Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Log in
  • Hey all, just changed over the backend after 15 years I figured time to give it a bit of an update, its probably gonna be a bit weird for most of you and i am sure there is a few bugs to work out but it should kinda work the same as before... hopefully :)

amazing new shoulder rig

Hi Kostas,

Will there be a way to make this work with the forthcoming Meizler Module? The Meizler module utilizes a spacer underneath the camera (same thickness as those made by RED, Wooden Camera, Viewfactor, etc. to get the lens/rod distance correct when using RED/ET baseplates) through which cables run to power FIZ motors. As I look at your extremely nice setup I see you dispensing with that spacer (which makes sense I might add) and attaching to your low profile QR system directly. As a result it looks to me like you would not be able to use your system and Meizler module if, for example one still wanted to use 15mm studio rods. But then again you might have something clever waiting for us??
 
constantine Tirintzis said:
Andy I can make a longer telecopic arm for you to just do that easilly, at the moment it can probably reach your nose.
No problem
kostas
Click to expand...

:emote_22_yikes: - you presume my head is normal!

LOL - OK, nice to know this and to see how customizable it is.
 
Abuse of the patent system?

Abuse of the patent system?

Abuse of the patent system?

We invested 8+ months of the scarcest resource we had (development time) coming up with the production version of the Mantis. It was the last product that Hector and myself developed entirely on our own when we were just 2 guys designing and building everything from ET. After the Mantis we started hiring mechanical, electrical and software engineers to help us develop increasingly complex products like motorized 3D rigs and lens control systems. To put it in perspective, the EVF Mount took less than 4 months and the Breakout Box took less than 3 months.

Why did a simple shoulder rig take over 8 months? We had already designed and mass produced the EVF Mount and Breakout Box which are easily as complex. We already knew how to make dovetails and rosettes. So, why so long? Well, we were determined to make something that addressed the issues and concerns of every cameraman and operator we had spoken with.
Arriflex had a handheld rig with an Arri compatible dovetail on top with a cross bar with rosette mounted arms and handles. It had a shoulder pad with an angle cut into it like most other shoulder pads. A number of people were buying these for their RED One but no one we spoke to said: "I love it" As we studied the problem and built numerous prototypes for our operator/customers to test. No operators seemed to agree on the right length of the arms so we developed the telescopic arms which brought a great deal of adjustability and configurability to the system however our beta testers were still complaining of neck and back pain. We started to really focus on the effort it took to keep the camera level and pointed forward parallel to the operators LOS and how the effort was different from operator to operator depending on the shape of their shoulders. We needed an adjustable shoulder pad. We searched everywhere and could not find an instance of anyone making a shoulder pad that adjusts the roll angle not to mention the pan angle.
This was an "Ah Ha" moment for us. Very simple but still unique. But what good is a clever idea unless you can execute. We started off focusing on roll with a small rod running the length of the underside of the dovetail. The shoulder pad frame had a reciprocal rod clamp but this pushed the camera too high and didn't address pan. On top of that the small diameter of the rod and clamp didn't have a lot of holding force so the weight of the camera and lens tended to change the roll angle. As we increased the diameter of the rod/clamp to get enough holding force the optical center of the camera kept climbing. So there we sat with a great idea but no way to achieve the freedom of motion we wanted without making the camera way too high.
As we studied the problem it occurred to us in another "Ah Ha" moment that if we could create the round profile based on a 3" diameter but only use 14-16 degrees worth of that profile we could embed the mechanism in the dovetail itself. This would give us the +10 to –4 degrees of roll travel we desired and add almost nothing to the height. This type of mechanism also lent itself to adding pan rotation without adding height.

The only issue at this point was the fact that when this 2 axis gimbal was unlocked, both pan and roll could be adjusted which turned out to be cumbersome. We were so close!
As we wrestled with the task of how to isolate the adjustments we turned to the ubiquitous rosette. By using a pair of spring loaded rosettes in the gimbal stack we arrived at a solution where: When the gimbal is unlocked and unweighted, the shoulder pad can be rotated in the pan axis. When the gimbal is unlocked while on your shoulder (with camera mounted) the roll axis (only) is free to move. This made it possible to put the rig on your shoulder and while looking at the monitor or viewfinder, quickly adjust and lock the horizon.

My point is, given that we invested so much time and effort into developing a handheld solution that by many accounts is the best, coupled with the fact that to get to a finished product required us to develop new and unique features is exactly what the patent system is for.
 
Stephen Pizzo said:
Abuse of the patent system?
Click to expand...

In college I took a tripod head and converted it into a shoulder system. Day one I found that I could use the fluid head's "rotation" to level the camera. The idea that a camera should be able to rotate on the lens axis for better comfort isn't unique or non-obvious.

If you have a unique gimble mechanism that's one thing. But the impression given was that the fact that it *has* rotational adjustment is patented... that's just spreading FUD.
 
Stephen Pizzo said:
Abuse of the patent system?

We invested 8+ months of the scarcest resource we had (development time) coming up with the production version of the Mantis.

My point is, given that we invested so much time and effort into developing a handheld solution that by many accounts is the best, coupled with the fact that to get to a finished product required us to develop new and unique features is exactly what the patent system is for.
Click to expand...

Hi Stephen,

We're actually 8 months in the making of this system ourselves so we completely understand were you coming from. It's hard work, a lot of frustration and tons of investment - not only in work hours, but also money. Just know that we thought long and hard in how to design our rig and it had nothing to do with yours. The only thing we knew was the features we wanted to give it, such as extremely low centre of gravity even though there was adjustments for balance - both back and forth adjustment and shoulder angle.

We did have legal advice looking into ALL PATENTS (including your pending one) before we applied for patent ourselves and our systems are different, very different.

Kostas can fill in tomorrow with some tech details. As I believe he's asleep right now.

I also want to add that me as a customer with your company have the deepest respect. You are nothing but professional and the design and customer service you provide is stellar.
 
Mr Pizo. I hear your frustration but I hope you dont think in any way that we are abussing or violating any of the mentioned patents. There is really nothing in comon with our system at all, the only common thing is that the roll angle is adjustable, the method, mechanics, and function of our system is unique and it works as a slide in out , back to front system with a quick release lock, tooless, that can do both adjust the back to front adjustment as well as the roll angle and roll lock, and also can be slide out with one move , one lever lock,so it frees our system to work as a arri dovetail base.
So as you see there is nothing in common of how we function and use our design .
Iam answering because I have been designing unique systems having as a rule to NEVER copy anyones design , and make my own patents and solutions.
And looking at my posts you will find many of that that I fight with people copying patents, instead of making their brain works.
So please clear this out, and let us know if this is directed to our design directly.
I have great respect to people creating gear after brainstorming and endless hours of going back to the drawing board , than the ones that simply copy with reverse engineering, or even direct copy of a bought item.
I have personally have been congratulated from Garret Brown for my older gimbal design , with an active suspension, and 180 degrees of panning the camera , and more than 120 degrees of roll,on a single shoulder mount and Iam one of the people that do exactly that. Spent endless nights and days to create my inventions and bring them to life with great respect and awareness of what is like to be an inventor. The Titan is a simple yet effective device that can do many things more than a shoulder rig can.
With great respect to your company, I would like you to clear this out please.
Thank you
 
Gavin Greenwalt said:
If you have a unique gimble mechanism that's one thing. But the impression given was that the fact that it *has* rotational adjustment is patented... that's just spreading FUD.
Click to expand...

Gavin, no FUD being spread on our side at all. You need to better understand what our patent, not patent pending, but granted patent actually says. It includes much more then its obvious you realize, whether you agree with it or not.

If you are bored and want some more reading material, please feel free to read up:
Patent number: 8128295
Issue date: Mar 6, 2012
 
Hello

Hello

Hi Fredrik, Good to see you are staying busy.
...and hello Constantine.

Just to be clear, my post was not directed at either of you or your handsome product. It was actually in response to another post that challenged the fact that a handheld rig could have patented features. You guys have no doubt put a huge amount of effort into your system and it shows. I look forward to seeing one in person.

To be honest, I don't know if there are any potential issues between our system and yours but like Joey suggests you might want to have your attorney take a good look at the patent as it covers a number of features.

Patents aside, there is always a good market for well made, functional products and I expect you will do well.

Regards,
-SP
 
paul engstrom said:
Hi Kostas,

Will there be a way to make this work with the forthcoming Meizler Module? The Meizler module utilizes a spacer underneath the camera (same thickness as those made by RED, Wooden Camera, Viewfactor, etc. to get the lens/rod distance correct when using RED/ET baseplates) through which cables run to power FIZ motors. As I look at your extremely nice setup I see you dispensing with that spacer (which makes sense I might add) and attaching to your low profile QR system directly. As a result it looks to me like you would not be able to use your system and Meizler module if, for example one still wanted to use 15mm studio rods. But then again you might have something clever waiting for us??
Click to expand...

Hello Paul. I use to use similar devices , motor modules for my number of steadicams in the last 15 years. You are correct, we are mounting the Epic and Scarlet directly since everything is calculated to work for the correct lens distance for 19mm, Studio 15 , and 15 mm.
that is taken care of the unique bracket design for each rod , I personally think that a module or rizer that serves to be placed under the camera for rising the camera is dramatically effecting the distance from the shoulder and make a heigh gravity rig, and this is not what I think is correct for hand held balance. Modules that provide power and control to FIZ motors are available with minimum size and weight and with several mouneting brackets, and they can be placed in places that can be used with out having effect of the balance, as well as they can be placed in places that, if you want to place them after on a steadicam from handheld , they can just do that, with out again rising or being akward for a steadicam sled balance, which is a no no.
Now you can probably use this method for other cameras as the lens center is in a different distance, so for a C300 is definatly possible as well as other low profile cameras. But for Scarlet and Epic not really.
about the 15mm solution I have an adapter that you can swap from universal to 15 in seconds toolless.
I believe that thebalance and low Gravity of a camera hheld rig is more importand than a small module that can be placed anywhere.The best possition for it is under the lens, and all it takes is a small bracket.
thank you very much for your interest and compliments
 
Hi Paul,

I think Kostas misunderstood your post a little as he's not up to speed in all things coming out on the market, but I am. Yes we are aware of this and we will work around this. We can't do anything until we actually have one in our hands - or if someone that has that info could give us the specifications on it. Especially the plate underneath with the cables running through for the motors.

What we probably will start with is to see if we're to have a different QR plate made up for this - so the distance in lens height is correct etc, but as I said, we can not do anything until we know the exact measurement of that plate. If anyone does and is interested. Please contact us and we can get to work immediately.

As for Joey and Steve regarding the patent. First of all thank you for you kind words and know that I understand completely. We all work hard, very hard and people don't understand how much work and heartache that is involved. They don't understand that when you're trying to create something different it involves so much stress that it's almost impossible to stay sane. Anyone who truly have started a company were not only work hours (personal) as an investment is needed, but also personal capital investment and have tried to do so from scratch. Well, they know how crazy it is and sometimes think... if I known. I wouldn't have started it, but in the back of your head you're the masochist and you would have anyway. Because you can't help to have that creative little mind tickle you're brain, telling you that you need to... have to do this. And it breaks your heart every time anyone complains as all you can think is - hey we're not magicians LOL. I would love to create a Ferrari that costs a fraction of what a KIA does and outruns a Bugatti LOL.

In saying this. I assure you that we had specialised attorneys and engineers (that deals with patent only) going through this. It cost us $30.000 just in legal fees only (quite a lot for a some guys doing a labour of love thing - with no sales, as of yet). I did point out your system specifically while going through it and as you already know is not a fun task - I also did all the hard work laying it out for the patent itself LOL. What was found - was that they're completely different solutions and that we should go ahead and apply for our own patent (which was yet another cost - as you also know) as ours has a different approach in what is the actual total purpose of our solution. I can ask them to have a look again although I know they will come back with the same answer.

Thank you for you interest.
 
Joey R. said:
Gavin, no FUD being spread on our side at all. You need to better understand what our patent, not patent pending, but granted patent actually says. It includes much more then its obvious you realize, whether you agree with it or not.

If you are bored and want some more reading material, please feel free to read up:
Patent number: 8128295
Issue date: Mar 6, 2012
Click to expand...

My apologies,

To my knowledge it was pending when we looked into it.
 
Hi Paul and others interested in the Preizler module

What I mean with that we need the specifications from the actual module itself is simply because RED accessories has a tendency to be slightly different in their specs to others - so it's not clever to measure this from other 3d party products. We should do so from the real thing.

What we are doing is using the already existing ones and are designing according to those and as soon as we have the actual specs we can start that in motion.

Thanks
 
paul engstrom said:
Hi Kostas,

Will there be a way to make this work with the forthcoming Meizler Module? The Meizler module utilizes a spacer underneath the camera (same thickness as those made by RED, Wooden Camera, Viewfactor, etc. to get the lens/rod distance correct when using RED/ET baseplates) through which cables run to power FIZ motors. As I look at your extremely nice setup I see you dispensing with that spacer (which makes sense I might add) and attaching to your low profile QR system directly. As a result it looks to me like you would not be able to use your system and Meizler module if, for example one still wanted to use 15mm studio rods. But then again you might have something clever waiting for us??
Click to expand...

If and when that come on the market on the other hand, I can always make special dovetail brackets that can be reaplaced on the fly, and can allow riser plates and also the Meizler module and the correct lens distance for this,for people to have if they buy this as well.
It will be an accessory item specially for this. Of cource you will be able to use it with the Meizler and or other riser plates of the same height with no prob.
So there is a solution to this for the future.

Thank you
 
A few of pics with the Titan loaded up

A few of pics with the Titan loaded up

Hi Kostas,

Here are a few pictures of me with the Titan all rigged up. I would have more pictures but our stills camera is nowhere to be found. I'll post more from our upcoming shoot.

I haven't had an issue with the EVF being too far from the camera as one person posted. What I do like about it (EVF arm) is the ability to articulate in and out, up and down and back and forth.

I haven't rigged the Red battery module yet but will put that together and mount it up and post pictures of that setup.
 

Attachments

  • G 2.jpg
    G 2.jpg
    84.4 KB · Views: 0
  • G 4.jpg
    G 4.jpg
    91 KB · Views: 0
  • G 1.jpg
    G 1.jpg
    88.3 KB · Views: 0
Very nice Glenn. I can kinda tell you are a pretty tall guy, you head sticks out very high at the second photo , and I can tell from the evf possition that you have choosen as well.
that being so adjustable can practically go at all extreme possitions.
thanks for the photos.
 
Thanks for noticing Kostas. I stand six foot one, six six with an afro. (Fletch fans will know what I'm talking about). On a serious note, I like my EVF in a high position and the Titan EVF arm lets me get it to a position where I feel a little more "at one" with the rig. It's a fairly subject thing, positioning of an eyepiece that is, but I think most folks will find they can get the sweet spot to suit their shooting style.
 
Has anyone has any experience with the Shape composite grip?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top