So Leigh,

Are you going to take my suggestion and work on starts, stops. and direction changes for your next video as suggested by Charles' post?

Please let us know. We would like a bit more conversation than just "Thanks" although thanks is good.

Tery

Hehehehehe, I knew it would get to you eventually Terry :D

Leigh is a guy of very few words...

<<<-- Originally posted by Terry Thompson : So Leigh,

Are you going to take my suggestion and work on starts, stops. and direction changes for your next video as suggested by Charles' post?

Tery -->>>

Hi Tery,

Yes, I will try.

Regards
Leigh

You did it again!!!

Hello everyone,

Here is an exercise video I shot today using panasonic gs400. gs400 weighs less than 1 kg.

--------------------------------------
divx format(MPEG4) You may need to download decoder from www.divx.com

file size around 16mb

http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_3_27.avi

--------------------------------------
wmv format
file size around 18mb

http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_3_27.wmv

I hope you'll check out this video and offer some constructive criticism. I look forward to your comments.

Regards
Leigh

Leigh:

Either you have an extremely dry sense of humor, or you just aren't getting what many people have expressed to you both here and in the Steadicam forum. To continually post your videos with a form letter asking for criticism followed by a form letter simply stating "thank you very much" is, while superficially proper and polite on the surface, actually quite rude and thankless by repetition. Various people have taken the time to help you; others have challenged you, but you remain tight-lipped about your goals and intentions, and it is clear from the responses you have received in both forums (and for all I know, you could be posting these in half a dozen other boards as well) that you are frustrating people with your posting style.

What exactly is your intention? To become a good operator, or to gain feedback on a product that you plan to market, or both? When this thread began you were looking for the latter--now I don't even know what you are looking for. If this is still the case, you are using all of us for market research, and let's call it for what it is, and we can discuss the efficiency of your machine and not spend our time trying to help you become a better operator.

If you are truly invested in becoming a good operator, you must understand that there is an ethic in place that was set in motion by Garrett Brown nearly 30 years ago, and that is to share information and teach others about Steadicam in a generous fashion. It was handed on to me, and I hand it on to others, and I'm happy to donate my time to this even though I am tremendously busy with my own career and other pursuits.

However, I can't help but feel that you are being evasive and manipulative (whether intentional or not) with these identical posts for criticism. Read through this board to see what everyone else does when they put their work up for others to see. They generally will present their work with some qualifiers, others will comment on it, and then they will RESPOND to those comments, elaborating on the issues brought up, explaining their setbacks or triumphs, tackling each point so that they can learn from it, and others as well. It's a dialogue.

I have personally taken the time to offer you my thoughts on your work; I have also suggested in a more succinct manner many of the points in this particular post. I feel that neither has been responded to or learned from in some ways.

For instance: both Terry and I hammered home the importance of stops and starts from your last video. In this follow-up video, all the stops and starts are wobbly and seem like an afterthought, particular the last one at the end where you move off the subject arbitrarily and tilt up to the building. It looks like you gave up and turned off the camera. Is this the case? Or were you really trying to stop smoothly? Tell us; don't just say "thank you very much". What were you going for with this particularly video, what aspects of operating were you exercising? Or was it just that you are excited about putting your rig into low mode? There are literally dozens of comments I can make about composition and operating form as represented in this video, what worked and what didn't, but I want to hear from YOU what your assessment is of your work.

OK, here's your assignment: write a 100 words on "what I did on my summer vacation"--well, no, but do write about what you think of this exercise, where you failed, where you succeeded, what you need to work on. Then and only then will I furnish my comments on it, and I recommend that others do the same. I will stop short of re-posting this missive over at the Steadicam forum, but I strongly suggest that you consider taking the same approach over there, since as you have seen folks are more likely to tell you like it is, and that is "take a workshop". In other words, there's only so much free advice you should be asking for before paying someone for their time to teach you.

Oh, and thank you very much.

Hi Charles,

Yes, I will try.

Regards
Leigh


...hehehehe...

Charles,

I'll second that! I'm ROTFL about ..."write a 100 words on "what I did on my summer vacation.""

=======================

Funny Richard.

=======================

Leigh,

I was hoping for your latest post would say something like this...

Here is my latest video showing my progression on starts and stops as well as direction changes. I worked a week on them and feel I have progressed quite a bit. You will notice on the earlier direction changes I have some pendulumming* movement but on this last one it is almost gone. I am really pleased with my progress and would like to know if it looks as good to the rest of you.

I await your feedback and thanks in advance

Leigh

This is what we are looking for.

========================

The following is an honest question and not a criticism. Is English your first language or do you have a hard time with it? If you have a hard time with it I can see why you would use all the form posts and replies. Let us know so we can understand you better. If I had to write in another language I wouldn't have long posts either.

=======================

What bugs me the most (Charles would put that more eloquently) is that all the time Charles has put into posting information on this and other forums "unnecessarily", he could have been doing his training and instruction video and the rest of us could be much richer (ability wise) on our steadycam rigs. Once it's on video, we can have answers to questions we never even thought of asking. He is a very busy guy and I wish there was some way of helping him free up some time for his video so we could all benefit. You can see from what he has written that he has a great knowledge of steadycam principles and what's even better is that he is also a very good writer. You don't find that in very many people so we need to take advantage of it.

I would like to hear from others concerning this subject. Maybe I'll start a new topic "Who wants Charles Papert to finish his training video?" I told you I was going to be the pebble in your shoe, Charles.

*NOTE:Pendulumming is the swaying of the post caused by changes in direction or speed. This is due to the bottom being slightly heavier than the top in order to keep the post vertical. Charles could do a better job of that description. When I checked the word "pendulumming" using MS Word it gave only "Pendulum Ming" as an alternative and since I don't know anyone named “Pendulum Ming” (maybe Flash Gordon’s enemy?) I'm going to leave it just the way I spelled it. Charles...help!

Tery

P.S. It took me an hour to write this post as I have to correct and rewrite a lot so Leigh...make it worth it please.

Great post Terry (and CP)
But MS word missed one.. (and I'm saying this for the benefit of anyone reading... Sorry if you allready know this Terry..) But it's Steadicam with an I - not a Y! :)


- Mikko.

Hi Charles and Terry,

Thank you very much for spending the effort.

I apologize for what I did.

I am a software engineer with around ten years experience. I worried about my job as a programmer and thinking sometime I might not be competent enough to do programming anymore. My eyes get sored after 8 hours sitting in front of the computer every day. I need to find some skill to backup and make a living and do not want to always sitting in front of the computer for another 30 years.

I like watching movie and I heard that shooting wedding video can get NZ$600 plus for just one wedding. I thought that I just need to shoot four weddings every month and that would cover my basic living cost and was quite relaxed too. So I asked on the net about wedding camera. Lots of people gave me good advice to get a JVC gy-dv5000 camera. At that time I did not realize that it was not the camera, but the person behind the camera make a difference. I never touch a still camera or video camera before last April. Once I got the camera and it was big. I was very excited that it looks so professional and make me feel good. I hold the camera on my shoulder to shoot. I was really sad once the video play back the pc. It was too much shaking while I was moving. It seems that the difficulty only occurs after experience it. I asked the question about how to solve the shakeness problem on the cameraman forum. Lots of cameramen suggested me to exercise my muscle and do physical training. I thought that I did not want to be very strong while I was in 20 and I was quite happy about my current shape. I was sad that I might not get the steadiness I want to operate the camera on the shoulder. My collegue suggested me to learn about the steadicam. I used google and found the steadicam website. I was amazed by the steadicam described on the steadicam website. I thought that was the one I want to operate. But sadly once I found the price. It costed US$30,000 plus if I really want a decent one. My JVC gy-dv5000 package costed me around US$8,000. I had to use my programmer salary to repay back the camera for a whole year. At that time I did not think that I can repay back US$30,000 easily due to around half salary level in NZ compare to USA. My dad helped me to build a stablizer in last May. Once we finished that stablizer, we realized that it was so simple and can make a fortune on it. So I decided not to make a living on wedding shooting, but manufacturing the device. After using the stablizer, I realized that operating stablizer also was a challenge. I searched on the net and found that operating a steadicam need years of practising. I thought that if I really want to sell the device, I first need to demo the video shot by the device. I can't afford to hire a steadicam operator to demo my device. I heard there are aournd two steadicam operators in NZ. I have to do the job myself. There were limited training material on the net. I purchased the book <steadicam techniques & aesthetics> written by Serena Ferrara. But there was little mentioned about the skill to operate the steadicam. I also purchased the tape <award winning workshops advanced steadicam techniques>. But just as the name said, the skill described in the tape is not for the beginner. I asked the question on the home built stablizer website. Someone told me that it was a combination of my equipment and a lot of practice. I thought that maybe the best is just to practise myself and posting the video on the net for feedback. That is why you have seen these videos posted on the net. I want to be like Mr. Brown and get every cameraman a stablizer.

The first video I made at that time I did not know anything about how to operate the steadicam. I just viewed the photo posted on the steadicam website and the advanced training video tape. The photo just tell the hand position but nothing else. It was too much side movement and I spent months trying to figure out the reason. Actually my left hand hold the post very tight as I worried about the post not in straight position. Now I realized that I should gently slightly touch the post as Charles and others pointed out in previous post. Later I found out that most beginners like me worrying about the camera might drop to the ground.

I experienced low mode several months ago, as mentioned previously, I hold the post too tight and the footage was really bad. I have not practised low mode just yesterday. I was really surprised that the gs400 camera was very light and not much shaking demonstrate in the lcd screen. John Cooksey from elitevideo said walldo in his training video is very important. And I really feel the powerfullness of walldo in low mode of steadicam. Walldo stand for wide, angle, low, linking, depth, opposite. I was very happy all these elements were applied in low mode shooting. I did not realized the importance of stops and starts from my last video. I just excited about low mode demo and simulate fake 3d environment. It looks so fun. And it really seems that low mode is an unusal shooting angle from normal viewing and is really powerful and offer some perspective.

I am sorry about lengthy post and I look forward to getting a copy of Charles training video. Hi Charles, let me know once the tape is on sell. Thanks

To Terry:

I am a Chinese and mandarin is my mother tongue.

Regards
Leigh

wow...
*applause*

Thankyou Leigh, that cleared up a lot! :-)

Unfortunatly I'm stuck on a modem connection at the moment, so I haven't had a chance to watch your video clips yet, So I'll leave those coments to the others.

But as far as operating goes, and I think you'v allready been told this on the steadicamforum too, but before learning steadi, it is crucial to be a good regular operator too. - All the normal rules of shooting apply and form the base of steadicam shooting.
Keep it up, practice practice practice. And try to find some proper instruction somewhere in person. Again i'll say Workshop beacuse we always do.
But here is a sugestion from me for your next clip for the guys to review:
Shoot a short video (subject unimportant) WITHOUT your stabilizer. - show us your skills on a Tripod, and handheld (dont' worry about stability.. just show us the pictures you make)

- In fact i'd sugest simplifying it even furthur and just posting some still pictures, either shot as stills, or frame grabs from video. - And tell us why you posted them, show your best work and tell us why it's good, and also post some failed still shots, and tell us what is wrong with them.

First a picture, then moving pictures, then moving camera!

- Mikko

Hi Mikko,

Thanks for the encouragement.

I started practising still photo once I got my gs400 several months ago.

Here is the photo which I think was my best shot.

http://www.salenz.com/picture/IMGA1929.JPG

I love this photo as it is quite unique. You can see shallow depth of field. The focus is on the eye of the bug and it draw attention to the bug. All the back ground is out of focus. The skin of the bug likes knight's cloth. The color was painted like gold. 8 )

Here is the photo including the bug compare to my finger.

I shot some photos and I put on my site for your reference.

http://www.salenz.com/picture/

All shot by a minidv camera using still photo mode. The minidv camera is gs400.

The bad one is this one.

http://www.salenz.com/picture/house.jpg

Because my camera is just normal minidv camera which is not suitable for this kind of view. I found that my gs400 is really good at shoot tiny object. For big view, I need a digital SLR still camera. I don't want to spent extra money on SLR right now. So I just use my gs400 for practise.

Regards
Leigh

<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : Great post Terry (and CP)
But MS word missed one.. (and I'm saying this for the benefit of anyone reading... Sorry if you allready know this Terry..) But it's Steadicam with an I - not a Y! :)


Mikko,

I use the term "steadycam" in the generic sense to refer to all camera stabilization systems (like mine) which owe their existence to the original "Steadicam". I spell it differently on purpose in respect to Garrett Brown (whom I have met) and all the Steadicam operators like Charles Papert (whom I have also met). We own a great deal to them.

Thanks for letting me clear this up.

Tery

Ironically, the rig I use is not made by Tiffen, thus it is not a true Steadicam either...!

Leigh, thanks for your post, it cleared up a lot and please feel free to elaborate at length any time.

I have an impossibly early call tomorrow so I will try to give you notes on the latest video when I can get to it.

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Ironically, the rig
I have an impossibly early call tomorrow so I will try to give you notes on the latest video when I can get to it. -->>>

Hi Charles,

Thanks

Don't worry about that.

Regards
Leigh

Charles,

I stand corrected but the idea is the same. I know you have a deep respect for Garrett and the origional Steadicam as well.

Even though there are many steadycam type rigs out there that are extremely well made like the MK-V they all stem from the same place. Just giving credit where credit is due.

============================

Leigh,

I'm going to take a look at you last video and see what I can see...It looks like your server is down so I will look tomorrow.

Tery

Terry:
I suspected this was the case. - I just hate when it's a misconseption, not the highly earned respect the name and it's history deserves. (yeah, [must show worthynes...] i'v met GB a few times too :-) - not CP yet though ;-)

Leigh:
I'm writing this post in 2 parts; this first part while I download the photos..
And I'll use this time to make a technical sugestion:
I would sugest compressing what you post somewhat.
Raw images are nice, and crucial for picture quality in production, but not for reviewing camera work.
Of course if focus is beeing addressed then sharper is better.
However in the situation we are workign in now, where we are looking at the other elements of shooting, framing, composition, and movement it doens't need as big images.
So please: can you shrink your files considerably before posting them. 1.5meg files per picture is just too large for me to download, use an image editor to bring them down to a few hundred k. - Those pictures you post wont' even fit on my monitor so that i can see them properly!
- The images on my site (http://mikko.n3.net/photos) show enough for what we are looking for, and they are only 650x433 and 89kb in size.
- Same goes for video, granted i knwo it's much bigger of course, but we dont' need full frame sizes here. - Heck very few camera viewfinders (and steadicam monitors) show full resolution!

Ok, enoguh technical mumbo.. the fiels have downloaded so i'll take a look at them:

first: The bug.
Cool photo! definatly has that "wow" element. and it's well framed and good composition too. The Eye appears ot be the most important part of the picture, it's in the right place (rule of 3rds) and it's sharp. The rest of the bug is cropped out, but that's ok, it's not meant to be in the picture beacuse it's a Extreme Close Up. The soft focus tells us that it's unimportant.

The house.
Yeah i'll agree, this is a preay boring shot. It's good for showing a (your?) house, but it doens't have much of a subject. With no real foreground it has no dpth to it, and really dones't look too special as a picture. That beeing said, it does show the house well, and maybe with the camera slightly more to the right with the flowers more as foreground, it's a very good wide or establishing shot of the house. "Here is a house" - the house is well within the frame, and has a propotionate amount of "headroom" - it's a very balanced shot.
As an intereting shot it fails, but as a basic shot showing a house, all teh elements of a basic picture are there.

I dont' have time to check all your pictures, agian becuse they are rather big to download.

I took a moment to download one more "flower1.jpg".
This shot failed in my oppinon. When i first looked at it, the first thign i saw was the house in the background. The flowers (which i presume to be the subject of the picture) are off balance, they are tucked away on the bottom righ of the frame, while the top and left side are empty. - That would be a good example of too much headroom.
I threw it into photoshop and cropped it quickly to my oppinion of a better composition. - file: http://mikko.n3.net/files/flower1_2.jpg
See the difference?

Don't worry about what camera you are using. I read an article about a guy who's favorite picture was taken with a disposable camera. (was a cool shot too). and Dont' futz too much with exposure, focus, etc for these stills.

You next assignment, take some pictures of people, or animals, and post them here (smaller files please). even the same person in the same setting, but with a bunch of placements within the shot. - give us 3 shots with different headroom and see if we choose the same one as you think is best.

I am off on vacation skiing this coming week, but I will be back on next week with hopes of seeing lots of (smaller) stills! Keep shooting!

- Mikko

Leigh...I see my estimation of what sort of response you were likely to get in the Steadicam forum largely came true (certainly the part about "take a workshop")!

Not to pour fuel on the fire, but I could suggest this: even though making it to a workshop seems like an unsurmountable dream, it actually makes good business sense as you are thinking about getting into the manufacturing end of things. Learning as much as you can about your product and application and techniques etc. is a solid investment.

If however your goal is to get good enough at operating to be able to make a decent demo video to sell your rig, and that is all you are waiting on, wouldn't it make sense to hire an experienced operator to take the footage with your rig? I know you are in NZ--too bad this conversation didn't happen a year ago when I trekked through both islands!; regardless, you could even ship them your rig anywhere in the world. Whatever that would cost would be offset against the time you are currently losing, which equals revenue--each day that you aren't selling rigs, you are losing that income stream.

Personally, I think that if you had a solid product that is ready to sell, you should put up your website and get it out there even if you don't have a demo video yet. I would perhaps recommend that you when you do have that demo ready, you post it in either QT, Windows or Real--asking people to download the Divx plug-in may turn some off. And my two cents about stabilization video is that it's much more important to deliver a high frame rate than a large image, if you need to compromise on the size of the file.

Mikko,

Good job cropping. It does make a difference in the "focus" of the picture. I didn't know what I was supposed to notice most with the original picture. I probably would have pulled the dead flowers out is I was trying to show who beautiful they were.

===================================

Leigh,

I'm looking at coming to NZ in a couple of years for my and my wife's 30th anniversary. I want to see Tonga, Samoa, and NZ because I have always loved the South Seas. I'm also looking forward to lamb with mint sauce!

What part of New Zeland do you live in?

I agree with Mikko about file size. Yours are really too large for most of us on the web.

===================================

Charles,

What were you doing in NZ? Any kind of movie and if so...what movie? Just wondering.


Tery

<<<-- Originally posted by Terry Thompson : Leigh,

I'm looking at coming to NZ in a couple of years for my and my wife's 30th anniversary. I want to see Tonga, Samoa, and NZ because I have always loved the South Seas. I'm also looking forward to lamb with mint sauce!

What part of New Zeland do you live in?

-->>>

Hi Terry,

Thanks for asking. I live in North Shore City, Auckland. It is a quite nice place and I can go swimming on the beach everyday in summer. The place I really like is Singapore where I can swim whole year on the beach. 8 ) But the law in Singapore is pretty strict which I don't like.

Regards
Leigh

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : Leigh...I see my estimation of what sort of response you were likely to get in the Steadicam forum largely came true (certainly the part about "take a workshop")!

Not to pour fuel on the fire, but I could suggest this: even though making it to a workshop seems like an unsurmountable dream, it actually makes good business sense as you are thinking about getting into the manufacturing end of things. Learning as much as you can about your product and application and techniques etc. is a solid investment.

If however your goal is to get good enough at operating to be able to make a decent demo video to sell your rig, and that is all you are waiting on, wouldn't it make sense to hire an experienced operator to take the footage with your rig? I know you are in NZ--too bad this conversation didn't happen a year ago when I trekked through both islands!; regardless, you could even ship them your rig anywhere in the world. Whatever that would cost would be offset against the time you are currently losing, which equals revenue--each day that you aren't selling rigs, you are losing that income stream.

Personally, I think that if you had a solid product that is ready to sell, you should put up your website and get it out there even if you don't have a demo video yet. I would perhaps recommend that you when you do have that demo ready, you post it in either QT, Windows or Real--asking people to download the Divx plug-in may turn some off. And my two cents about stabilization video is that it's much more important to deliver a high frame rate than a large image, if you need to compromise on the size of the file. -->>>

Hi Charles,

Thanks for the suggestion.

It seems that I can't pickup my operating problem on my 17 inch lcd monitor initially. Only after spending hours watching my low mode video on a projector, I can clearly see the problem now.

I spent around 20 years using computer including ten years working as a programmer and I feel that I am competent enough to write some general business software now. Thus I think that I should do the same to my stablizer business. I am not in a hurry to make money as stablizer business is just my part time business and I have my main job as a programmer to support me as I stated in my previous post. I will give a time frame for 8 years for my stablizer business to grow up.

Regards
Leigh

<<It seems that I can't pickup my operating problem on my 17 inch lcd monitor initially. Only after spending hours watching my low mode video on a projector, I can clearly see the problem now. >>

And what would that be?

<<What were you doing in NZ?>>

Strictly sight-seeing. 6 weeks through NZ and Oz, loved all of it.

<<<-- Originally posted by Charles Papert : <<It seems that I can't pickup my operating problem on my 17 inch lcd monitor initially. Only after spending hours watching my low mode video on a projector, I can clearly see the problem now. >>

And what would that be?>>

Obvious one is you said in your previous post start shot around several seconds shaking, end shot without too much thinking about how to end, thus cause hesitation to end the shot and cause it not fluid ending.

Less obvious one is that I use my left hand constantly touching the camera and tilting the post.

Maybe you can tell me other missing one I have not figure out yet.

Regards
Leigh

Leigh,
I'm back and hoping for some new excersize stills, but none i see!


- Mikko..

<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : Leigh,
I'm back and hoping for some new excersize stills, but none i see!


- Mikko.. -->>>

Hi Mikko,

How was your holiday? Fun? 8 ) Skiing is my dream hobby too. But I never try it.

I got some photo in my PC and I am selecting some photo for our review. I am hoping to upload to my server in next two days.

I have uploaded some photo I shot last month.
Click here My post date is from April 2nd, 2005 03:58

Just check the one mark with small size photo as you have slow internet connection. They are around three times smaller than full size photo.

Tell me what you think of these photo. 8 )

Regards
Leigh

<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : Leigh,
I'm back and hoping for some new excersize stills, but none i see!


- Mikko.. -->>>

Hi Mikko,

Here are some photo I shot for our review. 8 )

The one mark small is small size photo. They are around 140k bytes.

Flower 1 small size photo
Flower 1 full size photo

Flower 2 small size photo
Flower 2 full size photo

Flower 3 small size photo
Flower 3 full size photo

Flower 4 small size photo
Flower 4 full size photo

The decision for me to select which one is best is quite hard. All are nice photos IMHO. I really like the one is number 4. Both corner got flower and it seems offer some balance and talking to each other. 8 )

Thank you for your time and effort to teach me and I look forward to hearing from you.

Regards
Leigh

Hi Mikko,

I look forward to your comments.

Regards
Leigh

Leigh,

Pictures 1 and 3 look like the same picture. They are better than 2 and 4. Picture 4 doesn't have a definite focal point. It looks like you are framing for something in the middle but there isn't anything in the middle.

How did this thread go from video to stills?

Nice flowers though.

Terry

<<<-- Originally posted by Terry Thompson : Leigh,

Pictures 1 and 3 look like the same picture. They are better than 2 and 4. Picture 4 doesn't have a definite focal point. It looks like you are framing for something in the middle but there isn't anything in the middle.

How did this thread go from video to stills?

Nice flowers though.

Terry -->>>

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the comment.

Mikko suggested me to learn to take photo first, so I just go back to where the industry started. 8 )

Regards
Leigh

Oh, I get it, composition. Good idea!

Tery

You got it Terry. I see that needing some work before moving!

Leigh;

I like the pictures. and i definatly think that terry put it very well abotu shots 2 and 4. you can probabaly see that yourself.
4 is somewhat balanced as you said. but with the left flower out of focus it looses importance and puts the shot off balance.

However, 1 and 3 - are very similar, but one is definatly better than the other in my oppinion. It has "balance" of objects in the frame without the distraction of unimportant elements.
Can you tell which one i'm talking about? Which is better of 1 and 3? why?

First tell me which is better, 1 or 3? Then surf over to: http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp022.htm and read that module as well as modules 23, 24 and 25.

- Mikko.

<<<-- Originally posted by Mikko Wilson : You got it Terry. I see that needing some work before moving!

Leigh;

I like the pictures. and i definatly think that terry put it very well abotu shots 2 and 4. you can probabaly see that yourself.
4 is somewhat balanced as you said. but with the left flower out of focus it looses importance and puts the shot off balance.

However, 1 and 3 - are very similar, but one is definatly better than the other in my oppinion. It has "balance" of objects in the frame without the distraction of unimportant elements.
Can you tell which one i'm talking about? Which is better of 1 and 3? why?

First tell me which is better, 1 or 3? Then surf over to: http://www.cybercollege.com/tvp022.htm and read that module as well as modules 23, 24 and 25.

- Mikko. -->>>

Hi Mikko,

The flower in the right bottom in picture 3 should be completely out of focus, but it is reasonable focus now. I did not successfully throw that element out of the picture which distract of the important element, the center flower in the picture 3. Thus picture 3 got two focus flower which left top corner became empty cause picture not balanced.

Am I right?

Regards
Leigh

Legh.

I like picture 3 more.
The flower in the top left of picture 1 does provide a little balance, but it's out of focus and there fore part of the backgroudn and not in the equation of balance.
Therefore i'd say that picutre 3 is better becaus the focus is in the right place in the frame. in picutre 1 it's all too far in the bottom right corner.

That beeing said none of those pcitures are what i'd call a "great" picture.

Ok. next assignment:
Take another set of photos. but of a person. Again same questions abotu composition. ignore focus, ignore everything else, just where is the person in your frame.

Oh and even smaller image sizes would be better - about 50% of the smaller ones of this set.


- Mikko.

Hello everyone,

Here is a video I shot backward today. Glad the day is not sunny, so it is quite easy to control the camera. The camera is my old jvc gy-dv5000 camera with a fujinon s20x6.4brm-sd lense.

I found that shot backward is harder than shot forward. I think I need some more exercise. ;-)

wmv format

Here is the link

[short]file size around 10mb
http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_5_21_small.wmv

[long]file size around 98mb
http://www.salenz.com/movie/2005_5_21.wmv

I hope you'll check out this video and offer some constructive criticism. I look forward to your comments.

Regards
Leigh

Leigh,

You're a skunk! The video looks very good but I was waiting for you to "reveal" yourself as you panned at the end of your shot. I thought I might see you reflected in the glass but you panned perfectly at the end of the building. NOT FAIR!

Thanks for the smaller file size. It looked fine on my computer.

Terry

Hi Terry,

Thanks for the comment.

I am shy in front of the camera. ;-)

Regards
Leigh

Excellent Leigh. Very nicely done.

[edit: See, I can be nice.]

-Rick

Hi Rick,

Thanks for the praise. ;-)

Regards
Leigh

Leigh:

Yes indeed, the operating is looking solid. Your horizons are looking better every time.

It would be helpful for you to start using a subject again, perhaps you have some friends that you can corral for this purpose; block out a "scene" and start to work on the reactive aspect of operating; moving with a person, framing, using the boom arm, pans and tilts etc.

Now, let me ask you this: is your rig substantially improved from when you posted your earlier clips, or is it basically the same?

Hi Charles Papert,

Thanks for the comment.

There is no change for the device for the last six months. I was very sad that we can not invent device help cameraman instantly get steady shot. It seems that still need lots of training. For me, as I mentioned before, I spent an hour training everyday and I bought myself a nice mp3 player and walking with the music to get rid of boring stuff. 8 )

Regards
Leigh