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 :)

Freefly offer a list of features and statistics for the MoVI M10, asserts dominance

Tabb Firchau said:
Hi Evan,

I will post up BTS of this shot once it is cleared. It involved starting handheld on the top of the bridge, lowering the gimbal via a rope off a bridge and down to a ravine, and then continuing handhled. I fail to see how a hot head, jimmy jib, or scorpio could have accomplished this? In the BTS clip I was sent there were high fives around for getting the shot.


I will post the BTS clip when I am allowed and let forum members evaluate for themselves. I will say I have never seen a camera system prior to the MōVI produce stable footage when suspended from a single rope. If you have I would love to see it. The closest I have seen is the Klauscam.

Tabb
Click to expand...

Tabb, I did not say any of those could pull off the shot, I was asked to give a refernce for the heads performance and those are the examples I've used. The (rope) shot was designed with the MOVi in mind so it was the appropriate choice all along. My criticisim was that the head it's self was too fiddly and required too many comprimises to fit well into a more serious production in day to day use. Of course if you can handle the trade offs in both time and performance then it is capable of really interesting and unique shots but it's not a practical additon to a show for more than the odd novelty shot. And for owner/ops like myself that means it's not a great canidate for ROI at it's price point.
 
Evin Grant said:
Tabb, I did not say any of those could pull off the shot, I was asked to give a refernce for the heads performance and those are the examples I've used. The (rope) shot was designed with the MOVi in mind so it was the appropriate choice all along. My criticisim was that the head it's self was too fiddly and required too many comprimises to fit well into a more serious production in day to day use. Of course if you can handle the trade offs in both time and performance then it is capable of really interesting and unique shots but it's not a practical additon to a show for more than the odd novelty shot. And for owner/ops like myself that means it's not a great canidate for ROI at it's price point.
Click to expand...

Wow! Those are strong words. Novelty shots only? I thought Laforet shot the entire demo on the MoVI. Was that all novelty shots?

If it is true, and the MoVI is only capable of shooting novelty shots, then yes 15k is way too much money to spend on novelty shots.

I bought the MoVI with the intention of shooting an entire feature on it. Now I'm going to have an entire feature full of nothing but odd novelty shots!

I hope no one notices : /
 
I think I completely understand Evin Grants point. I also work as camera and steadicam operator and I know from own experience what it means sometimes to assemble the A camera to the steadicam during the day. You have to give a time how long it will take and if you say more than 10-20 minutes people might already get nervous. However, I don't really hope I'll have to setup a brushless gimbal under pressure. Of course it's also that there will be a lot of accessoríes which will have to be rigged down before the actual gimbal setup can start.

What I think should be clearly stated towards bigger productions is that a brushless gimbal of any kind is more a tool for the B or C camera, which might be mounted to the system in time before it is really needed. Even better if the camera can remain in the rig and be ready to use on demand. In that case having a brushless stabilizer on set can really be a big time saver which is also able to pull of great shots once in a while.
 
Last edited:
Andreas Kielb said:
I think I completely understand Evin Grants point. I also work as camera and steadicam operator and I know from own experience what it means sometimes to assemble the A camera to the steadicam during the day. You have to give a time how long it will take and if you say more than 10-20 minutes people might already get nervous. However, I don't really hope I'll have to setup a brushless gimbal under pressure.

What I think should be clearly stated towards bigger productions is that a brushless gimbal of any kind is more a tool for the B or C camera, which might be mounted to the system in time before it is really needed. Even better if the camera can remain in the rig and be ready to use on demand. In that case having a brushless stabilizer on set can really be a big time saver which is also able to pull of great shots once in a while.
Click to expand...

Now this seems like another "Game changer," based on what most perceptions, after release announcements...

I'm sure it will get sorted out over time, however...right?

Thank you very much

Fury
 
I meant it can be used on a lot of shots and also on great and complicated shots once in a while. Heck if you only think of the possibility to use brushless gimbals for car to car shots and how fast they might be accomplished. They are nothing less than small stabilized heads.

As you know I build these systems myself and I love what they can do but I think it's necessary to make such things clear. Use the B camera with it if possible and it'll be alright :). I'll probably use my portahead on a feature in oktober and november where I'll work as B-camera and steadicam operator and will let you know how it fits in.

Andreas

www.portahead.de
 
Last edited:
From a cameraman's perspective, the MoVI is enticing, in part, because it makes impossible "one-ers" possible. From a directors perspective it's alluring because it offers a different "feel" than hand held, jib or Steadicam. For a producer it might represent a way to make a project stand out from other similar fare.

Yes, the MoVI (and the knockoffs) can add production value on appropriate shots. There are probably even some producers and directors who will make good judgements about when to use it. Unfortunately, I'm preparing myself for hours and hours of footage shot on these kind of rigs for no apparent reason, without intentional service to story and as a substitute for other production values.

I'm not looking to "blame the messenger", kudos to Freefly and others for developing these rigs, but I see this as an analog to "with great power...

Just sayin'

Cheers - #19
 
My ideal use of a Brushless Gimbal would be on the end of a Jib arm personally, I think it's a pretty neat thing that a new kind of electrically assisted remote head has opened the door for a lot of things. Many people will use these in many different ways, my personal preference would be for swinging a cam through space, not necessarily walking a cam around, but that doesn't mean that other people won't use them in ways I've never dreamed of (on a rope for instance)...

Excited to see what the rest of this year looks like, and next year as well! If a great idea can be measured by how many people try to replicate it with their own spin then I think its easy to measure the potential here.
 
Carey Lee Coffey said:
Those guys are a trip over there. A lot of steadicam bias IMO LOL...
Click to expand...

No. Not a lot of Steadicam bias. There are many threads on that forum discussing where Steadicam should NOT be used, and it's limitations

The bias in that forum is respect for all professions. Sometimes Reduser - and most forums are far worse - has an untrained, uncultured amateur bias. "You don;t need skill or even money, now a monkey could shoot just as well with X-gadget."
 
Mike Smith said:
Clearly, these aren't going to replace Steadicam. They're two different animals. Anywhere a single, experienced Steadicam operator can do the job, it would be pointless using a two operator gimbal. But there are areas that the gimbal is better suited than a Steadicam. There's the obvious pass-through-a-window type shot, but also a gimbal can handle pitch-change shots - such as going from level to descending stairs and back - much better than a Steadicam. Also, a Steadicam is more vulnerable to accelerations in vehicles as it has to by definition be at least a little bit bottom-heavy, effectively making it a pendulum. The point of the gimbal is the camera is neutrally-balanced and the brushless motors maintain heading, pitch and roll while the cameraman/controller adds pitch and/or pan moves as the shot requires. Since the steadiness in all three axes is electronically controlled, a gimbal requires less experience to operate than a Steadicam. That is true. But the creativity of the shot is still down to the filmmakers, just like a Steadicam. Use it as a sort of Steadicam replacement, and you're missing the point.
Click to expand...

A skilled Steadicam Op with a good rig would have no problems like those you describe. Yes it requires experience and skill - but a Steadicam Op is not just a skilled user of said gear, they are also excellent camera ops with a refined eye for framing and motion who undesrtand the finer points of actors needs and set morale.
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
No. Not a lot of Steadicam bias. There are many threads on that forum discussing where Steadicam should NOT be used, and it's limitations

The bias in that forum is respect for all professions. Sometimes Reduser - and most forums are far worse - has an untrained, uncultured amateur bias. "You don;t need skill or even money, now a monkey could shoot just as well with X-gadget."
Click to expand...

Never mind. No offense intended. It was meant to be tongue-in-cheek.
 
I am sure that it will be used all the time, for a while. Poorly composed moving wide shots are going to get old really fast. Honestly, it's not like there is a burning need for this thing. 99% of the shots in the universe can be had with what one finds on a modest movie's grip truck and camera truck. Look at it this way, the amazing oners in Soy Cuba would have been more amazing with a MOVI. But they did them quiet a long time ago with out it, and with russian cameras for fucks sake.

Brushless technology is great, and it's new, but it really only makes sense for small cameras, so when you need a particular shot, that can be accomplished with a small camera, a brushless head is the solution.

I suspect that the hot head functionality will improve, but as it is right now, the brushless gimbals I have operated (and 99% of them are based on the same two pieces of software, so I doubt there are any major differences) are not quite as good as a jimmy jib head. Which is not great. Anyone used to operating a professional remote head will be disappointed in this technology ATM. I am sure it will improve.

Nick
 
Robert Ruffo New said:
A skilled Steadicam Op with a good rig would have no problems like those you describe. Yes it requires experience and skill - but a Steadicam Op is not just a skilled user of said gear, they are also excellent camera ops with a refined eye for framing and motion who undesrtand the finer points of actors needs and set morale.
Click to expand...
What are you saying here? That it's easy to be an Steadicam op? My point was the opposite - that it takes a lot more skill to be a good steadicam op because he/she is not relying on electronics to maintain a level horizon or smooth operation. I maintain there are shots that simply are not possible with a Steadicam that a 3-axis stabilized gimbal can do. Like the passing through a window to a second operator. Just because the latter can do it, isn't "rubbishing" a Steadicam because it can't, any more than a Steadicam is "rubbishing" a tripod because it's no good at running shots. Stop being so sensitive.
 
Dan Kanes said:
My ideal use of a Brushless Gimbal would be on the end of a Jib arm personally, I think it's a pretty neat thing that a new kind of electrically assisted remote head has opened the door for a lot of things. Many people will use these in many different ways, my personal preference would be for swinging a cam through space, not necessarily walking a cam around, but that doesn't mean that other people won't use them in ways I've never dreamed of (on a rope for instance)...

Excited to see what the rest of this year looks like, and next year as well! If a great idea can be measured by how many people try to replicate it with their own spin then I think its easy to measure the potential here.
Click to expand...

You can use the ProLine / better TRUTH gimbal as a regular remote head, since it's coming with a pan bar system isntead of a tiny RC remote.
 
Here's the battery plate mounted with the brain:


dbkD44s.jpg



Will be a nice combo with the carbon fiber Epic on Game of Thrones I reckon!
 
David Kellermann said:
You can use the ProLine / better TRUTH gimbal as a regular remote head, since it's coming with a pan bar system isntead of a tiny RC remote.
Click to expand...

David, does the pan bar system you use interface with the protocol(s) the MoVI uses (Spektrum and JR)?
 
Nick Gardner said:
...Brushless technology is great, and it's new, but it really only makes sense for small cameras, so when you need a particular shot, that can be accomplished with a small camera, a brushless head is the solution.

I suspect that the hot head functionality will improve, but as it is right now, the brushless gimbals I have operated (and 99% of them are based on the same two pieces of software, so I doubt there are any major differences) are not quite as good as a jimmy jib head. Which is not great. Anyone used to operating a professional remote head will be disappointed in this technology ATM. I am sure it will improve....Nick
Click to expand...

Nick...think you are saying...scorpio head best..followed by jimmy jib..followed by gimbals.
If so is that due to the quality of the remote controller or the motors themselves..?
Also was it possible to do dutch or barrel roll rotations with the gimbals you used..?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top