One of the greatest attributes of the MoVI is it's freedom of movement. You eliminate almost all of that by mounting it to a sled, or the arm. I could see the desire to remove the weight from the operators arms, or for additional translational compensation, but again you're now attached to the operator. The added complexity of mounting a MoVI inverted with the cg of the MoVI directly over the centerline of the sled, and having to balance two separate systems wouldn't be worth it. The MoVI's abilities would be hindered, and the steadicam then becomes a large heavy carrying device. Throw in the learning curve of having a moving object on top of the sled, and everything has just gotten way too complicated, with little to no benefit. KIS comes to mind
Remember this?: http://www.ulozto.net/live/xE2USHX/bugs-bunny-hare-we-go-1951-avi My favorite line: "she's-a round like-a my head" WHAM! "she's-a flat like-a you head" Until somebody mounts a Movi on top of a Steadicam and takes it for a spin, we might as well be asking if the world is flat. So I'll say it again: Try it and find out.
I don't have to: http://www.portahead.de/ This guy owns a Steadicam and is already planning to test it out with his gimbal. I was just hoping somebody would also try it with a Movi.
Guys, I too was thinking about mounting the MoVI on a steadicam. I only have a steadicam Pilot though. I did some tests with the current 3-axis gimal, but they didn't turn out too well. How are you going to mount the MoVI? Upside down? Any plans on adapter plates anyone? I tried to extend the upper arm, because I suppose the MoVI will need some space for rotation (when not mounted upside down), but that didn't work too well. I really like the jib idea, but I guess the pilot won't carry the weight.
Upside down would be the only way, unless you built a cage around it. I still don't understand the reasoning behind putting a stabilizer on a stabilizer though
Actually there are two reasons for me: Just last saturday I had the steadicam on a whole day - talking about 12 hours+. I can´t imagine carrying a MoVI for more than an hour. I like to make pretty fast moves with the steadicam and while I´ve seen people on horses with the MoVI delivering good results, I guess it would be more convenient, if the appropriate axis would be dampened. When running with a steadicam I always have to make rather short steps with little up and down movement. It would be a dream come true if I could run at full speed with a MoVI attached.
I could see using an attachment for the movi to the arm to bear the weight, but this thread has been about mounting the MoVI to the sled. If you had a fully configured movi at it's weight limit, you'd have a setup around 15 lbs + anything you added that isn't on the stabilized section. That's just enough weight for most medium weight capable arms to function properly. If you add all of that to the sled, you're then having to add useless dead weight just to balance, and adding even more complexity getting lens height. It might not even be possible to get a usable lens height range, since the movi would add an additional 8-10 between the lens and the stage.
I still don't understand the reasoning behind putting a stabilizer on a stabilizer though[/quote] I'll bet flight looked pretty stupid too, until we started doing it left right and center. I say try it. You might be surprised at what you find:
Not sure why flight would look stupid... Many here have been flying cameras for years on multi rotors, and some like myself came from large single rotor helicopters. The MoVI was "born in the sky". The best part about the MoVI is the freedom of movement it allows for, but for some reason you seem fixated on making bad steadicam operators better. The moves you've described the MoVI steadicam doing, can currently be done with the steadicam tango.
Ever try a Steadicam Tango? Compare that learning curve to a Movi on a Steadicam. Why would I want to make bad Steadicam operators better, you ask? The same could be asked about automotive design. Why would you want to make bad drivers better? Why would you want to make anyone who's bad at something better? The answer should be self evident. Seriously, think about this question for a minute and ask yourself why you're even asking it.
You're missing the point. Watch the video again so you can see how the MoVI is a tool that frees up the camera operator. It unleashes new possibilities to move the camera in ways that have not been possible before. Bolting it to a sled would remove all but a small range of movement. Would you strap a helicopter to the ground, so it can only move 10 feet in any direction? If you need to put a 15k stabilizer on a 15k+ steadicam so the operator can keep a stable frame, you need to find a new operator. Having said that, there are other complicated interactions mechanically. Something you haven't accounted for is how the MoVI motors in each of their respective axis function. The interactions you would get when tilting the sled at various angles wouldn't allow the camera to be moved properly by the second operator. If the sled was neutrally balanced and you tilt it forward 90 degrees, the pan axis now becomes the roll axis, and the roll becomes a panning axis. Ever notice how the handles on the movi in all of the BTS videos only move at very shallow angles from level? We can continue to discuss why you want it to be the "next great thing", but the fact is that the physics of how the 2 devices work won't play well together. Howard passed along some, and I've tried to help you understand other aspects of it. Those of us that have been using 3 axis gimbals, and are steadicam operators as well do have more insight than you think.
Custom build a passive two axis gimbal for the pitch an roll axis only. Make sure it's large enough for the Movi to fit inside of it's inner dimensions. Mount the Movi underslung to the passive 2 axis gimbal. Mount the whole assembly to the Steadicam sled.
So now it's a 3 axis stabilizer, mounted inside a 2 axis stabilizer, mounted on a 3 axis stabilizer with another 3 axis stabilizing arm... Sounds so simple and easy to use.
So you're the old man that is blind, but sees everything? Up until a few days ago you didn't know that the pan axis had to be balanced on brushless gimbals... It sounds like you have a good background with steadicams, but you're just learning about 3 axis gimbals. If you ordered a MoVI, you'll get your feet wet soon enough. It's understandable that you don't want to take someone's word for it so I'll leave you to try it on your own one day.
I understand a "gimbal within a gimbal" is a bit tedious for most people to get their heads around. So here's a simpler solution. The more I think about it, the more I realize we probably won't need to isolate the pitch axis from the Movi. The Steadicam operator wouldn't need to tilt the sled much past 90 degrees to begin with. That's what the Movi is for. With the Movi on top, the remote operator would've already tilted the camera by now so there wouldn't be a need to go anywhere near the 90 degree limit. Use a passive cradle for the roll axis only. Mount the Movi to the cradle, and mount the cradle/Movi assembly to the Steadicam sled. Make sure the cradle is slightly bottom heavy. Better?
Very nice! Our company in Kyoto is trying to get this setup (MoVI M10 with Glidecam X-10 or similar). How did you mount it?