AndreasKielb

Two weeks ago we did first tests with the Porta Head 5 brushless gimbal combined with steadicam and a custom bracket like Larry McConkey built. The bracket allows to move the camera during the take from ground level to over head height by rolling over the gimbal by 180 degrees. The first system was custom built for Lorenzo Senatore. I visited him during the prep week for a new feature in Bucharest to deliver the system and give an introduction to the setup. He won't need the rollover function for this movie actually but we wanted to make sure that the basic idea works with his new Porta Head. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=DnH0bVWLf6M Best regards, Andreas Kielb http://www.portahead.de

There is a detailed report about how this disastrous situation came up: http://variety.com/2014/film/news/investigator-midnight-rider-crew-wasnt-supposed-to-be-on-tracks-1201115835/ Seems like different people from production, heads of department but also from the railroad company tragically underestimated the danger that there might be an unexpected train.

Last week I used our new Porta Head 5 system for the first time with the cablecam and the brushless gimbal brought another improvement into the stabilization together with the kenyon gyro I used before. I edited some footage and making-of-material from the shooting with the cablecam. The camera used was a Canon 5D Mark 3 in RAW modus. Focal length mainly used was 50 mm, some shots used 35 mm and up to 85 mm. Best regards, Andreas Kielb www.portahead.de

Very interesting discussion and the section of a roll cage idea is exactly what I think about since a few weeks for using a camera like the Alexa on a Steadicam sled together with a brushless system. Actually it's going to be a 2 axis system for roll and tilt mounted to the topstage. Instead of the smaller tilt motors in the picture I plan to use two motors of the 5-kg-class per axis. The 2 motors for roll are going to be centered behind the camera and the front with the tilt motors will be supported by the 180 degrees cfk-arc as you can see in the picture: A third axis for pan might be an option to extend the system to be used as a small stabilized head for crane or car-to-car shots. The two axis system alone will probably have a weight of 3 kg which still makes it a good addon for a common steadicam. With the third axis motor I've tested the whole system would be heavier and exceed what can be classified as portable device. I also plan to offer a bracket to put my "Movi-style" three axis Portaheads 2 and 5 overslung on a steadicam sled (connected to the dovetail: http://www.steadicamforum.com/index.php?showtopic=17972&p=92441 ). It will be possible to change between the steadicam bracked and the handles within a few minutes so this is going to be the most versatile solution. To switch between underslung and overslung mode there will be preconfigured user profiles selectable with a menü button. Last but not least there will be a version of the Porta Head 5 as two axis system only which will allow to roll 360 degrees from low to high mode on the steadicam sled (with stabilized roll and tilt and also a rotating monitor). ... still a lot of work to do ;). Off course all of this might be only necessary for really really difficult steadicam shots like i pointed out before. On the other hand I see the steadicam as a great device to improve the limitations of brushless stabilizers. Best regards, Andreas http://www.portahead.de

I like the MK-V Fusion design as much as I like Russian Arms or Cineflex-Systems. But I also like if a nice gadged is within my range of building. That's how I made my steadicam and also my cablecam system. None of that is new or havn't been there before but it's still nice to build and use these things.

Just to add some fuel to the fire, look what I found on youtube: I know this design is under patent and I'm not saying that I like this way of copying or the inconsistent headroom due to the small inertia on the camera length side. What I have in mind is a 3 or 2 axis setup for very precise tracking shots.

Hi, the steadicam operator should not tilt the sled up, at least it's not necessary with the remote controlled gimbal on board. If he tilts a little by accident it would not harm but not 90 degrees or something as this would change the sensor orientation. He is still responsible to place the camera in space, start or stop the movement with the action or to compose the backround lights nicely etc. If he pans the sled this will not have an effect on the speed of the remote pan as the brushless motors and the sensor will react fast enough to compensate for that. Also it'll not be necessary to do all shots with the brushless gimbal / steadicam combo. I can imagine it might be helpfull to have both tools available and operated by the same guy. What I have in mind is a setup were you can change quickly between the handles or the steadicam bracket. This way you can change between the handle mode and do those cool roller skate movements and 5 minutes later you can have the setup ready for a precise tracking shot on the steadicam. You don't need to rebalance the whole thing for the change between overslung and underslung mode. Also I plan to have the pan motor disconnectible with a lemo plug and that the pan axis can be fixed with a bracket to allow for whip pans as Shawn pointed out. Alien revolution style moves will not be possible with the pan motor enabled because this would change the sensor orientation. But I plan to introduce a 2 axis system with tilt and a 360 degree roll axis for lighter cameras in the next year. The stabilized tilt axis will help to provide a constant headroom as it does not rely on the small inertia of the camera length side if the sled is horizontal. I also found the post on the freefly forum and some people answered that the movement of the brushless gimbal will change it's CG but that's not the case. 3 axis brushless gimbals need to be in balance in all axis to work properly so the CG will not change on the steadicam sled. But I didn't really notice a fight or something going on there.

Actually I had to do a shot of that kind once with the steadicam and the alexa. There was a dirt track nearby and I suggested to move there as the ground wasn't in the frame. Frame size was a semi close up. At first they insisted on doing the shot directly in the brush-wood with a lot of obstacles and roots. Needless to say I could only run very carefully in a kind of superslowmotion. Headroom went all over the place, regardless, as I was only able to check the monitor every few seconds and for a very short moment. I did wear my kneepads and briefed the grip running with me that I will dump down on my knees in case I stumble. I told him that he'll have no chance to stop the stumbeling itself but that he needs to hold my upper body straight when I'm on my knees to avoid that the rig crashes to the ground. I did that briefing with the grip while we were standing near to the director so that he eventually will realize how dangerous the situation was, but without success. I had to do the shot in the brush-wood like 8 or 9 takes in slow motion. Of course I was carefull but it was very dangerous, regardless. After they were kind of satisfied with the result (... don't really know how as the story was that the character runs to save the life of his new love) I suggested to finally move to the dirt track and try if I can run faster there (...of course I could). We did two more takes and they were way better and with a speed corresponding to the story. In the end they were really satisfied with the result saying "Andreas... that's exactly what we need". Well, yes... at least I was happy to surrived that day without an accident or getting fired.

I'll try my portahead system overslung on the steadicam sled soon. Also I was about to order a gore-link until I saw the picture of how low the camera will hang underslung from the wire. That's why I see a benefit in putting the rig on the sled itself in overslung mode. You will need a monitor and batteries for the rig anyway and the steadicam sled can provide both of course. The extra weight of the sled itself is not that much if you use the brushless system with an Epic size camera. Just a light weight for a steadicam. What you gain is to get rid of the foodsteps and have the camera at eye level or at the usual steadicam heights at least (also in low mode and underslung). I'm not sure how and if the overslung mode will be possible with the movi as I don't know about the software and sensor orientation but it is possible with the alexmos boards. I'ld say if it makes sense or not to put the rig on the steadicam sled depends on the shot. Imagine a steadicam shot that starts quite close on an actor and then pulls out slowly to a very wide shot of the whole plaza to visualize the sudden loneliness of the character, maybe even down some stairs, music, end titles etc. As the actor isn't moving at all every little pan and horizon error will clearly sidetrack from the narrative intention of the scene. Very difficult for many operators at least. Also imagine a shot running at full speed through the woods in Don Juan. With a brushless gimbal on the rig you can fully concentrate on your path as the remote operator will take care of the framing. I'll also provide analog joysticks with the portahead for single operator mode. There are 3 differnet preset profiles possible with the alexmos software and I thought to use them in this way: Preset 1: two operator mode with wireless RC control Preset 2: single operator mode with analog joysticks at the handles Preset 3: wireless RC control mode but with reversed motor directions for overslung mode with the pan motor below the camera I'll also provide instruction videos on how to change the settings in the software directly so that more options are possible than those presets.

Great video! In the meantime I made a short video with footage from first tests and projects with the Porta Head 2 and 5 prototypes. The footage is not stabilized in post to show the actual results of the gimbal. More footage will follow soon and also a test with the gimbal combined with the steadicam. Best regards Andreas

Looks like you gonna be alright with renting it from Freefly. Just to keep it at the back of your mind we are also nearly ready for market with a brushless stabilizer for the Epic and enventually Alexa M and might provide a rig in September via my partners agency in the USA ( http://www.flightcopter.com ). Best regards, Andreas http://www.portahead.de

I think the 3rd axis may be the issue when going overslung, these motors don`t have that much power since they are gearless - just guessing, but that`s probably something Andreas may be able to answer. I think it is possible to go overslung but with my current setup I'll have to turn the pan sensor as well. Will try it over the weekend. I already hold the head overslung today without switching the motors on. It feels alright and it doesn't have a tendency to tip over if the rig is balanced.

We plan to offer the Porta Head 2 for cameras up to 2 kg at about 3.000 Euro and the bigger version shown in the last video for 7.000 Euro. This one is called the Porta Head 5 as it carries around 5 kg, like a Red Epic with a lightweight Remote Focus. We'll make a real demo video, also with longer lenses, as soon we got enough material and will keep you updated here or on http://www.portahead.de

Hello, we plan to offer our brushless stabilizers soon. There will be a version for cameras around 2 kg, one for cameras up to 5 kg, like the Red Epic and we also build a stabilized head for cameras up to 10 kg, to be used on a steadicam arm or easyrig. The mid sized version is the most advanced in the moment. This is a test with 5 kg weight including camera and brass weights: We have first prototypes to test and improve step by step and plan to add small joysticks to the handles for better control of pan and tilt in single operator mode. For more information, updates and new videos you might visit our website http://www.portahead.de. Andreas Kielb

Thanks, now I found it on http://www.gpiprosystems.com under "geeky stuff". Lemo 1S.303 1. 24vdc 2. Gnd 3. 12vdc

Is the Lemo FFA.1S.303 also the connector type for power output of Pro Gpi compatible systems? What is the pinout for Pro power cables? Thanks, Andreas

I just heard, that the MoVi can't look down over 20 degrees without problems at the moment, though that may be just rumors. However, a well programmed IMU should be able to look straight down: :

Looking like a suitable device! http://www.walterklassen.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/10/DSC01263.jpg

In the meantime I almost finished my stabilized remote head and made first tests. Now I need to add the third axis and a second bearing support and do some work on the steadicam jib arm. The third axis is going to use a gear motor until the 3 axis open source controller for brushless motors is available. Will post some raw material when I'm ready.

I think both versions of operating (one or two man) might be usefull and possible without extra costs on a feature set. On all of my previous cablecam jobs so far I asked the DP if he wants to do the remote control of the head while I was driving the cablecam trolly (also with a remote control). It worked out really well each time and since we talked about the shot before, there were no restrictions. I knew where the camera should be during the move and the DP didn't really have to do many corrections. Of course another alternative for the remote control is the camera operator but here in Germany the DP often operates himself. Running through the woods with a brushless gimbal or in tight corners I think it might be really usefull if you don't need to control the framing at the same time. I'll add joysticks to the handles of my brushless gimbal anyway and at least for television live jobs this would be the better option without the need for a second operator. I'm making good progress with building including steadicam jib and arm bracket and I think I can do a view more later on if somebody is interested.

Probably it'll be exactly like you said and relatively untrained people will be asked to carry the gimbal while a operator with more practice is doing the remote control. But I just thought that actually a steadicam operator would be the best "carrier" for the gimbal to get the best out of the device. We are trained in starting and stopping with the actors, booming up and down for headroom with our steadicam arms at the first step if an actor walks on stairs. Also if an actor is just coming closer like in the video https://vimeo.com/62917185 at 4:30 min. A trained steadicam operator would have boomed up naturally with his arm as the girl was coming closer and this way avoided the cut off of the head. No remote operator in the world has a chance to correct the framing that fast and even if he does, a detracting perspective change would be the result. Just that the horizon is kept automatically doesn't mean our other learned skills are useless.

Nice to see what is meant by the majestics mode. Good idea but probably it takes a lot practice to get the framing just quite OK. I think the normal shooting style will be two persons.

Another problem that speeks against a use as all day tool is rain. I just thought it will be very difficult to protect, much more difficult than wrapping our Steadicams. A normal shifting camera cover wouldn't be possible as the motors have that low holding torque. The camera has to be really in neutral balance in all axis or it doesn't work. Wrapping the camera in clear plastic foil will of course be possible but the motors need their free moving space and also get a little hot. If light or space doesn't allow for a large umbrella or "Easy up" carried with the camera a large plastic garbage bag around the whole thing including handles might be the best option, leaving just a window for the lens. But this will certainly restrict panning. When I'm ready with my system I will have to test if the the edges of that window can be loosly connected to the matte box or if that already affects balance.

I can't edit my last post but I was wrong about the resolution thing. At the lowest rate of 250 deg/sec the sensitivity of the gyro output gives a resolution of 0.005 degrees or something at 12 bit data calculation. The Cineflex works with 0.003 degrees resolution if I remember correctly. Denny Rowland somewhere made the full derivation but I can't find the link. Of course I don't know anything about which IMU the MöVI uses and how they do their calculations. I can only speak for the open source solutions I use.

This technology is indeed capable of beeing a small and affortable Gyro head solution with similar results as those Scorpio/Libra/Stab-C. Actually it's pretty much like a cineflex in performance. The IMU mostly used has a resolution of 250 deg/sec. At 12 bit processing this is 250 / 4096 = 0,06 deg/sec and pretty close to the cineflex. The motors greate a spinning magnetic field which is also very similar to the torque motors of the cineflex. The only problem is that the motors have very limited holding torque so it will be very difficult to create bigger heads with them holding a Alexa with Optimo Zoom and everything. A striped down Alexa or Red One might be possible, though. And of course Epic, Alexa M, Blackmagic etc. Car to car shots and shotmakers are of course possible with it as well (this was shot with a 2 axis system so jerks in the pan axis are not corrected in this video):