Nick Gardner
Well-known member
I'm on Evin's team. Shoot like it's an SR. LWS, hand grips form an aaton or an SR, folded up diaper or fancy foam pad on the shoulder. The camera being lower is much much better.
Nick
Nick
Welcome to our community
Be a part of something great, join today!
Amazing Mantis
- Thread starter Shawn Nelson
- Start date
Mitch Gross
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 7, 2007
- Messages
- 3,657
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
Abel carries many kinds of handgrips, including Spyder grips, Moosebars, Zacuto Z-Grips, Ugrip and of course the Element Technica Mantis.
Roberto Lequeux
Well-known member
I am not an operator. I do own an little HVX-200 and have apparently shot 453hs with it in various configurations, several different HH setups with Zacuto gear and others. I also have worked in countless big productions where I saw accomplished operators HH'ing every camera out there. So while I am no definite source of wisdom on the subject, I do have my own humble opinion. Just 0.02.
I believe the lens should be at the operator's eye height. Also, hopefully very close to his head. The camera needs to be perfectly balanced front to back and left to right. Also, it should not be top heavy.
I HH'ed the Red with the 25mm and 35mm RPPs not long ago and my main problem with it wasn't the total weight, though it is not a light camera. I felt the main issue with it was the fact that it is very tall and that with the lens mount on the top of it's body it is very top heavy when using a heavy lens like the RPP wides. This creates a reversed pendulum effect which really put a hurting on me in just 30min. of wild operating. OK, so I am out of shape right now, who cares? Still, this has an effect on the operator's horizon control weather you are Conan the Barbarian or Conan the Tonight Show host. Not good.
That is why I asked if anyone had mounted it upside down and flipped the footage in post. You would immediately gain more control over the camera and the ET Mantis wouldn't be high at all. The lens might be a bit lower than your eye, but not by much. Anyone done/considered this?
About as low, not lowest.
Thanks for the details though. I will consider it and suggest it.
I believe the lens should be at the operator's eye height. Also, hopefully very close to his head. The camera needs to be perfectly balanced front to back and left to right. Also, it should not be top heavy.
I HH'ed the Red with the 25mm and 35mm RPPs not long ago and my main problem with it wasn't the total weight, though it is not a light camera. I felt the main issue with it was the fact that it is very tall and that with the lens mount on the top of it's body it is very top heavy when using a heavy lens like the RPP wides. This creates a reversed pendulum effect which really put a hurting on me in just 30min. of wild operating. OK, so I am out of shape right now, who cares? Still, this has an effect on the operator's horizon control weather you are Conan the Barbarian or Conan the Tonight Show host. Not good.
That is why I asked if anyone had mounted it upside down and flipped the footage in post. You would immediately gain more control over the camera and the ET Mantis wouldn't be high at all. The lens might be a bit lower than your eye, but not by much. Anyone done/considered this?
About as low, not lowest.
Thanks for the details though. I will consider it and suggest it.
Constantine Tyrintzis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Greece, Athens and Syros
- Website
- www.the-running-rig.com
Hello.In the 15 years of camera operating , steadicam operating , and robotic stuff, I have seen ops with different build up and body structure.Some were phycicaly advanced to others,having a few pounds more around their body had a better sit for the camera, than other skiny ops like my selve with big deltoids muscles, and they could do smoother shots.Walking technics is another factor, walk with your hills you get big vibrations, walking with toes and they are gone. Balance on CG is very critical for smoothness, but that can be shorted in many different configurations. its just physics and the rools are there to follow. I believe that if you ask different ops with different body structures to configure a very modular camera rig they will come up with different set ups and thats why because of personal style of shooting, body dimensions, body structure,height, e.t.c.
I also believe that HH rigs must allow to the operator to set up the camera every possible way according to his preference and taste.
Some times there is a learning curve in some equipment, for instance try and put on a steadicam for the first time, you will find yourself fighting against gravity, phycics, and your muscles but after some practicing you are starting producing smooth fottage and you feel comfortable in it.
I think the main point is what can you achieeve with a rig. if you can do extra moves, if you can walk smoother with out uncomfortable body turns, if you can view well, e.t.c.
In order to achieeve this you might have to sacrifise some, use a monitor, e.t.c.
Could you do steadicam looking at the view finder? Or pulling focus by hand?
What Iam trying to say is there is different equipment out there doing a lot of different stuff, other to help you stabilize, other to take the weight of your back, other to give you freedom of moves, all of them in one or more points will sacrifice some utilities in order to be advanced in some other features. Its up to you and what you need and how much you want to play with it to make it work best.And they dont always work for every shot.
I want to make more than ordinary stuff,I want to have the ability to produce shots that were difficult before.I want to be modular.thats the goal for my products
Some might like them some might not. Its all personal taste, and needs.
I also believe that HH rigs must allow to the operator to set up the camera every possible way according to his preference and taste.
Some times there is a learning curve in some equipment, for instance try and put on a steadicam for the first time, you will find yourself fighting against gravity, phycics, and your muscles but after some practicing you are starting producing smooth fottage and you feel comfortable in it.
I think the main point is what can you achieeve with a rig. if you can do extra moves, if you can walk smoother with out uncomfortable body turns, if you can view well, e.t.c.
In order to achieeve this you might have to sacrifise some, use a monitor, e.t.c.
Could you do steadicam looking at the view finder? Or pulling focus by hand?
What Iam trying to say is there is different equipment out there doing a lot of different stuff, other to help you stabilize, other to take the weight of your back, other to give you freedom of moves, all of them in one or more points will sacrifice some utilities in order to be advanced in some other features. Its up to you and what you need and how much you want to play with it to make it work best.And they dont always work for every shot.
I want to make more than ordinary stuff,I want to have the ability to produce shots that were difficult before.I want to be modular.thats the goal for my products
Some might like them some might not. Its all personal taste, and needs.
- Thread starter
- #25
Shawn Nelson
Well-known member
Constantine Tyrintzis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Greece, Athens and Syros
- Website
- www.the-running-rig.com
If you dont mind me saying, the Mantis is a fine piece of equipment , but what is this about alignment of eyes and sensor? I can operate a camera that the lens is higher or lower from my eyes no problem as long as a have a viewfinder in a reasonable angle.
Joshua Brown
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2008
- Messages
- 387
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 40
- Location
- Los Angeles, CA
- Website
- joshuabrown.name
Roberto Lequeux
Well-known member
It does make it more natural, which makes it easier to operate. Wouldn't you agree?
Personally I wouldn't mind it being a bit lower since what I am most concerned with is low center of gravity which makes it easier to swing around.
Mass is also super important. Not to light or the whole thing vibrates with your heart beat but light enough and you can shoot better and longer.
Before Slumdog I thought of the old Scarlet prototype with gyros. I wonder how that must feel.
Personally I wouldn't mind it being a bit lower since what I am most concerned with is low center of gravity which makes it easier to swing around.
Mass is also super important. Not to light or the whole thing vibrates with your heart beat but light enough and you can shoot better and longer.
Before Slumdog I thought of the old Scarlet prototype with gyros. I wonder how that must feel.
Constantine Tyrintzis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Greece, Athens and Syros
- Website
- www.the-running-rig.com
To me it feels the same, lower, higher, it doesnt matter , easy point of view, Iam ok.
Gyros are for specific shots, they are noisy, you are talking about at least 2 KS6 for a full equipped scarlet, that will add some battery weight to it, I dont think that gyros are for the average shot unless you shoot tele.
Gyros however will work very well on the HR-1 rig as they can stabilize very well it roll axis and there fore no roll errors.Gyros are expensive either active or passive.
Gyros are for specific shots, they are noisy, you are talking about at least 2 KS6 for a full equipped scarlet, that will add some battery weight to it, I dont think that gyros are for the average shot unless you shoot tele.
Gyros however will work very well on the HR-1 rig as they can stabilize very well it roll axis and there fore no roll errors.Gyros are expensive either active or passive.
JonathanF
Well-known member
JonathanF
Well-known member
Depends on the operator, some shoot with both eyes open and others don't. I happen to be one of the ones who do. Ask Arri why they make the SR so it has the lens as close to being in plane with the operator's eyes as possible and you'll have your answer.
I find the cameras that do this are easier to use HH and cause less eye strain. I have heard many others make the same comment.
:J
JonathanF
Well-known member
+1 for that one Nick
Constantine Tyrintzis
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 14, 2009
- Messages
- 143
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Age
- 60
- Location
- Greece, Athens and Syros
- Website
- www.the-running-rig.com
Hello. Iam not going to argue about personal taste on shooting and how it feels one or the other way. There are several ops with years off experience that do have certain habbits, for instance they wont shoot looking at a monitor cause it feels weird as they are use to view through a viewfinder, e.t.c. Me I have tried most possible ways of shooting ,had to go through steadicam use, I had to shoot from remote head cranes where camera rotates panning angles where the monitor stays in one direction, Ive even done hheld with video glasses , all of these worked after practicing, and I never said ohh I wont do this it doesnt work cause it feels weird, as I said to do some moves you need to sacrifice some comforts or compromise in one way or another. On the other hand if you have no reason to compromise why should you ? Do it best way it works for you. I want to break out of the box, and make equipment that not always satisfies everyone habbits but does create shots you probably couldnt or was very difficult to achieve before. If the great Garret Brown was thinking of confort he would probably never created steadicam to be what it is now. None of the other imaginery tools of his.
But he did. I have various designs of camera support systems that are out of the square thinking. Just need courage to make them and promote them and show people they work.Cause they look strange and have a learning curve. Hr-1 is an example. Its not for everyshot or for sporting events or dai;y news rig. Its made for action moves , to be used where and when is effective or in any way can help ops do shots its good at.
Thats whats all about. I have had people saying how orientation of where the lens is and where the viewing monitor is messes up your brain. And it does in the beginning.But after even a few hours you get pass this, and you start doing things you thought were a no no . Independence of different senses and movements on your body are only borders that your brain defines and with exercise these borders can be re-aranged. and go one step beyond. put a camera on your shoulder, with the lowest COG you can , the grips that suit you and the softpad of you taste. Pull a normal lens and then try and produce some of the shots I do on my videos...which by the way were shot with out rehearshal and with a pissed off with me girlfriend that didnt like telling her do this and do that,( I also left the sound as was so you can hear m haha) on a very uneven surface with steps of uneven length, between narrow spaces with loads of curves. The HR-1 has the camera mounted high level, you view through a monitor, the orientation of the lens and viewing is always changing. But the results are great. And thats what counts. To me if you want an easy hheld shoulder mount rig the HR-1 isnt for you, but if you are in for a different rig with more abilities and with a learning curve the HR-1 rocks. You will be having some reports and footage soon as its only 1 1/2 months on the market then you find out for your selve.Everything on the above posts is also very trooth. Iam not arguing at all.
Cheers
Constantine:idea:
But he did. I have various designs of camera support systems that are out of the square thinking. Just need courage to make them and promote them and show people they work.Cause they look strange and have a learning curve. Hr-1 is an example. Its not for everyshot or for sporting events or dai;y news rig. Its made for action moves , to be used where and when is effective or in any way can help ops do shots its good at.
Thats whats all about. I have had people saying how orientation of where the lens is and where the viewing monitor is messes up your brain. And it does in the beginning.But after even a few hours you get pass this, and you start doing things you thought were a no no . Independence of different senses and movements on your body are only borders that your brain defines and with exercise these borders can be re-aranged. and go one step beyond. put a camera on your shoulder, with the lowest COG you can , the grips that suit you and the softpad of you taste. Pull a normal lens and then try and produce some of the shots I do on my videos...which by the way were shot with out rehearshal and with a pissed off with me girlfriend that didnt like telling her do this and do that,( I also left the sound as was so you can hear m haha) on a very uneven surface with steps of uneven length, between narrow spaces with loads of curves. The HR-1 has the camera mounted high level, you view through a monitor, the orientation of the lens and viewing is always changing. But the results are great. And thats what counts. To me if you want an easy hheld shoulder mount rig the HR-1 isnt for you, but if you are in for a different rig with more abilities and with a learning curve the HR-1 rocks. You will be having some reports and footage soon as its only 1 1/2 months on the market then you find out for your selve.Everything on the above posts is also very trooth. Iam not arguing at all.
Cheers
Constantine:idea:
J Clark
Well-known member
The EVF mounted on our new Easy-EVF Mount with a Hydra attaches to the cross-rod of the Mantis and puts the EVF right at eye level. Pics coming soon...