7d and skates..

[Sam Morgan Moore]

Hi

 

watch

(it gets going at 45 seconds)

 

NOT shot by me

 

As a newb operator and also a user of DSLRs I wonder what you big rig operators think ?

 

Im particularly interested in if this sort of stuff can be done with a big rig or if mastering super light (1.5lb camera only) can bring a new dimension to the art

 

It seems most here putting DSLRs on regular rigs and adding some mass but this is a different approach no?

 

he is using a sub $1000 glidecam

 

S

Edited January 9, 2010 by Sam Morgan Moore

[Charles Papert]

That is some extremely cool shooting.

 

I think there will continue to be opportunities to make great shots like these from this point on, as high resolution cameras will continue to shrink. I think that the future for this kind of extreme shooting will probably be with lighter cameras than DSLR's, probably with less than full-frame size sensors. Depth of field issues make pulling focus complicated for uber-light setups, so its all about getting the desired wide angle lens and going with it. I'm imagining it won't be long before Canon puts 1080 24p into their mid-range cameras like Powershots, and I'm sure other manufacturers will follow suit, so very light handheld rigs will become the rage for this sort of thing (maybe even the new Smoothie).

 

My approach is not to tack on 20 lbs of steel, but just adding the necessary components to make the Canon DSLR's work in a "pro" configuration with lens control and outboard wireless monitoring results in a package around 12 lbs, which works nicely on a "medium-little" rig like a Flyer. If I truly needed to achieve the kind of super-subtlety that a more mass and inertia requires, I'd add the dead weight for that, but I'm really enjoying the experience of working with a light rig, as well as having far less gear to shlep to a gig!

[Sam Morgan Moore]

That is some extremely cool shooting.

 

CP I love the way you seem to be moving with the times

 

would people even attempt such shots with a bigger rig ?

 

On the FF thing : I think we can be only months from the cameras being controlable (using canon lenses which have their own motors) by some cheap simple wireless device - this is one reason Im not ponying up for a RemoteFF yet, it could end up as a nice doorstop

 

With a compact like a G10 you could mount them in lowmode and normal mode at the same time !

 

S

[Sydney Seeber]

canon lenses which have their own motors

but a non-adjustable iris during the shot, and a "Slippage" problems here and there unless you attach an external motor...

Remote FF isn't going anywhere.

 

It does seem though, that Red is incorporating this very thing into their new series as they can fully control Nikon or Canon lens functions, I don't know if they're putting it into the redmote for the Scarlett, or if it's just on the body like a traditional SLR.

[Sam Morgan Moore]

canon lenses which have their own motors

but a non-adjustable iris during the shot, and a "Slippage" problems here and there unless you attach an external motor...

Remote FF isn't going anywhere.

 

It does seem though, that Red is incorporating this very thing into their new series as they can fully control Nikon or Canon lens functions, I don't know if they're putting it into the redmote for the Scarlett, or if it's just on the body like a traditional SLR.

 

I think the redmote is removable, dont know if it is wireless

 

on dslrs the cameras have controlled the iris and focus for years

 

you can control focus on a canon via a laptop (on a wire)

 

so its all there in terms of the hardware on the cameras all that is missing is the wireless interface and software

 

(http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_Lantern_0.1.6_User_Manual)

 

of course a $4000 RFF makes sense on a $100k rig and camera - it is less apealing to someone enjoying a $3000 rig and $2000 camera :)

 

 

S

Edited January 11, 2010 by Sam Morgan Moore

[Dan Coplan]

I've done a lot of skating with video cameras and recently the 5D but not on a Steadicam (and I wouldn't on a full-sized rig). My most recent experience was shooting in the middle of a roller hockey game. I shot one day with a support rig from Redrock that stabilized the camera against my body and the footage came out very smooth. The next time I decided to shoot totally handheld with no support and the footage was surprisingly jittery. I didn't the Redrock gear would make that much of a difference but it did.

 

Dan

[Sam Morgan Moore]

I've done a lot of skating with video cameras and recently the 5D but not on a Steadicam (and I wouldn't on a full-sized rig). My most recent experience was shooting in the middle of a roller hockey game. I shot one day with a support rig from Redrock that stabilized the camera against my body and the footage came out very smooth. The next time I decided to shoot totally handheld with no support and the footage was surprisingly jittery. I didn't the Redrock gear would make that much of a difference but it did.

 

Dan

 

My baby footstep with mountain biking have been with a rig that was a solid rig built with three masses ala steadicam but no actual gimbal just gripping the lil rig where the gibal would have been

 

RR rig - probably a similar effect

 

if you were using the top handle the rig becomes bottom heavy and could swing add a mass above the top handle and it woud counter the swing

 

S

[Sydney Seeber]

I think the redmote is removable, dont know if it is wireless

 

on dslrs the cameras have controlled the iris and focus for years

 

you can control focus on a canon via a laptop (on a wire)

 

so its all there in terms of the hardware on the cameras all that is missing is the wireless interface and software

 

(http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_Lantern_0.1.6_User_Manual)

 

of course a $4000 RFF makes sense on a $100k rig and camera - it is less apealing to someone enjoying a $3000 rig and $2000 camera :)

 

 

S

The redmote is wireless, but I don't know if it's going to have focus capabilities, it would be cool if it does. They've said that all the new Red bodies will have touchscreen autofocus capabilities using Nikon/Canon lenses, as they're supposed to be able to shoot stills as well as video. The lens control is a $500 option for the Red body. I just hope they give the remote the capability to control it, and not just on the body like a traditional SLR.

 

I'm aware that focus and aperture are controlled through a DSLR camera body. However, my point is that an aperture on a still lens will never be confused as an iris on a lens designed for motion... You can't adjust it while you're recording video, a major drawback, as the steps as it opens and closes are very noticeable. That's why, when you put a 5/7D(etc.) on auto, the exposure priority goes to the ISO first, giving it a much smoother appearance as it steps up and down. I wouldn't trust autofocus on an important shot, either. It "Searches" too much. Maybe with slight changes in focus I'd use it, but that would still be pretty useful. There's also issues when using still zoom lenses and "Slippage". It doesn't happen with all the lenses, but the heavier the still lens, the more it's apt to slip a little out of alignment...

 

Still lenses were designed for a different purpose, so they're going to benefit greatly from a good wireless FF in video mode, at least for the foreseeable future, I'm afraid. If it were me, I'd shoot something like this with the widest lens I could and on infinity as much as possible.

 

On a side note, here's some fanboy douchery (Warning: If watching a dog humping your friend's leg makes you uncomfortable, so will this) concerning the camera/remote I'm talking about... It seems to confirm that everything's remote controlled via the wireless remote, but he didn't get specific

[Sam Morgan Moore]

I'm aware that focus and aperture are controlled through a DSLR camera body. However, my point is that an aperture on a still lens will never be confused as an iris on a lens designed for motion... You can't adjust it while you're recording video, a major drawback, as the steps as it opens and closes are very noticeable.

 

Im not suggesting using AF im suggesting that a future ML (etc) could control the lens through the AF motors - already possible via a wire and laptop (virtually usleless therefore for SC) but said to be in acceptably small increments to make pleasing racks

 

On Iris clicks my nikkor G lenses dont have clicks, and I doubt canon L do either - no lever to try - yes the current in camera control set only offers click stop adjustment but that is the camera software limitiation I guess

 

It should be possible - I guess

 

Wether it becomes a commercial reality is anyones guess - IMO canon and nikon are not taking cinematography seriously yet with their DSLRs - in fact their approach could be described as comical in terms of usability

 

Sorry I got 2 mins in to that doco and gave up

 

-----

 

Anyway my main reason for starting the topic was discussing with more experienced ops if they would actually dare attempt such dangerous and fast shots with a full rig or if the new generation of micro sized systems can bring a new element to the art ?

 

S

[Jess Haas SOC]

you can control focus on a canon via a laptop (on a wire)

 

so its all there in terms of the hardware on the cameras all that is missing is the wireless interface and software

 

(http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Magic_Lantern_0.1.6_User_Manual)

I just saw today that Canon now has a wireless interface for their camera control. I believe it uses 802.11 and software on a laptop.

 

~Jess

[Sam Morgan Moore]

I just saw today that Canon now has a wireless interface for their camera control. I believe it uses 802.11 and software on a laptop.

 

~Jess

 

Is there a link?

 

I found this but dont quite understand it - it mention Java Scripting and PDAs - if that is write it yourself jave scripting then could be good - someone could write (and im cr$p and java - shame) an app with all sorts of toys

 

http://www.canon.co.uk/About_Us/Press_Cent...ess_Release.asp

 

S

Edited January 12, 2010 by Sam Morgan Moore

[Sydney Seeber]

That isn't a new function, just something Canon bought into completely relatively recently, it was capable with 3rd party components already, and they're behind the curve of their competitors. Sports shooters have had the capability of remotely controlling cameras throughout a stadium for a few years now... But it's for still work. Fashion photographers have been able to do so as well. It allows for remote control capabilities, and does a really nice job of WiFi connectivity and file transfer. The iris is an issue, as I said earlier. The best you're going to get between steps is 1/3 of an F-stop. That's too much to be used during a shot. It's noticeable. So you've got to set it prior to the shot... You can set the shutter or ISO to auto, (Gain on video cameras) but then you run into the problem of how much that changes your look... Fine for some, it's definitely been done a lot. I don't like it at all, but I've been asked to do it... So I did it. Maybe they'll fix/allow for this in the future... It's absolutely technically possible. But they're not doing it now, or in the near future. Probably has something to do with market cannibalization, much like RAW video. Maybe someone can hack it. There's probably someone in Russia doing that very thing as I write this.

 

I'm referring to video functions in a still lens... You asked why Canon hasn't done it yet. They have... For different lenses. Every lens type has different needs/functions... Still, video, and cinema. Canon makes 'em all (I'm pretty sure the cine lenses only come in 2/3" mounts now, not 100%). Why make one lens do something else, when you've already got the market covered in a different department? That's why I'm saying remote FF on these still lenses is crucial, and if you need something the still lens can't provide very well under certain conditions, (Aperture, as we all know, there's no external aperture ring on newer Canon still lenses anyway) you've going to need to attach a cinema lens, which itself can look like shit if you pick the wrong one... Then you're definitely going to need the remote FF. There's no getting around it from what I can see, unless you're willing to sacrifice quality.

[Sam Morgan Moore]

That isn't a new function, just something Canon bought into completely relatively recently, it was capable with 3rd party components already, and they're behind the curve of their competitors. Sports shooters have had the capability of remotely controlling cameras throughout a stadium for a few years now... But it's for still work. Fashion photographers have been able to do so as well. It allows for remote control capabilities, and does a really nice job of WiFi connectivity and file transfer. The iris is an issue, as I said earlier. The best you're going to get between steps is 1/3 of an F-stop. That's too much to be used during a shot. It's noticeable. So you've got to set it prior to the shot... You can set the shutter or ISO to auto, (Gain on video cameras) but then you run into the problem of how much that changes your look... Fine for some, it's definitely been done a lot. I don't like it at all, but I've been asked to do it... So I did it. Maybe they'll fix/allow for this in the future... It's absolutely technically possible. But they're not doing it now, or in the near future. Probably has something to do with market cannibalization, much like RAW video. Maybe someone can hack it. There's probably someone in Russia doing that very thing as I write this.

 

I'm referring to video functions in a still lens... You asked why Canon hasn't done it yet. They have... For different lenses. Every lens type has different needs/functions... Still, video, and cinema. Canon makes 'em all (I'm pretty sure the cine lenses only come in 2/3" mounts now, not 100%). Why make one lens do something else, when you've already got the market covered in a different department? That's why I'm saying remote FF on these still lenses is crucial, and if you need something the still lens can't provide very well under certain conditions, (Aperture, as we all know, there's no external aperture ring on newer Canon still lenses anyway) you've going to need to attach a cinema lens, which itself can look like shit if you pick the wrong one... Then you're definitely going to need the remote FF. There's no getting around it from what I can see, unless you're willing to sacrifice quality.

 

Id defo be willing to sacrifice remote iris control !

 

Still photos is my primary profession and corp video a fast developing second string with DSLR DOF and some simple 'steady' shots giving lift in appearance over my competition

 

Ive always remotely fired still cams using 'pocket wizards' and not been into the computer side too much - basically being an old school type at heart

 

Im thinking that getting a handle on the computer side is useful in this application because it fundamentally seems dumb to add a motor to an already motorized lens

 

I dont dispute that if you need a solid system functioning this week then the established 'external' systems are absoutely the way to go

 

S

Edited January 12, 2010 by Sam Morgan Moore

[Charles Papert]

The stepping motors that are used to drive AF lenses are not suited for the type of application we do for motion picture focus pulling, which requires very smooth, high resolution operation with varied acceleration. They are made to snap to a given point as quickly as possible. While it may well be possible to "jack in" to these motors to remotely control them, we may not like the way they respond (and may possibly burn them out)! Remains to be seen whether this will be workable or not.

[Sam Morgan Moore]

The stepping motors that are used to drive AF lenses are not suited for the type of application we do for motion picture focus pulling, which requires very smooth, high resolution operation with varied acceleration. They are made to snap to a given point as quickly as possible. While it may well be possible to "jack in" to these motors to remotely control them, we may not like the way they respond (and may possibly burn them out)! Remains to be seen whether this will be workable or not.

 

http://magiclantern.wikia.com/wiki/Focus pretty smooth

 

I cant see them burning out - they do quite a lot of work at a footy match !

 

anyway - who cares about wont dot exist right now !

 

 

S