I was looking on the internet and found this site. Anyone have any experience with them? Any opinions?

What would a "real" stadycam set me back?

TIA!

Here's the link: http://littlegreatideas.com/steadycam/

I built one of these once long ago. It definitely removes vibrations that would be there if just shooting handheld. It's also just a good experiment in the principles of stabilization. Unfortunately, I wouldn't consider it to be of any practical use in a real production environment. But, for under $50 of materials you can get at the hardware store, it's hard to go wrong.

A "real" Steadicam can start at around $800 and go up to the hundreds of thousands.

I built one of these once long ago. It definitely removes vibrations that would be there if just shooting handheld. It's also just a good experiment in the principles of stabilization. Unfortunately, I wouldn't consider it to be of any practical use in a real production environment. But, for under $50 of materials you can get at the hardware store, it's hard to go wrong.

A "real" Steadicam can start at around $800 and go up to the hundreds of thousands.

I made one of these, and I do want to warn you - it takes forever to drill through those metal end-caps, and you need to get that sucker 100% straight, otherwise all your stabilization footage is going to look like it's shot at a dutch angle.

It absolutely helps but not so much that I considered my adventures "worth it."

I built one a few years ago, and actually found a way around drilling the end cap by using some sort of plumbing reducer. I threaded it onto the top post, and was able to bolt into the camera directly through it. I subsequently changed it by mounting an old tripod head to it. This enabled me to "trim" it slightly.

At the end of the day, it's an amusing little project, and it can have a nice effect on your shots, but it doesn't compare to a Steadicam AT ALL in my opinion.

You can often find older Steadicam JRs on that evil auction website that is frowned upon here in the forum. I've seen them go for under $100 to over $400. I got two JRs that way.

A stabilizer with a good gimbal makes a huge difference. Just be advised that any kind of stabilizer requires a lot of practice. Just as buying a table saw doesn't make you a furniture builder, neither does buying a stabilizer make your shots for you. It's only a tool that you get out of it what you put into it.

Happy flying!

One of my favorite parts of Johnny's site is where he frowns on gimbals, claiming they are "not critical to the existence of a steadycam" (sic).

What would I do without this board!! Thanks for the quick and informative responses!!

Another question: I was looking on line and found a Varizoom Flowpod Steaycam for a reasonable price. Is this a good make/model?

I'm so "virginal" in this area that I "don't know what I don't know" so any input is appreciated!!

Thanks again!

A good steady cam can be as much as $10,000 (Believe it or not). Those DIY "Steady Cams" work, but really it's all in the user. If you have no clue how to keep a camera steady even a real steady cam won't help you.

Realistically securing a weight to the bottom of a camera will work to keep the camera steady.

A good steady cam can be as much as $10,000 (Believe it or not)

Would you believe $60,000? that's for sled, vest and arm of top-of-the-line models (such as the one I haul around)--the complete "essential" package with cables, brackets, wireless lens controls and the like is closer to $120,000.

Would you believe $60,000? that's for sled, vest and arm of top-of-the-line models (such as the one I haul around)--the complete "essential" package with cables, brackets, wireless lens controls and the like is closer to $120,000.

Wow.

Maybe I should re-mortgage my home and buy one of those.

But I guess in a Hollywood movie whatever makes the shot look good behind a great steadycam operator is worth the dough.

$60,000/ $120.000??? Let's get real, the GL2 only weights about 5 lbs, and the cheaper Steadycam systems are just fine for it. If you want to get serious about a Steadycam system, check out the IndiCam www.indicam.com This unit cost under $2,000.00 and is directed to the independent film guys like us. Truly, if I had an extra 2 grand, I would probably buy a second camera, and just keep using my $60.00 dolly and a $15.00 iron pipe rig. But that's just me :)

Interestingly enough, I have a cousin that is a machinist and we are presently working on a steadycam system. Hopefully with only a few hundred dollars in parts we can produce a respectable system. I'll keep everyone posted on our progress.

$60,000/ $120.000??? Let's get real...Actually that is quite real. Charles makes his living as a professional Steadicam operator; it's been his career, and if you watch any television or if you've been to a movie theater in the past decade then chances are high that you've seen his work.

Charles was responding to correct an earlier post in this thread that said "a good steady cam can be as much as $10,000." He should know since that's what he does for a living as a card-carrying (S.O.C.) cameraman. He was *not* saying that you need to spend this much on a system just to hold a GL2. Let's try reading more closely for comprehension next time -- thanks in advance,

Actually Charles was probably a bit on the conservative side because of the "essential" bit, at the Melbourne 5 day Steadicam workshop Luis Puli showed us CASES of stuff that he has collected over the years.. power/video cables for all different film/video cameras, (and of course you need 2 of everything), an assortment of plugs, custom made brackets, widgets, you name it he had it. One of the follow focus systems cost $40,000!! It all adds up. Professional Steadicam is not a cheap business to get into. I have yet to see any of these no gimbal home rigs produce footage comparable to a proper Steadicam. They just make crap footage slightly less crap (IMHO). You also can't ignore the 30 years plus of R & D that has gone into these high end systems. You get what you pay for.

Hey listen, this game (and the discussion of it) has gotten complicated over the years.

Up until the early 90's, there was only one size Steadicam of several different vintages. Gradually, smaller, video-only models emerged followed by 3rd party systems, once the original patents expired. Today it's impossible to keep tabs on how many variations on the Steadicam concept are being marketed around the world. Seems like a new one pops up on eBay every week. And of course there's the vibrant homebuilt stabilizer world, well documented by our friend Charles King.

Thus it is complicated when one suggests "if you want to get serious about a Steadycam [sic] system" because that can mean very different things to different people. Nick T. here started off shooting weddings with a Merlin, has moved on to a Pilot and it won't be long before he'll be sniffing out loans for one of the Big Boys. That's my idea of getting serious, but for someone who is on a limited budget and simply wants to move the camera from A to B without seeing their footsteps in the shot, the $14 rig may suffice, or perhaps they will move on to spending the "serious" money on a 3rd party rig like the Indicam. Now that's a perfectly good rig, Terry has worked hard on developing it over the years (I gave him some feedback on it early on) and it's a good product at that price. But even he will admit that the Steadicam Flyer or Pilot have components that perform over and above, the arm in particular.

Is it possible to perform a smooth walking shot with an Indicam (or Glidecam, or Flycam)? Absolutely. I've tried most of them, and I know what their strengths and limitations are. The Pilot, to me, represents virtually no limitations even compared to my own rig. In fact, I have a 5-6 minute opening shot coming up in a feature I'm about to start working on and I'm strongly considering bringing in a Pilot to use for the rehearsals while the timing is being worked out, moving to my full-size rig with the Genesis as late as possible in the process.

I'm absolutely sensitive to the fact that the extra $2K may be hard to justify on a struggling filmmaker's budget, and that choosing to put it into other gear may be a worthwhile compromise. I do believe that support gear like stabilizers and fluid heads are worth spending extra on simply because they will outlast the cameras they are being used with. I bought my O'Connor 1030 used about 6 years ago, and it had been in use for years before that and will be for years to come. I can only imagine what kinds of cameras may end up on that sucker down the road, but I do know that all of my pans and tilts will be smooth as silk and it's worth every one of those hard-earned bucks that it cost me.

Finally, David, if you are looking to build a system similar to the Indicam, definitely check out Charles King's homebuilt stabilizer site if you haven't already. Most of the veterans there will tell you that building a rig like that is something that you should do if you like the challenge and creative aspect, but not if you are looking to save money over the commercial versions, because by the time you are done, you will likely have spent far more than you can imagine even if you don't count you and your machinist cousin's time. And while you are there, take a peek at this (http://homebuiltstabilizers.com/MembersRigs/FullRigs/charlespapertsrig/index.htm) young lad--a young starry-eyed version of myself, who spent the best part of a year building that particular rig only to crash it somewhat spectacularly on its maiden voyage (where these pics were taken) and never got it back on its feet...sadly, even when it worked it still produced crap footage (slightly less crap than handheld, as Nick said!)

BTW Nick, yeah, I'm into my Preston setup for something like $45 grand at this point also--and that's after selling some of it! And like Luis, I've got some stuff in my kit that is so long in the tooth, I have to struggle to remember what it is and what it does, even though I built some of it myself! Embarassing but true.

A lot depends on the size of camera/accessories you are trying to stabilize, that's one thing to consider - a small handycam is a while diffferent ballgame from a full size camcorder, and quite again different from a professional film camera...

As a purely practical matter, a properly handled monopod with weight attached as needed to balance the camera will do everything the "poor man steady cam" can, and a whole lot more.

There are other simple ways to improve handheld stability for relatively cheap. They are not going to be the same as a gimballed handheld or full rig, but they might "do" for a casual or even professional event type videographer.

It really comes down to what your budget/use is and what sort of camera you are trying to control.

Then again, with "reality" style shooting, bouncing about seems to be accepted!

Then again, with "reality" style shooting, bouncing about seems to be accepted!

**groan**

true that.

Dear Charles,
Although I haven't seen it, Being that you did work on Superhero Movie, and worked with Nielsen! You are GOD! hahaha and don't worry, steadicam will never die!

Then again, with "reality" style shooting, bouncing about seems to be accepted!

I suppose It depends on your personal goal, I'm not interested in just getting by. I try (and try) to emulate the quality shots that the pro Steadicam ops produce in the motion picture industry in my work as well, wether it's a wedding production, corporate shoot or just filming the kids at the park.

I remember a couple of years ago either reading or hearing in a director's commentary the director saying, "We wanted a feeling of uneasy excitement, so the look we were going for was 'bad steadicam.'"

Dear Charles,
don't worry, steadicam will never die!

It will as soon as this telekinesis thing catches on.

Hey Charles. Have you ever entertained mounting a director's viewfinder and video tap on top of a Pilot? With the weight of the lens, that would probably be right in the zone of the Pilot, as well as give you the proper framing.

I've been thinking recently about a setup to make shot rehearsals and choreography easier. Originally, I was just thinking about a "Larry-cam" type setup - just a viewfinder with a video tap and transmitter, handheld. However, your mention of getting a Pilot for rehearsals made me think about combining the two. Overkill? Probably. Isn't that what we're all about though?

Hello everyone,

Funny how a simple question morphs into a bigger then anticipated conversation. Steadycam is an art all to itself, which is wrapped up with physics, engineering, and talent on the operator. My "comprehension" of the original question was about a $15.00 rig and what could be accomplished on a tight budget. I'm an amateur vidographer, I don’t live in Hollywood, I don’t work in movies, and nobody in their right mind would ever hire me for a full budget production movie or television show. I'm paying for all of my gear with money my wife gives me :) so I have to conceder what is "reality" or not. $15.00 is real, a couple of hundred dollars in spare parts is real, 2 grand is really stretching my imagination. $120.000 is so far out in space that I would have to consider changing my career field and selling my house.

Absolutely, without question there is no comparison between $15.00 rig and one that cost many tens of thousands of dollars. There is no way I can build anything that could come close to what professionals use. That's fine, I'm not a professional to begin with, and I never claimed to be. What I am is a guy who on weekends, or time after work will video my sisters Elementary school concerts, family weddings, or have fun shooting short videos with my cousins.

Thanks Charles for the link and names of people that have information about homebuilt stabilizers. We all have to start somewhere, and help from professionals and people who have tried and succeeded with their own tinkering really helps me from reinventing the wheel.

Sincerely,
Your humble backyard videographer...

Hey Charles. Have you ever entertained mounting a director's viewfinder and video tap on top of a Pilot? With the weight of the lens, that would probably be right in the zone of the Pilot, as well as give you the proper framing.

That's one of the things I was thinking about also, Afton. Certainly for film jobs there's a logic to that, since the image will be very similar to what will be seen once you mount up. The whole idea is to make the transition from rehearsal to the actual shooting takes as invisible as possible for the director and AD's (who are setting background etc). Up until now it has been somewhat impractical and a bit silly to consider doing so with a vest/arm setup, and the finder itself is bulky enough to make a handheld version "unpleasant".

However, for rehearsals on HD jobs it makes more sense to deliver a full-raster color image that more closely replicates what the HD camera will look like. Thus I am considering either my XHA1 on a pilot, or my HV20 on a Merlin. With either, I will potentially have to hardwire, so I would have to get production to rent a component video to HD-SDI converter (easier to mount and power on the Pilot) so we could use the existing cable setup. Then it's just a matter of dialing the zoom in to match the framing of the selected lens on the Genesis, and away we go (and see how many people end up "preferring" the image from the A1!)

Whether or not it is overkill depends on the shot. Knowing that we will be spending all day preparing and shooting this one particular 5-6 minute shot, I think it will be well worthwhile. I'll be able to get my head into all of the various framing and negotiating issues while exerting very little energy to do so.

OP here!

Just wanted to say how much I wished I'd never asked this question!! LOL!

Thanks for all the info...I'll start my savings acct now! My children don't need an education anyhow!!

This will be a thread that I'll keep my eye on!

"...perhaps they will move on to spending the "serious" money on a 3rd party rig like the Indicam. Now that's a perfectly good rig, Terry has worked hard on developing it over the years (I gave him some feedback on it early on) and it's a good product at that price. But even he will admit that the Steadicam Flyer or Pilot have components that perform over and above, the arm in particular."

I will say personally that in regards to the Steadicam Flyer and Steadicam Pilot, I like the Steadicam Pilot better because they seem to have done most things right. They put an extension post on the Steadicam Pilot where as the Flyer has none. The Steadicam Pilot just feels better to me overall. I know they are for different weights of cameras but I'm with Charles on which one I like better.

In comparison of the two Pilots (Steadicam and Indicam) the Steadicam Pilot excels in ease of adjustability on the fly for both the arm, camera stage, and socket block. It's a beautiful piece of equipment as you would expect coming from Tiffen. It's like their big systems but not big.

The Indicam PILOT excels in affordability, camera weight handling capability and range (2 lbs to 14 lbs for the 214 system-down to .5 lbs handheld), ease of balancing, as well as the ability to use the sled handheld. This shouldn't be overlooked because there are many shots which can be done that don't warrant using a full support system. This saves some time and is much easier to tote around. Example...We shot handheld many scenes on a cruise ship highlighting their different activities. Our full support system was used for the "Hairiest Legs" contest (which was about an hour in duration) as well as the final night review of the ship. Enough on that.

The bottom line is...A good steadycam system (generic spelling) will still be in use years after the "latest" camera has been replaced. It's like getting a great computer monitor...You'll be using the same one though you will have replaced your computer many times over.

Sorry for rambling...It's 1 o'clock in the morning and I need sleep.

Tery
Indicam

An hour of "hairiest legs?" oy vey! Hopefully you were in low mode!

Agreed on the sled design of the Pilot, Terry. It's a slam-dunk that the next generation of Flyer will incorporate all of the good features of the Pilot, and likely take it to the next level. I've heard whispers here and there about some of the design elements that are being dreamed about for upcoming models, and there are some amazing ideas being batted around (like concept cars though, hard to say what will see the light of day). The ability to add the Merlin weights onto the ends of the camera stage and lower sled to increase inertia was a genius move and a major part of why the Pilot feels better than the Flyer.

Off to bed with visions of the Hairy Leg contest floating in my brain...gee thanks Terry!

Sorry Charles...it wasn't a favorite of mine either. Now the Mardi Gras parade around the ship was interesting though.

See you at NAB

Tery
Indicam

[...] I am considering either my XHA1 on a pilot, or my HV20 on a Merlin. With either, I will potentially have to hardwire, so I would have to get production to rent a component video to HD-SDI converter (easier to mount and power on the Pilot) so we could use the existing cable setup.

It might almost make sense to trade out the A1 for the G1 - that would give you a native HD-SDI output, so no converters [and associated power supplies/cables] to worry about.

- Mikko

Indeed, except that I already own the A1! (was also thinking about EX1, probably a bit easier to find than the G1). The rental on the converter will likely be less. As it turns out, my running rig might actually be ready in time to do the job....will be a good bit heavier than the Pilot but still much lighter than the shooting setup. So dealing with power for the converter should be easy. The only wrinkle is that we might be feeding fiber rather than HD SDI...I'll find out soon enough.

You know, I actually built one of those things - but instead of throwing it out... I don't know... I think I might actually be able to make one of those things work.

But I'd change up the design more than a little bit.

First, I'd want a way to attach a tripod head. Doesn't need to be a -video- tripod head, but I'd like to angle the camera so that it's level. Second, I'll need some way to attach a gimble to it.

Hmm... *hamster goes round in wheel*