William Demeritt

Shots fired, repeat, shots fired.

After several years of expos and conventions, I feel like we've seen very few breakthroughs or major changes in our world of Steadicam operation. Monitors are getting brighter and lighter (and cheaper), the accessories are becoming varied, but the core components always seem to stay the same. I'm not sure if people are willing to throw their ideas, their wishes or their dream piece of gear out into the ether where any manufacturer monitoring this forum could snag it and take the credit... but perhaps some people are? So, the question is: What piece of gear do you think someone should be making? What accessory is missing from your kit? What problem do you currently have on set that needs a solution?

What have you encountered?

Ozzie: doing a quick search, the Ultra2 has a different pinout on the 8-pin LEMO for monitor than the PRO. I think it's safe to assume the pinout diagram for the 8-pin LEMO on the Shadow V would likewise match the other Tiffen sleds? Ultra 2 MON LEMO 1: Pwr Gnd 2: +12v Battery 3: Video 4: Video Gnd 5: RX-Data 6: Tally 7: +24v Battery 8: TX-data GPI PRO CineLive MON LEMO 1: Pwr Gnd 2: 12 VDC 3: VIDEO 4: VIDEO GND 5: <<DEAD>> 6: <<DEAD>> 7: Tally 8: Tally Gnd To me, this sounds like something finicky with the HD6. It has the same pin diagram as the HD8, and with John's LEMO, it should power up. I don't know much about the CineMonitor HD6, but I ask: does it need to be set to know to accept power over the accessory port? Might there be some issue with your HD6? It seems to be the most temperamental of the bunch. Perhaps a good test (if you can still find John) is put your monitor on his sled with his cable and power the HD6 thru the 4-pin XLR power, and if it powers on, test the tally. That would isolate some sort of power irregularity? Your 8-pin LEMO works on John's Shadow because the 12v power and PWR GND match the GPI PRO. Powers the monitor, but the tally doesn't match. The Shadow's MON LEMO is tally on pin 6 (not sure which is ground???), but GPI PRO is tally on pin 7 and ground on 8. His monitor on your sled with your cable works because: CineMonitor HD8 MON LEMO 1: GND 2: 10-36V PWR 3: Y/CVBS 2 4: GND VIDEO 5: Pr 6: Pb 7: Run 8: Gnd Run Your cable was made for a GPI PRO sled where all that really matters are 1/2/7/8, or 1+2 = power, and 7+8 = tally. The HD8 is set up exactly that way, so it works. So, moral of the story: his HD8 with your cable on your sled works, but your HD6 with the same pin diagram doesn't. Cable works as it should, sled seems to work as it should with another monitor. To me, that points to the HD6 as a culprit. Did you mean it was "not working over there" in that the tally and all wasn't working, or the monitor itself wasn't working? Perhaps a Transvideo guru can chime in with what might be happening here? I thought John's HD8 worked on your CineLive with your 8-pin LEMO?

You know what they say: never judge a shoot by it's call sheet.

You know what they say: a film in the hand is worth two in the bond holding company.

You know what they say: make hay while you wait for criminal prosecutions.

This photo is so 90's, my phantom pager just went off.

Somedays, I wish I did! :D :wacko: I took your comments entirely as such. I just wanted to give some descriptive feedback (albeit possibly sesquipedalian). I didn't want to come off as "shooting the messenger", since I know you're on the forums and ENORMOUSLY supportive of our community. Not sure if those notes are useful to you or others at Anton Bauer, but just wanted to put it out there. B)

Probably works with strictly analog signals, and I'm guessing locked into a small range of channels (set by a dial somewhere on the chassis)? You can probably find an old Sony TU-1041U VHF receiver on eBay for fairly cheap (<$50), and a Sharkfin antenna will probably be the most costly piece depending on availability and price. Even after all that, you still have an analog transmitter, susceptible to interference, snow, people clamoring "this looks soft" from video village, etc. Maybe just hang onto it until the need arises, then borrow the additional pieces to make it work? I'm betting it'll be a while before you need it.

I would say not supporting PsF leaves the CW-3 dead in the water (for me, anyway). We need a Swiss Army Knife of sorts when it comes to video transmission, and "most signals" doesn't cut it. :blink: Personally, I would be willing to overlook the lack of multi-cast if PsF made it into the CW-3 but kept the same price point.

Paul, As someone who helped me get my current Dionic HC's at CineGear a few years ago, let me just clarify (since that's my quote you copied :) ). I tend to determine my purchases, from top dollar items to small widgets and accessories, by what provides the most versatility for any possible situation. On top of that, I consider what makes the greatest ease of use. The stacking feature is appealing to me because I currently have 2 dual position chargers, which means I can place a max of 4 batteries on charge, and only 2 charging (assuming all 4 are in need of charge). When batteries are charged, I need to swap batteries (or be mindful of swapping batteries) on the charger. With the stackable option, I can keep my same 2 dual position chargers, and stack all 8 batteries. Granted, it still takes the same amount of time, but gone is the possibility of "Oh, this battery never got on charge". Likewise, when at home, I can have all my batteries charging at all times between gigs. Some Steadicam operators will probably make the argument: "Charging the batteries are the responsibility of your AC's, they should have been on their game. Routine for charging batteries shouldn't be on you, the operator." I agree, responsibilities are not in question here. I just don't want to encounter the situation where we're ever losing time on set juggling batteries because an AC forgot when I could have purchased something with multiple options, especially when they're using my kit (and I'm hoping the AC's encourage production to call me back). Likewise, the option to stack other "3 stud" batteries onto the PAGlink will be an interesting experiment. Do I expect to use the stacking feature on my sled while operating? Probably not (although stacking on a PL Micro Charger "wall charger" as a means to keep the sled up while docked is interesting). Is the option attractive? YES. The premium is considerable (about 63% more expensive), but I wonder if the price will drop in the coming months as the product goes thru the usual stages of product saturation. Also, they have a variety of accessories to use on the stackable position when a battery isn't there, such as the PAGlink "Power Hub" (adds 4 PTAP's plus a USB) or the PAGlink Battery Reader. Another feature I did like was reading battery capacity on the battery's LED screen. The AB "RealTime" screen is on a side of the battery I rarely see on my sled, so I can't really use it. I know the new Digital 90 has a percentage screen, but again it's on a "dumb" side of the battery. With regards to what you posted, I'm curious to know about the charge times with greater stacks, and we'll see how they do as they get into the market. Battery construction and holding up to field use are obvious considerations, but at this point, most batteries can withstand a single impact. More importantly, they never should have to withstand one. The safety circuits are probably a worthwhile consideration, and PAG can probably address it themselves? With regards to the Digital 90's, here are some other considerations that Steadicam operators and AC's at NAB who saw them brought up: No flat surfaces, not very velcro friendly for attaching accessories, etc (that's from the AC's). Size: Dionic HC's are 4.06 x 5.46 x 2.34 in (10.31 x 13.87 x 5.94 cm). Digital 90's are 2.70 x 6.50 x 4.40 in (6.86 x 16.51 x 11.18 cm). So they're more narrow, but they're over an inch wider and over 2 inches thicker. Total volume increase is from 51.872184 in^3 to 77.22 in^3. That's a 48.87% increase in total volume per battery. The PAGLink batteries are 5.23622in x 3.30709 in x 1.96 in, for total volume of 33.94 in^3. Weight: Dionic HC's are 1.8lbs, Digital 90's are 2.0lbs. True, we consider batteries as "functional weight", but adding more weight when you don't get greater wH out of them is a consideration. The PAGLink batteries are 1.6lbs. To be honest, I think these Anton Bauer Digital series will have an effect of pushing more people into considering generic batteries (Switronix, GlobalMediaPro, etc) for their raw power needs (cheap, higher watt-hour, etc), or enjoying the new discounts on the Dionic HC/HCX. For people looking to spend a bit more, you'll probably maintain a lot of Anton Bauer users, but the form factor of the Anton Bauer Digital series just changed things for people. Also, completely meaningless in the context of function, but aesthetically speaking... I personally think the Digital series are ugly and silly looking. I also appreciate that the Performance Dual/Quad chargers have the batteries positioned such that you can read the percentage, but it just seems enormous, bulky, heavy and again (sorry) ugly.

I'm betting someone can come up with a clever design for the "tab" surface of those PAG batteries to attach and create a flat surface appropriate for resting on surfaces without enhanced fear of leaving a mark?

That's a bummer.

I've got it. Great in the sun. Horizon indicator is a bit problematic, and not motion compensated so it freaks out during lateral moves or whip pans.

Here's what I was excited by at NAB: https://www.paguk.com/landing/PAGlink So long, Anton Bauer (I guess?)

Impressions of Day 1: BlackMagic has a cheap camera, the buzz is decidedly AGAINST it primarily based on how much everyone hates BlackMagic's support of their current cameras. Everyone seems very jazzed about the AJA camera, and rightly so: looks like an Alexa mated with a Phantom. Lots of connections, seems ergonomic, lots of flat spots for mounting accessories and velcro, etc. An AC friend of mine gave it the highest accolade any AC will give a camera: "I don't hate it." PAG now makes 3-stud "gold mount" batteries that seem to work with Anton Bauer gold mounts, and they stack, so you can have 5 batteries stacked high, and they'll charge (and discharge) in order of outermost battery. I was inordinately excited by that. The guy doing interviews at the Teradek booth didn't know Garrett Brown invented the Steadicam, introduced him first as "Gary". Chris Fawcett made Lynn Nicholson's auto-leveling platform, it looks awesome, seems to work beautifully. The number of Movi knockoffs was double digits.

Didn't the advent of the 200º shutter come with the "bowtie" style mirror that offered more exposure (something the film stocks desperately needed/wanted)? I believe the reflex system was actually two 80º mirrors. The film itself still moved through the gate at 24 frames per second, but the exposure time changed from 1/48 of a second to 1/43 of a second (a change of 23/10000 of a second), and the pulldown claw moved the exposed frame out and set the next position for the registration pin in less time. Rather than taking 1/48 of a second to move and set, it should take place in 1/53 of a second. So, if the spinning mirror went from 180º to 200º, the movement would compensate for the longer exposure (or else each frame would smear for 23/10000 of a second, and leave a gnarly ghost)? And if it was <180º, then the spinning mirror would simply spin faster, limiting exposure time of the individual frame but keeping the frames progressing thru the gate at 24fps. I would imagine that projection would take place as normal, since despite all the exposure trickery of the mirror and movement, the film was still shot at 24 frames per second. If the film is projected at 24 frames per second, all the extra effort should be seemless to the audience and enjoyed by a DP getting 11.05769% extra exposure out of his stock. Anyway, all conjecture. I interned at Panavision Florida a while back, and remember learning about that stuff. I think all the Panaflex cameras could do 200º shutters either by turning a little wheel to the position of the angle you wanted. sup?

Rob, we're gonna raid the minibar in your room and bail shortly thereafter. NEVER TAKE US ALIVE, VUONA! NYA!

Wow, that's a great price for the range and attached antennas. Seems like the tradeoff between this and the new Teradek systems are the LCD display, which is a fantastic option. Still, at this price, kinda unbeatable, especially if you don't plan to take advantage of the multicast options (this device seems to advertise explicitly 1:1).

These look pretty awesome: http://ikancorp.com/productdetail.php?id=579

FINALLY!!!!!!!!!!!!!! Looking forward to seeing the price for the 600.

I wasn't contacted. I feel really sad now. However, I really want to go on record (again?) by saying this: it's a forum of professionals, but it's also Steadicam nerds. Seriously, we're all nerds for this goofy little device and all the doodads that make the dynamite go boom. Nerds have opinions. They have good opinions and bad opinions. They have knee jerk opinions, and well thought out opinions. We react to vaporware, and we praise the legit stuff. That sort of dynamic is a GREAT thing ESPECIALLY on a web forum, because it means I can make purchasing decisions with a grain of salt, or I can heed great advice or disregard as appropriate. When I'm considering new gear, I don't round up how many people say "OH, YES, THIS LOOKS AWESOME!" I look for the people who have critical analysis of the gear and determine if that analysis has value. Sometimes, they do, and sometimes they don't! But I'd rather sift thru the information and decide for myself. So please, let's not sanitize this forum of all it's critical value simply because we're doing what we do: talk nerd.

I'll give you 2,800 pesos.

I may just ask people at every booth where their 3D cameras and technology is.