerky but level. AR is a new technology, and from what everyone says, a totally different technique to operating. Steadicam wasn't an exact science in the beginning either, and like the early steadicam shots, the work on Curse had a young feel to it. I'm sure that as more people experiment with the rig, the competition and "time behind the wheel" will drive the skills. Still, besides the couple of obvious horizontal-mode shots, my feeling was that a good op on a standard rig could have done a cleaner job. Again, just my opinion. As a new op, its easy to be romanced by the latest and greatest technologies. When it comes down to it though, the basics are still the basics, and even when the rig can isolate one of the great challenges. There are still a lot of other fine points of technique regardless of the rig. Back to the line for me.

Definitely, the archer isn't a 24v rig. I actually posted this particular item because it was a voltage down-converter (like the xcs, etc). My suggestion was to run a 24v line straight from 2 batteries (in series) to the stage, and power everything else on the sled off the dc-dc at 14.4. At 100 watts, that converter (theoretically) gives 6.9 amps at 14.4v, which should power a pretty good amount of gear. I know a bunch of people have tried boosting 14.4 to 28.8, which sounds like a crap shoot to me. However, going the other way, with a dc-dc buck converter, and allowing the camera to run 24v off the batteries more or less directly, and powering the sled's stock wiring off the converter sounded less likely to cause problems. Either way, I have ruled out a 12v sled for myself, because in the end, it'll probably cost as much to install a power supply as to buy a rig with a pre-integrated system. But, for those people (who probably started this particular thread), I figured I'd share that finding. Maybe it'll help someone. I agree though, going 12-24 sounds like a bad idea, as the 24v load is likely to be pretty substantial.... far more than a typical (non-genesis) 14.4v load. Oh, and if anyone knows someone trying to offload a clipper 24 or similar rig (in U.S. dollars), I'm interested.

I've been doing all the financing math to try and get a new rig, and I'm stuck deciding whether to go with a 12v system and convert to 24, or just get the 24 off the bat. In my research, Instead of trying to go 12 - 24, I found a dc-dc buck converter that does the 24-12 thing, and gives 100 watts of power at 12-15v. It's adjustable, so you can set the output to 14.4v even as the batteries run down. With one of those hot-swaps run in series, and this dc-dc to run the 12v items, it appears to be a pretty viable 24v option. http://www.mouser.com/search/ProductDetail...ey618-VTD15SC24 It says there's a 15v output, but it's variable +- 10%. Input from 19-30v. Not the smallest box in the world, (3"x7.5"x1.8") but it does put out a lot of power. Who knows, this may be useful to someone.

5.8 ghz Wifi 802.1 a. it's about an inch and a half taller and about a half inch wider than a standard battery mounting plate. Definitely larger than a modulus by a lot. But it fits between the battery and the mount (v-mt), and draws power and passes power through.

Cool, thanks for the quick response. And Jim, as soon as the wallet allows, I will be turning over a couple paychecks to you. Appreciate the help guys

Yes, turns out that "person" was you. Thanks man, I like the idea of saving $1600 on the motor, at least for now. Besides the fact that it's "nicer," what advantages might there be to the M1 over the Stanton?? Thanks John!! p.s. hope Cali was good

So kinda on the same topic - has anyone used one of the Stanton right-angle motors for a focus motor with the bartech? Someone suggested it as a decent and inexpensive way to add focus for video applications. Any thoughts?