self made a little steadycam for sony hc3 at DVinfo.net

Go Back   DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-A1 and HDR-HC Series

Sony HVR-A1 and HDR-HC Series
Sony's latest single-CMOS additions to their HDV camcorder line.


Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old October 26th, 2006, 02:12 PM   #1
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: italy
Posts: 27
self made a little steadycam for sony hc3

hi friends, i have buy a wonderfull video camcorder sony hdv hc3 model
fantastic quality :-)))))))) image very bad stabilation image, a little moviment of my body big moviment to image video :-((((((((

i would make a little steadycam for stabilation image.
you have a little plane for self made a steadycam ???????

thanks a lot for reply.

bye m.

sorry for my bad english
Marco Levi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2006, 03:42 PM   #2
Major Player
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Grand Rapids, MI, USA
Posts: 202
Many of the self-built units use a pipe with the camera threaded to the top and a balancing weight on the bottom. I've seen some where the owner puts in a lever arm in the middle somewhere, using a pipe T-joint and another piece of pipe.
Jeff DeMaagd is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2006, 04:28 PM   #3
Major Player
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Location: Toronto Ontario Canada!
Posts: 353
Here you go,

http://www.cs.cmu.edu/~johnny/steadycam/

I built one myself and improved upon the design of that on the website, but nevertheless honestly tho it is a poor stablizer, but I guess good for the price. I do use it for the ultra low ground shots on short films but for obvious reasons my Merlin does a WAYYY better job.
__________________
dreaming hobbyist + storyteller
www.michaelywong.com
Michael Y Wong is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2006, 08:05 PM   #4
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,781
Yup. It amazes me how many people have followed that model, considering it has inherent flaws in the design that have nothing to do with cost.
__________________
Charles Papert
www.charlespapert.com
Charles Papert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 26th, 2006, 10:49 PM   #5
Trustee
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Wyomissing, PA
Posts: 1,141
Images: 57
Yes, but for 32 bucks I now have useable handheld/follow shots and without requiring EIS. I did it as a joke and was surprised by the results.

I have two days of soccer matches to shoot this weekend, and with little notice I have no time to pick up a better device. Even my monopole and three point shoulder rigs won't do, the image just falls apart if I have to move to follow the action. Don't let the cheap stuff fool you, it covers the basic need for counter balance. The rest is skill.
Peter Ferling is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 02:31 AM   #6
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,781
What I was getting at was that without the rig costing any more, it could be far better designed. That right angle handle coming off the side inhibits the stability and should be eliminated. If the whole thing were made out of PVC with counterweights at the bottom (especially if in the shape of an inverted T, with weights at either end of the horizontal bar), it would be both lighter and more inert.

In other words--it would be just as easy to build a rig for the same cost that would be a more effective stabilizer. Yet this particular design has proliferated.

This all said, if you are happy with the results, all this is moot.
__________________
Charles Papert
www.charlespapert.com
Charles Papert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 03:03 AM   #7
Major Player
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Barca Spain
Posts: 384
update to Johnny's $14 steadycam

There is one important update done to famous Johnny's $14 steadycam. Added one more weigth - to horizontal boom. It should reduce pan-style instability. Who uses it knows it well how it emerges.
For those who can't get it work well - it needs pretty good physical shape. You have to be able completely unbind Your forearms from body, that they can work as buffer. It's not easy but possible. And so does it very good job imo.
Frank Hool is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 06:13 AM   #8
Regular Crew
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Posts: 28
Quote:
Originally Posted by Charles Papert
What I was getting at was that without the rig costing any more, it could be far better designed. That right angle handle coming off the side inhibits the stability and should be eliminated. If the whole thing were made out of PVC with counterweights at the bottom (especially if in the shape of an inverted T, with weights at either end of the horizontal bar), it would be both lighter and more inert.

In other words--it would be just as easy to build a rig for the same cost that would be a more effective stabilizer. Yet this particular design has proliferated.

This all said, if you are happy with the results, all this is moot.
I don't mean this sarcastically: have you considered designing something like this with your ideas and publishing it on a website? I'm sure many would love to follow your better design and you could surely find a way to use that attention to your own benefit.
Lee Kazimir is offline   Reply With Quote
Old October 27th, 2006, 01:05 PM   #9
Wrangler
 
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Los Angeles, CA
Posts: 6,781
Umm--haven't thought about it, I have other projects out there that are more pressing (and lucrative, to be honest...I don't think Johnny has made much off his plans!)

This design is essentially the same as the Steadytracker, in any event. nothing new or radical about it.

The key to a handheld gimballed stabilizer is minimizing the weight of the system as much as possible to reduce operating fatigue. The next guideline is to distribute the weight as intelligently as possible. Use the principle of physics, which indicate that the further a mass is moved from a fulcrum, the more leverage it exerts. An assembly of steel pipes may weight 6 lbs, or the same assembly made of PVC may only weigh 1 lb, which allows 5 lbs of dead weight to be added as far from the camera as possible, which will present substantially more inertia than the steel version. Or you can perhaps add only 3 lbs of dead weight and realize the same inertia as the steel pipe version for 2/3" of the overall weight, which will allow you to shoot for longer.

The outrigger arm in the original design seemingly presents an opportunity for the other hand to be used to further stabilize the rig, but in reality it is introducing a whole new set of forces into the system. At that point you have simply expanded the footprint of the camera and made it heavier, both of which will increase inertia (that's how the Fig Rig works) but you are sacrificing the isolating effects of the Steadicam design that cantilevers from a single multi-axis fulcrum.
__________________
Charles Papert
www.charlespapert.com
Charles Papert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2006, 05:06 PM   #10
Major Player
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: East TN
Posts: 415
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marco Levi
i would make a little steadycam for stabilation image.
you have a little plane for self made a steadycam ???????
I built one and used the forums at http://homebuiltstabilizers.com/ as a guide.

Parts I used:
1" Aluminum Box Channel
Tripod camera mount from old tripod
Handle from old monopod
1/2" balljoint from mini tripod (this serves as the "gimbal")
3/4" Nut
Teflon "T" washer from a toilet water supply hose (served as a relatively low friction socket for the balljoint.
1/8" sheet metal to use as a bracket on the bottom of the sled. Used poprivets to secure the sheet metal to the sled.
And a variety of nuts and bolts.

Use the pictures as a guide and the forums mentioned above... this thing flies really well and was used with one of my HC1s till I bought a glidecam 2000. The pipe systems and many other homebuilt jobs look like crap--so I built this one that works and looks much better.

BTW, position the middle and lower arm to control the vertical angle during balancing... and make sure you secure the tripod mount VERY WELL so the camera doesn't fall off. I used some aluminum angle channel and pop riveted the tripod mount to the angle metal, then cut a slot for the two screws to slide through it and secure with the nurled nuts.

Good luck.
Attached Thumbnails
self made a little steadycam for sony hc3-01.jpg   self made a little steadycam for sony hc3-02.jpg  

self made a little steadycam for sony hc3-03.jpg   self made a little steadycam for sony hc3-05.jpg  

self made a little steadycam for sony hc3-06.jpg  
__________________
Jerome
www.jeromecloninger.com
Jerome Cloninger is offline   Reply With Quote
Old November 7th, 2006, 05:54 PM   #11
Major Player
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London UK
Posts: 376
Here is my homemade stabilizer, mainly made from old bicycle parts and scarp stuff I found around the place, the only thing I really paid out for was a 7" monitor (arounf 50).

http://img154.imageshack.us/img154/1708/12ru4.jpg

http://img109.imageshack.us/img109/2324/29cg.jpg

Lee
Lee Wilson is offline   Reply
Reply

DV Info Net refers all where-to-buy and where-to-rent questions exclusively to these trusted full line dealers and rental houses...

Professional Video
(800) 833-4801
Portland, OR

B&H Photo Video
(866) 521-7381
New York, NY

Z.G.C.
(973) 335-4460
Mountain Lakes, NJ

Abel Cine Tech
(888) 700-4416
N.Y. NY & L.A. CA

Precision Camera
(800) 677-1023
Austin, TX

DV Info Net also encourages you to support local businesses and buy from an authorized dealer in your neighborhood.
  You are here: DV Info Net > Sony XAVC / XDCAM / NXCAM / AVCHD / HDV / DV Camera Systems > Sony HDV and DV Camera Systems > Sony HVR-A1 and HDR-HC Series

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

 



Google
 

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:27 AM.


DV Info Net -- Real Names, Real People, Real Info!
1998-2017 The Digital Video Information Network