I'm seeing alot of sites selling their blueprints to a very cheaply made (as in cost of parts) steady cam. I am curious to see if anyone out there has constructed their own steady cam and if they are willing to tell me which design they used to accomplish this feat. Also I've seen the site of the $14 steady cam and was curious if anyone has tried that model as well. Are these worth trying or is the cliche' you get what you pay for active in this case? Should I shell out hundreds for the manufactered steadicam?

Tim Logik

no simple answer here either. It depends what you're trying to do with it. The $14 steadycam is just as good (and bad) as the free steadicam--where you put your camera on a tripod (with the legs closed) and tape a few pounds of weight to the bottom. I've used the tripod trick and it works great for some circumstances. You're not going to get west wing quality steadicam moves with something like this. It's also how you use it. You want to hold it at the center if gravity--so if you tilt it horizontally, it'll balance on your finger.

I'm also in the process of building a steadicam that has a sled with a gimbal connected to an arm connected to a vest. It's as much an engineering experiment as anything and I wouldn't be surprised if my first design doesn't work perfectly.

If you look at how steadicams work (have you taken physics recently?), you'll see that they're complex decices that take advantage of very simple pricipals. You're creating a greater moment of inertia (making it harder to stop and start). Depending on what kind of steadicam you're looking at, it increases the moment of inertia on different axeses (there's four). The $14 steadicam steadies two of the axeses and sortof a third. It's not bad, but it's not perfect. Build a free one and find out for yourself.

Long answer to your short question, but I hope this helps.
joren

The $14 "stedi cam" is a bit misleading. A stedi cam uses a counter weighted arm that helps absorb body movments and such for smoth tracking shots. Most of the "do it yourself" variety are really just a stabalizer much like a "glide=cam" rig which is pretty much a pole with counter weghts underneath it to make a slightly smoother move.

These still work especially with lighter cameras but its not a stedi cam per say.
R. Michael

"Luck, is when opportunity, meets preperation." "There are 3 sides to every story. Yours, mine, and the truth, and none of us are lying" -Robert Evans
Tizzy Entertainment "Redemption" Hi-Def trailer

Recipes???

A friend and I built the $14 steadicam...it takes a lot of practice (which looks really weird, running around with this ghetto contraption in the backyard for a few hours) but for certain shots it is definately better than nothing...and for the price, it's better than pulling out $2,928,410,859,031...or whatever.

Using it for regular shots, such dollies and walking a few feet was sort of pointless, but for long sweeping shots it was great. Not perfect, but *good enough*
And though it is our jobs to settle for somthing better than *good enough*... think about it: Unless you want to fork out insane cash for something that works insanely good and is quick, easy, portable and very stable in all movements, this is the best cost vs benefit ratio. $14 absorbs enough shock to get by.

For an example, check out Mahri's Revenge:
http://studentfilms.com/film/get.do?id=586

I used it for about 6 shots and people seem to be happy with the results. Also the, as a few people have called it, "ass bullet time" shot would have been impossible without the $14 investment in some metal pipes and a 5lb weight.

So, in conclusion, vote $14 steadicam. If you make a movie big enough for people to care about a few minor camera jerks here and there then you should be able to buy something better anyways. Or make them buy it...they're the ones complaining after all.

Werd to yo mutha.
-Vanilla Ice

i made the $14.

not so great for steady shots. INCREDIBLY useful for ground angle or leaning out of car door angle. i'll try to post samples some soon.

Stirling | Dueling the Fates @ Zomp

I built the $14 steady cam last weekend and although I haven't used it much, I've already found that it works amazingly well for ground level shots if you build the inverting bracket. For some reason it seems alot easier to keep steady when the camera is on the bottom and the weight is on top...maybe it has to do with where I'm holding the thing when its upside down (I'll have to go figure that out). Anyways, I say its worth it if you want really cool ground level shots, and it does take practice to make it look good...you have to bend your knees and glide like the site says.

Yah yah, inverted works better. WAyyyy better.
Inverted meaning: Instead of the camera sitting on top of the steadicam contraption it is on the bottom resting on a sort of "shelf" sticking out.

i love that 14$ stedicam. Practice does make perfect, but if u just don't use the "horizantal stabilizer thing" , and practice "stabilizing" the horizen without it, it works REALLLY good

lol darkfire and I made a decent steady cam that was like $4, heck my beef jerky i bought was more expensive. Only problem is that some parts were thrown away so were back with nothing again.

www.LostBoysMediaGroup.com

I own a professional $400 Steadicam. I would never let a cheap piece of equipment compromise my shots, ESPECIALLY Steadicam shots, which either look good or look like crap.

_________________________