Tilting Stage

[RobVanGelder]

Hi Jamie,

 

You are not really missing something but in my experience, the moment you use the tiltplate and lift it to 10-15 degrees, the shift of the CG is so much that you will not be able to reach/correct that with your normal cameraplate.

So yes, you can leave your DogCatcher on all times but than you also want to have a extra long cameraplate, to allow for the big shift in CG.

 

This happens even with my own design, and my wedge is designed in a way that it pivots really close to the middle of the post.

With a Dogcatcher you will make a larger arc when tilting so a bigger shift in CG.

 

Really, Jerry has thought well about this and it does make a huge difference.

 

Rob van Gelder, Bangkok, Thailand

[Jeremy Benning]

Hey Will,

 

When I went by Walter Klassen's shop a few weeks ago, he had the new Chroziel tilt plate there, and it looks great! We are working on a way to mate it to the Ultimate...

 

jeremy

[Anthony Hardwick]

Jeremy,

 

Definitely keep us (Ultimate owners) updated on the Chrosziel Tilt plate and whatever adaptations you guys are working out. I'm sure I'm not the only one interested in it...

 

Thanks,

Anthony

[DavidWest]

how much additional weight would you guys be willing to put up with to have a

tilting mechanism that worked???

[WillArnot]

Not much.

 

Think light w/out compromising rigidity.

 

Titanium?

 

Maybe the weight of one of Greg Bubb's big baseplates, w/ the rod holders in it. How much does that weigh? Anyone?

 

Don't forget to shift the CG as you tilt.

[DavidWest]

i have a design in mind that will tilt and still maintain the CG.... ie, you can change the tilt and not have to rebalance the sled.... problem is there are a few ways to do it, but even with Ti you are adding weight to the sled, and to the camera end of the post...

 

but it seems that it might be worth it to be able to add tilting to the sleds other than the master and not have to retrim the camera...

 

 

just wondering if there was much interest before i start carving up my Ti stock....

[WillArnot]

Of course you have to add SOME weight, that's understandable. The question is how much? I was suggesting no more than about a pound. The weight of one of Greg Bubb's beefy base plates, not to repeat myself. Anyone got that weight?

 

Yes, the advantages far out weigh not having one. My feeling is this will be a hot item. Look at all the Non-Ultra Tiffen owners who don't have a tilting stage. Now they can have that advantage too, as well as the vast # who aren't Tiffen owners. This is an Un-tapped market, no pun inteded.

 

Who's going to hit it?

[WillArnot]

Chris Hood kindly e-mailed me the weight. 11 oz. So 16 oz isn't out of the question then.

 

Is that a reasonable estimate for the design you have in mind David?

 

Thanks Chris.

[Peter Abraham]

Who's going to hit it? I am.

 

Wil, you know I love ya and we have our history making a great movie down in Staten Island, but I am of a very divergent opinion here.

 

The time and creativity taken when solving a complex problem deserves it's due. If the Tilt Stage is a patented device, then it is irrelevant that Chroziel is overseas. They have copied a design that is well-protected, and are selling it inside of the United States, where such designs as the tilt-stage are protected.

 

I love making stuff, no secret there. I made a ton of stuff for my old rigs, and with my machinist, built my Mini Sled out of scrap parts and whatnot. That's for my private use. I'm not going to go into the business of making the PeterSled 2000.

 

Why? Because the design of the Steadicam Mini is protected and I respect that intent and reality of that right. It's painful to read that one person wishes they had it, and hey why not smack out a production run of 100 of em and call it a day?

 

Invention and design isn't a free-for-all. I would as those discussing an organized production run where money is going to change hands, not to do it.

 

Oh, and I don't have a tilting stage. Sure as hell wish I did. But I don't. And I'm not about to go producing 'em either.

 

This does not of course apply solely to this discussion. People have made mention here and there of their arm socket blocks failing critically ( cracking apart !!! ) while on vehicle mount. This poster, or that, will mention how great it was that they were sent a replacement quickly, and how nice it was to get such good customer service.

 

If a Tiffen socket block cracked, it'd be hell to pay and we all know it. Unfairly so. ( And, not for nothing, but my C.P. Model I rig came with THREE socket blocks. One on vest, one on Garfield Mount, one spare in a bag. None have ever cracked. They were machined- not cast......- in 1976 ).

 

We all have our favorites, fine and dandy. But if we covet something that is in front of our eyes because of hard work and long hours of design and prototyping, and that thing is legally protected, then I find it a wee bit appalling to throw the spirit and word of that protection in the face of inventors, and steal with glee.

 

Want a tilt plate? Buy an Ultra. :)

 

Peter Abraham, E.M.T.

[Anthony Hardwick]

Alright... I thought I'd put my $.02 in here, and in the process hopefully get an answer or two to questions I have.

 

First, of all, I would like to know what exactly is covered in the patent of Tiffen's tilt stage (Jerry Holway's design)... assuming it is Patented.

 

I respect the process of invention and the protection of innovative new technologies and design via the Patent system as much or more than the next guy.

 

Jerry has designed numerous outstanding products, and has numerous patents to his name. He deserves the well earned recognition, monetary reward and patent protection for those products.

 

Having said that, my questions are simply these...

 

First, is the tilt stage protected by a patent?

If the answer is yes, then...

Second, is the idea of having a tilt stage on top of a steadicam by itself protected by the patent, or is it at the point of adding the CG pivot point that the design becomes protected?

 

The point is that I would never wish to purchase a product (or commission a custom one) that is an infringement on someone's patented design, but I wonder what exactly is protected regarding the tilting stage.

 

The process of applying for a patent, and the resultant patent or patents involves a determination first of all whether or not something qualifies as unique, novel and therefore protectable via a patent. Many designs are not ultimately awarded a patent because the design fails to meet those (admittedly paraphrased and simplified) criteria.

 

Perhaps Jerry can or will weigh in on this and let us know what is the case, or surely someone with more tenacity could search the U.S. Patent site to find out these answers. Frankly, it's not that important to me. Sure I'd love to have a tilting stage. Am I going to make one? No. Is someone out there going to make one that infringes on an existing patent? I hope not. Would I buy such a product if it DIDN'T violate any existing patents? You bet. That's fair.

[Jerry Holway]

Anthony and all,

 

I agree, if it's not covered by a patent, then anyone is free to make it. Without going into any real legal issues (as I am totally unqualified to comment on that), there should be in this community as sense of what is right and wrong regarding intellectual property. Perhaps we are still few enough in number and closely enough tied together to still be a community.

 

Almost all of the ideas for Steadicam that I've had (including some fairly original ones) are not covered by patents, and anyone is free to copy them, make commercial products, whatever.

 

And if anyone wants to build a tilt head for themself, fine.

 

But I do ask that members of this community, for the sake of future innovations (no matter who makes them), don't buy or sell protected gear. You are just cutting your own throat in the long run by cutting out the inventors and the companies that take the time and effort and dollars to make the prototypes and get it right.

 

Imagine if Panavision had gotten away with copying the Steadicam, way back when. We'd all be doing something else, and the craft would stuck with shock-absorber arms and the like. Yikes.

 

Regardless, here's the link to the patent:

 

http://patft.uspto.gov/netacgi/nph-Parser?...;.INZZ.)&OS=IN/

 

and you can see what the patent covers and does not cover.

 

You can also use the seach page to find other Steadicam related patents...

 

Jerry Holway

[Jerry Holway]

To all, especially history buffs like Erwin-

 

I just checked the link to the patent, and it works, but it reminded me that there was an error in the patent in naming the inventors.

 

I am not the sole inventor, but share the invention with Garrett (and the patent is rightly assigned to him). It was a glitch when the patent was awarded, and there is an amendent somewhere, but the "original" document doesn't get changed to reflect this error.

 

So I shouldn't be given all the credit here.

 

Jerry

[WillArnot]

Peter, thanks for the love. I really don't want to make this a can of worms but I do think your loyalties are somewhat bound.

 

The point here is that there is a need to pre-set tilt sometimes. I was really coming more from the idea of Jerry Hill's lo-mode bracket for the 435. Something really simple that you could attach to either the top or bottom baseplate as needed. It would have nothing on the Ultra and it's integral tilting HEAD. I'm talking about a plate that would need to be added. Far from the ideals of the Ultra head. And I think a PLATE which needs to be added, is quite different from an INTEGRAL tilting HEAD. So lets be specific and not let this get into finger pointing chaos.

 

I must object to this notion that "If you want a tilt plate (head), Buy an Ultra." Sounds awfully like what happened to CP. "If you want a Steadicam you have to buy it from us." And no offense to Garrett and Jerry and all the fine individuals and hard work and research involved here.

 

I have no idea what Chroziel has come up with. Certainly infringing on patented designs b/c they don't hold in other countries, and then selling them here is way f'd up, and not something I would EVER endorse.

 

The other basic point is that I will not be forced into buying a rig b/c it has one component that I NEED, and other serious limitations that I don't NEED, just for the sake of having that one component. Especially after the 8 years of really lame service from the manufacturers. And forget about tailoring to your needs, unless you are Larry, Jerry, or Garrett. I'm sorry but 'dems da facts. And when I say 'need', that is b/c of the combination of the level of work I do nowadays and what has come to be expected on top rate jobs. That is where the bar is now. And the Ultra unfortunately has some serious compromises in order to have all those integrated bells & whistles, that I don't have to deal with with the sled I have now.

 

Seems like Tiffen should offer that tilt option on at least a couple of other sleds in their fleet of what is it now, 10 sleds? That would certainly do some justice to all the hard work put in by Jerry. And I sure hope he's getting something per sled sold, b/c he deserves it.

 

So jerry, what does your patent cover? Is it the asymmetric curve aspect that preserves the CG. Is it a specific hardware thing, or is it concept? I really don't know how patents are classified and broken down. Whatever they are, I don't mean to encourage anyone to encroach on them. I am simply trying to address a need, so please don't tell me there's only one way to do that. It just isn't true. Just no-one's made it yet.

 

Jerry, could you corner this alternate approach yourself? A detachable tilt plate that incorporates your previous work and ideas but could work with a vastly greater part of the market. I know I will gladly pay you for it, as I'm sure many others will too. But you can't expect everyone to just throw down on an Ultra. The idea is almost ludicrous, something has to give.

 

I guess I will leave with some really smart analogy to Henry Ford and his model 'A', but that's another story.

[WillArnot]

In writing this and having dinner and doing other things, I missed Jerry's posts. So thanks Jerry for the clarification.

 

I heartily agree w/ you. I would not buy "protected" gear as you put it. And i'm sorry if I gave the impression that I was encouraging that, in no way did I mean to.

 

Hopefully my post will clarify what I AM seeking out.

 

W.

[Larry McConkey]

Will,

Just a clarification, in case it's needed, and apologies if it's not, but I don't get any "tailoring to your needs" from Tiffen. I certainly have made lots of modifications to my own rig, and a couple to Garrett's, and I have urged that many of these modifications be incorporated into the design. I have also supported Jerry's designs for improvements, and I am happy to say that most of what I judged to be compromises in the design of the Ultra have now been rectified. The tilt head with motorized stage is now stiffer and tighter and no longer requires external cabling at normal post lengths to avoid "the shakes" when running or making quick moves; the RF components of that motorized stage now work quite reliably (although I added a mechanical adjusting stage to the receiver antenna that has made the RF link absolutely reliable); the multi-section post is now plenty stiff enough (early versions had too much flex) and the electronics are proving to be quite reliable, although as with anything, it pays to have a backup and I have had to swap out the electronics twice for repairs - at least they all come out as a unit and I was able to buy a spare. The 24v battery system (actually 28.8v nominal) with a DC to DC converter for 12 volt needs has proven to be a wonderful combination, at least the way I use it. I run as much as possible directly from 24volts and the 12 volt supply (100 watts) is adequate - I don't know how the system performs in the field with mostly 12v equipment... only needing one battery to monitor and change out has simplified my life considerably. The arm can be adjusted while wearing it - I have even tweaked it mid shot a few times and I LOVE that.

 

I have to say that compared to past models that I would judge needed major modifications to provide cutting edge performance, the Ultra needs very little in the way of tweaking and I am very happy about that. If only "they" would follow my advice about everything, then I would be even happier, but "others" who don't share my ideas completely would be less happy. I am quite content with the basic design and execution of the Ultra and the tilt stage is certainly an extraordinary part of that success - as is the post and motorized stage - all three unique and wonderful components of the system. I have added the ICBM meter, pots and switches to adjust the speed and direction of the motorized stage motors, Kipps handles for more positive adjustment and locking of the tilt stage, and some custom wiring up the post for gyro power, microphone in and speaker out on the stage. I use Greg Bubb's level, and his TB6 monitor. I modified the post clamp in the arm to stay in a fixed position, and I have a simple mod to add rubber bands to the arm to lift the weight of a fully loaded IMAX camera when required. I love the Gorelock dock and made my own post clamps to fit it (larger post diameter and I wanted to attach them to the aluminum sections rather than the carbon fiber). Other than these mods which I made myself, however, my machine is stock from Tiffen. Oh, I have substituted steel tubes for the battery mount and installed a connector on that mount so I can remove the mount entirely when required (for gyro work), and I also straightened out the battery angle to give me better clearance. I carry a couple of simple hose clamps in case one of the hand tightening clamps on the post gives out (twice so far). I use a DSD harness, but the Master vest has come out a couple of times when the DSD would not fit in a tight space.

 

It may sound like a lot of mods, but they are all fairly minor improvements for the way I like to work, and they are the kind of things I would feel necessary to do with any machine out there.

 

Larry