M�VI set to revolutionise filmmaking - Vincent LaForet shows gyro stabiliser by Freefly Systems (with footage from GH3 and 1D C)

[Tzedekh]

This Mōvi (at a price of, say, 2000 bucks) would lead to dramaturgically unmotivated steady shots in heaps. . . .
None of the steady shots would change the quality of low budget films at all.

"Unmotivated steady shots"? What's next? An epidemic of films with shots that are inexplicably exposed, focused, and framed properly? Oh, the horror!

[HurtinMinorKey]

I didn't take Laforet for a barker. Guess i was wrong.

[JesseB]

I got to see the Movi in use, first hand! I blogged about it here: http://m43weddings.com/2013/04/04/eyes-on-the-movi-in-omaha/

 

A few other thoughts I had: This will pair well with a GH3 w/12-35 Lumix lens: the autofocus should be more than up to that task, at least for event video applications. Re: power for the gyros and remote control, Tabb used a few strategically placed Li-ion RC batteries, small versions of what I use to power my Airsoft rifle. They were attached symmetrically on the device. Power for the gyros lasted AT LEAST for around 6 hours of filming. The RED Epic, on the other hand, needed regular battery changes. 

 

Keep your eyes on Vincent's blog, BTS that I shout will eventually be showing up there!

[Axel]

"Unmotivated steady shots"? What's next? An epidemic of films with shots that are inexplicably exposed, focused, and framed properly? Oh, the horror!

 

I am not against the MoVI at all.

 

Right now it comes to my mind that I always wanted to back out of a restaurant (a stair) to the street at night with the guests laughing and raising their glasses. With a friend I made tests with stabilizers, but only with the extreme wide angle of a GoPro we got smooth enough results, and I didn't like the extreme distortion.

 

This is a good device. All I say, forgive my bluntness, is that it seduces you to show off, that you do things without need. Because, look at the history of film, too prominent traveling shots are distracting, they don't help the story.

 

AND EDIT: In most situations, a tripod or a shoulder rig will do. For most situations, they would be indeed more appropriate. How many percent? You 'll see, with a MoVI, there will be less cuts, the device changes the approach to the scene. 

 

Brace yourself for an example of nauseating camera work. It's enough to watch the first five minutes, perhaps then you'll see what is looming once these MoVIs get to the hands of the vimeots or youtubers:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucmZsCwcCjA

[P337]

To me it looks better, because it's cnc engenired and mOVI is bunch of carbon booms and plastic clamps..

Im sure will seen one for $1000 or less in couple of months

http://rctimer.com/index.php?gOo=goods_details.dwt&goodsid=839&productname=

Well I didn't actually mean its physical looks, its movement wasn't very smooth.

[HurtinMinorKey]

A few other thoughts I had: This will pair well with a GH3 w/12-35 Lumix lens.

$8K on a stabilizer, and $1K on a camera? :blink:

[JesseB]

What excites me most about the Movi is its potential for MY industry: wedding videography. It will lighten the load i have to lug to a wedding SIGNIFICANTLY: no longer will I have to bring a slider, and a jib, and a glidecam. I can just bring the Movi, and get all the shots I need just like that.

[schnorgie]

essentially what I posted on the other thread:

 

1. It's FIFTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS!

2. Not exactly vaporware, but neither is the BMCC....

3. I am sixty years old, a "one man band" (more or less), and don't know how to roller skate. Even if I did, if the traffic didn't kill me, my wife would, if she saw me trying a stunt like that!

4. I have no helicopter in the garage.

5. I already have a Glidecam. Have you ever tried to carry a Glidecam, with a 5d and L series lens for more than 20 minutes? It is heavier than you think, and gets much heavier after a long day of chasing cabs.

 

All in all......great gizmo, would love to have one, amazing footage, thanks for posting. Probably not a game-changer, in the same way the 5D2 was. What we need is a device that writes great scripts, or creates more time to see all these amazing videos online. Yet more eye candy will not make better films...... just like another fuzz tone didn't make better music, back in the day.

[Heenok R.]

Well, just put a GH3 on his head and you've a cheaper and biological MoWLI:

 

 

[youtube]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k6M-h5g3PwI[/youtube]

[mike_tee_vee]

In a related note - How did the steadicam builders miss this? Have they been ignoring the quadrocopter scene altogether? Strange.

 

CMR (makers of the Blackbird) has been doing R&D on a gyro dynamic stabilizer since at least 2007.  Granted, they aren't as big as Steadicam. 

[HurtinMinorKey]

Putting this the same league as the 5D2 is abject nonsense.  I hope he was paid well.

[Bruno]

I hate it when they do (lame) product demos and call it short films, then it's neither one or the other in the end.

This "short" was terribly staged, camera was all over the place, crossing the line shot after shot, poor composition... if they had just done an objective and carefully planned demo they'd have spent their money better, but I guess they were paying for the Laforet hype and publicity, not for a good short film.

 

This equipment is welcome and I'm sure it will find its use, its price is not expensive for high end film making, but in order to be revolutionary as they're trying to make it, it would have to cost a fraction of that.

[ScreensPro]

$8K on a stabilizer, and $1K on a camera? :blink:

 

People put $20k+ lens on a $1k camera.

 

These cameras are getting so good that quantifying them by their price tag is pretty meaningless now.

[mojo43]

Wow, you guys are so negative!

[P337]

These cameras are getting so good that quantifying them by their price tag is pretty meaningless now.

I agree and hope to say something similar about this type of stabilizer soon!
 
@mojo43, negative with good reason; Laforet teased: 

"...you’ll see it will pay for itself in days relative to what other things it replaces and how it can fundamentally change the way you shoot."

but it's $15,000 dollars!
 
I get that this COULD replace a tripod with fluid head, a steadicam and a slider/dolly but what specific kind a situations would benefit the most from a gyro stabilizer like this?  

 

May I suggest, now that we've all mostly voiced our complete disappointment about this new "game changer" news, we now turn the conversation towards the actual product and what we actually would do with this thing (once it hits $1,000 of course).
 
It's basically a one-handed steadicam with an automatic "light hand" plus some remote tilt and pan ability so of course it would make steadicam "obstacles" easier; like running down a set of stairs, or navigating through a dense crowd, just going with the rollerblade idea an up-close hockey game might be really cool,  and I've wanted a way to remotely control my camera (with pan and tilt) when it's mounted onto the outside of my car while (someone else is) driving  :) 

[zephyrnoid]

Works on the same principle as my la gondola stabilizer/gimbal. So finally someone gets it, that the camera belongs BELOW the balance point, NOT above it! LOL just watch all the wrongheaded solutions end up on e-bay in the next year or so.

[Andrew Reid]

Brown owl / chicken... All does the same job. Organic accelerometers are wonderful. How about a new brand at NAB 2014? RotarOwl? ChickPan?

[Bruno]

May I suggest, now that we've all mostly voiced our complete disappointment about this new "game changer" news, we now turn the conversation towards what we actually would do with this thing (once it hit's $1,000 of course).

 

I think it would totally change the thousands of DSLR short films you see on vimeo these days. Instead of being shot wide open, with shallow depth of field and most of the important subjects out of focus, they would be shot wide open, with shallow depth of field, most subjects out of focus and badly framed and feature loads of smooth flying shots.

 

Just joking here! Kind of...

[Tzedekh]

This is a good device. All I say, forgive my bluntness, is that it seduces you to show off, that you do things without need. Because, look at the history of film, too prominent traveling shots are distracting, they don't help the story.

 

Well, with regard to what's gratuitous -- whether traveling shots or anything else -- that's a matter of opinion and preference. Steadicam was overused in the beginning, but its use moderated.

 

AND EDIT: In most situations, a tripod or a shoulder rig will do. For most situations, they would be indeed more appropriate. How many percent? You 'll see, with a MoVI, there will be less cuts, the device changes the approach to the scene.

 

But for some of the shots where a tripod or shoulder rig has been traditionally been used, MōVI will be a better choice: maybe less time setting up a shot where a tripod would otherwise be used, and probably less-shaky footage where a shoulder mount would be used (BTW, I generally really hate most handheld footage, especially the shaky "raw" aesthetic popularized by NYPD Blue and used ad nauseaum since).

 

Brace yourself for an example of nauseating camera work. It's enough to watch the first five minutes, perhaps then you'll see what is looming once these MoVIs get to the hands of the vimeots or youtubers:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ucmZsCwcCjA

 

Maybe the well-heeled or at least well-funded vimeots and youtubers, but until there are sub-$1,000 MōVI knockoffs, this is otherwise doubtful.

[JLM]

Living in Canada I will end up with a snow owl, which is white. Do you think I should dye it black so it doesn't reflect into the shots?