Here is something to water your mouth. You guys want to see a homebuilt professional arm? Check this out: Thanks to Andreas for the pic. This is the same guy who flew a 16mm on his older arm I posted along time ago who is a member on HBS website.

http://www.andreaskielb.de/new_arm.jpg

If you want more info on the arm just go to HBS forum.

Damn, that guy is good! It looks like a cross between a PRO and a Glidecam Gold arm. Impressive.

Hehe! I was just about to post this, Charles K. :)

Anyway, I'd say is more like www.baer-bel.de
We actualy talked about it on the forum, while Andreas made his design.
He calls himself the "beta tester" for the ideas that went back and forth on HBS forum! He did a wonderful job!

Damn, it looks good!

Impressive is right. Nice work!

Good Lord! That's not just an arm, it's a work of art. Beee-u-ti-ful job!

Dan
www.DVcameraRigs.com

May I ask how do you guys consider a good arm for steadicam? What crerteria? Light? Good looking?

TIA

Regards
Leigh

Here is my criteria:

1. Build (materials involved. Again, a budget thing)

2. Durability

3. Function

4. Stability

5. Capacity (depends on what capacity it was built for; for example, DV or Film. In other words, light weight or Heavy weight)

6. Weight. (The lighter the better but all depends on the budget involved)

Please note that my criteria extend to both commercial and Custombuilt/homebuilt arms.

That's a good list, Charles.

I would add my own thoughts that once you are actually flying the rig, the most important of those is #3--Function (I would probably bundle #4-- Stability, in with this). The smoother and more linear the arm, the better your results will be. What ultimately counts is what ends up on screen. But of course, if the arm isn't strong enough to properly counter the weight (#5), or it is excessively heavy (#6), then it will fatigue the operator more quickly which will ultimately affect the quality of the shot; and if it falls apart on you just before a take (#1 and #2), then you won't have a shot at all!

Had an exciting event a few days ago on "ER"--we were hardmounting the Steadicam on the dolly in low mode for a ground-level up to eye-level shot, and while balancing I heard an ominous announcement from down below. The part between the socket block and the first section of the arm had cracked deeply in two places, and would surely have broken in two given a substantial amount of additional torque.

Fortunately, we were only about 10 miles from the PRO shop, so I handed it off to transpo and it was back in my hands about an hour later, all fixed up with a new part! Too late for that particular shot, which we did on the dolly with a massive dance floor.

<<<-- Fortunately, we were only about 10 miles from the PRO shop, so I handed it off to transpo and it was back in my hands about an hour later, all fixed up with a new part! Too late for that particular shot, which we did on the dolly with a massive dance floor. -->>>

Not that was a big coincident. Just shows even the big rigs are capable of unfortunate accidents. Nice going Charles P.

This may sound naive, but please bear with me... The arm itself looks really good, there is no doubt. However, what good is just the arm without a vest? Does Andreas have any plans to make a harness?

Now THIS is what I've been talking about for a long time, about camera stuff. Form over Function if and when it works - WILL look fabulous . .remember the Spitfire? remember The Mallard steam engine? Now getting behind this concept and reversing the idea of this philosophy, think of a beautiful design and the function will be better . . by miles!

This piece of design should really get an award . . . .

Best regards,

Graham Bernard

<<<-- Originally posted by Keith Forman : This may sound naive, but please bear with me... The arm itself looks really good, there is no doubt. However, what good is just the arm without a vest? Does Andreas have any plans to make a harness? -->>>

Keith, of course he has the sled and vest. Like you said what's the point of the arm if he doesn't have the rest of the gear, com'on now.
No, he doesn't have any plans, as far as I know. If you want questions ask him on the HBS forum. He'll be glad to answer any questions.

His sled has cponents from an old EFP Sled (includes the gimbal as well).
He has a back-mounted vest but I think he is re-doing the vest. Again, you can ask him on the HBS forum if you want more info.

Graham, so far it works but he's doing more testing. He's machining more plugs to accomodate heavier springs to do more testing. Again, keep checking the forum, where he resides ;)

Oh yes, of course. But the fundamental wish to actually "make" a beautiful thing that then WORKS is - for my thinking - the way to go. I'm sorry, but there are some truly ugly and hideous stabilzers out there that shouldn't work, just on the basis that they are ugly IMHO!

Graham

Charles- I understand now... I think. What he is doing, is taking the componants of an existing system, and redesigning a new arm to fit it. So, what is the sled? And, can you get just the harness without the rest of the gear? Is there any real advantage?

Please understand, I'm not overly familiar with stabalisers, as are some of these illustrious members. I am curious, and hope to be able to move up to better gear... some day.

<<<-- Originally posted by Keith Forman : Charles- I understand now... I think. What he is doing, is taking the componants of an existing system, and redesigning a new arm to fit it. So, what is the sled? And, can you get just the harness without the rest of the gear? Is there any real advantage?

Please understand, I'm not overly familiar with stabalisers, as are some of these illustrious members. I am curious, and hope to be able to move up to better gear... some day. -->>>

Keith, you are misunderstanding me. The arm is completely built from scratch. Everything is machined from the ground up.

The sled is the only thing that uses parts from the Steadicam EFP and the SK2. Parts of the sled is from the SK2 and the gimbal comes from the EFP. The rest is homebuilt.

Can you please clarify your question on getting just the harness without the rest of the gear? If I understand you right. There is no point in just having the arm if you don't have the sled; and at the same token there is no point in getting the vest if you don't have the sled and the arm.

<<<--I'm sorry, but there are some truly ugly and hideous stabilzers out there that shouldn't work, just on the basis that they are ugly IMHO!-->>>

Graham, Have you heard the story of the ugly duckling? ;)

Yes .. I've got a mirror . . I'm still waiting! :(

<<<-- Originally posted by Graham Bernard : Yes .. I've got a mirror . . I'm still waiting! :( -->>>


Ha Ha good one.

Charles- There are several componants to a steady cam. Without all the parts, you have nothing but a pile of parts, right? So... Andreas has built a new arm, and will be using the rest of the parts from an old steady cam system?

I guess my question is this- Is it more cost efficient to build over buy? If I were skilled enough with machine work (So, it's a huge stretch ;) , and I machined the arm Andreas has built, would I be able to pick up the rest of the parts? For less than the cost of just buying a complete system?

Or is Andreas just doing this to prove it can be done?

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles King : Here is my criteria:

1. Build (materials involved. Again, a budget thing)
-->>>

Thanks for the comments.

May I ask why some manufacture claim gold as a feature for their stablizer?

I can understand to use titanium spring as a feature.

Regards
Leigh

The history of Steadicam, without going into endless and lurid detail, has had a long history of function over form. When the first PRO rig was introduced in the early 90's as the very first competitor to the official Steadicam, it was a clean but spartan all-aluminum design with lots of straight lines, as opposed to the more rounded Steadicam 3A with its contoured molded-plastic panels. Yet, the vast majority of working Steadicam operators flocked to the PRO for it's reliability and simplicity, as well as its ability to be field-stripped and cleaned (the gimbal can be broken down and all five bearings cleaned and lubed within 15 minutes, leaving enough time for lunch!).

Cinema Product's response to the PRO was the Master Series, which had a radical new industrial design again of molded plastic that some felt resembled a vacuum cleaner(!). The problem was that it was a non-modular system and didn't allow for additional gizmos and modifications to be added easily. It failed to win over the operators who had gone PRO.

In time, the PRO rig has evolved its industrial design as well. Their arm (http://www.pro-gpi.com/arm.htm) is a beautiful thing, not only in operation but in looks also. When some bored soul entertains themselves by gazing at my rig as it sits on the dock, more often than not it is the arm that impresses most.

Then there's the Steadicam JR vs the DV Steadicam. The JR was a brilliant piece of gear, but after a number of years an upgrade was due, and the DV rig was introduced. It looked badass, but it didn't work very well and was phased out, and the Steadicam JR became the sole handheld DV rig, with a design nearly 13 years old (look for a new version within the year!)

<<<-- I guess my question is this- Is it more cost efficient to build over buy? If I were skilled enough with machine work (So, it's a huge stretch ;) , and I machined the arm Andreas has built, would I be able to pick up the rest of the parts? For less than the cost of just buying a complete system?

Or is Andreas just doing this to prove it can be done? -->>>

Well Keith this all depends some factors:

1. Are you intended on being full time operator, part time or hobby?

2. What is your bugdet?

3. What are you intended on flying?

Answer to question 1 would be if you are an up coming operator than just rent a complete rig; If you are doing this as part of small business, which will be used on certain occasions then, rent one again( totally subjective); And last, if you are in it for the hobby then go ahead and build. Again, this all depends on your metal state and determination. Trust me, you're going to need it.

Answer to question 2 is simple. If you have the money then you've got no problems. You just buy a pro, mk-v or a steadicam

Answer to question 3 plays a major part of your descision. If it's DV then usually the choices are alot cheaper then choosing a system that will work for film. You could work to get the parts seperately to put together a compatible, optional custom system that will work for you. How much more economical that will be is depends on certain systems.

I think Charles P. would be better off answering this particular question - Take it away Charles


BTW, Andreas is just like everyone else on HBS. If we all had the cash, we wouldn't be building our own systems.

See more pics of his old rig and a pic of his post and gimbal on HBS website. You can also see a pic of him flying a 16mm camera. I posted a pic of him and the rig on this forum a long time ago.

When is it going up for auction on Ebay?

<<<-- Originally posted by Scott Ellifritt : When is it going up for auction on Ebay? -->>>

Good one but I sincerely doubt it.

"this all depends on your metal state and determination"

In general, I find it much cheaper and easier to buy, than it is to build. Way safer too ;)

But thanks Charles, you did answer my questions. And it really is a nice looking arm, Andreas has some serious skills in a shop.

Charles P: your link is not working?

Rob, I'll answer this for Charles P. The link is the same for gpi pro website. Just Copy this into your browser: http://www.pro-gpi.com

No problem Kieth.

Charles K: I get an under construction message when I go to that
URL. So that's not working either. Or is that what you are saying?

You're probably right Rob. I got the same message. Sorry.

I know pro-gpi and their beautiful arm (actually, I like this arm over any other one).

I checked the link again. "Under construction"? I get something more scary:

"pro-gpi.com

This domain name expired on 10/25/2004 and is pending renewal or deletion."

www.pro-gpi.com works for me...

Charles, you are perhaps getting a page already in your browser's cache.

This is what I got:

"pro-gpi.com

This domain name expired on 10/25/2004 and is pending renewal or deletion."

Me too. Guess Charles is on some hidden list of people allowed to
see the site <g>

You guys were right about cached pages--I finally found one with the same message you were getting.

Here's a page (http://homebuiltstabilizers.com/10.jpg)on Charles K's site that shows the PRO arm amongst other goodies.

The pro website is now back up: http://www.pro-gpi.com