Tips for dealing with rotation when using OIS (OIS major flaw?)

[kye]

I shot a bunch of clips hand-held in terrible weather with my OG BMPCC and 12-35/2.8 and now looking at the footage I realise the OIS did a great job with pan/tilt but zero reduction in roll / rotation (which OIS can't stabilise).  I've had a few goes at stabilising it in post but much of it is blurry due to 180 shutter.  

I don't mind a hand-held look, but the mismatch between the pan and tilt being almost perfectly stable and the roll being jittery as hell is really not a good look.  I realise that my options are some combination of stabilising the roll in post and de-stabilising the pan and tilt (adding shake) so the aesthetic works.  

I've been using IBIS on GH5 and GX85 for years now, and I have OIS in my X3000 action camera, but haven't used OIS-only in a "cinema" setup before and hadn't really realised that this would be a major issue.  The OIS in the 12-35/2.8 is far too good to match with the lack of roll stabilisation.

How do the OIS-only hand-held shooters out there deal with this?  

Build a huge rig so you don't get roll jitter? (In which case, OIS isn't really needed that much - right?)
Stabilise in post and deal with the shutter-speed blur?

Seems to be an incredible advantage of IBIS over OIS.

[webrunner5]

Maybe a Steadicam is the answer.

[Anaconda_]

Can you turn down the post stabilisation? Maybe that's a good way to find a middle ground between blurry shutter and shakey footage.

[kye]

12 hours ago, Anaconda_ said:

Can you turn down the post stabilisation? Maybe that's a good way to find a middle ground between blurry shutter and shakey footage.

Yeah, you can (sort-of) dial in however much stabilisation you want.  I haven't tried on this footage yet but will try to hit a balance where the shake doesn't look overwhelming and the blur isn't either, but I'm worried there won't be a middle ground where neither looks bad.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

On 8/2/2022 at 12:42 AM, kye said:

I shot a bunch of clips hand-held in terrible weather with my OG BMPCC and 12-35/2.8 and now looking at the footage I realise the OIS did a great job with pan/tilt but zero reduction in roll / rotation (which OIS can't stabilise).  I've had a few goes at stabilising it in post but much of it is blurry due to 180 shutter.  

I don't mind a hand-held look, but the mismatch between the pan and tilt being almost perfectly stable and the roll being jittery as hell is really not a good look.  I realise that my options are some combination of stabilising the roll in post and de-stabilising the pan and tilt (adding shake) so the aesthetic works.  

I've been using IBIS on GH5 and GX85 for years now, and I have OIS in my X3000 action camera, but haven't used OIS-only in a "cinema" setup before and hadn't really realised that this would be a major issue.  The OIS in the 12-35/2.8 is far too good to match with the lack of roll stabilisation.

How do the OIS-only hand-held shooters out there deal with this?  

Build a huge rig so you don't get roll jitter? (In which case, OIS isn't really needed that much - right?)
Stabilise in post and deal with the shutter-speed blur?

Seems to be an incredible advantage of IBIS over OIS.

Probably a small gimbal is the solution.

The newer Crane Ms and the Feiyu G6 Max (I have one) and the newer Scorp Mini could easlily handle a OG BMPCC and a 12-35 2.8. Even the original Crane M, that could be bought very cheap probably could handle it.

[webrunner5]

I am so sick of seeing gimbal footage I could vomit. It looks fake as hell. Wee look I can fly.

[BenEricson]

On 8/1/2022 at 8:42 PM, kye said:

I don't mind a hand-held look, but the mismatch between the pan and tilt being almost perfectly stable and the roll being jittery as hell is really not a good look.  I realise that my options are some combination of stabilising the roll in post and de-stabilising the pan and tilt (adding shake) so the aesthetic works. 

You need more points of contact.

https://www.bhphotovideo.com/c/product/1013082-REG/kinotehnik_lcdvfbm_blackmagic_pocket_2ea_mounting_plates_soft.html

https://www.ebay.com/itm/384999943227?hash=item59a3c8ec3b:g:orkAAOSwsQ1iy1eq

Or add weight. Gimbal is a different tool and creates a different look.

[webrunner5]

I am serious about using a Steadicam. I have the small one and it works great for the OG. What do you think movie sets use, Steadicams, or the high end Movi gimbal that has batteries and monitors etc. adding weight to it that only they can afford.

Trouble is you have to do the duck walk with any of them, so you look like you lost a bet using it. 

[BenEricson]

17 minutes ago, webrunner5 said:

I am serious about using a Steadicam. I have the small one and it works great for the OG. What do you think movie sets use, Steadicams, or the high end Movi gimbal that has batteries and monitors etc. adding weight to it that only they can afford.

Trouble is you have to do the duck walk with any of them, so you look like you lost a bet using it. 

They use all kinds of things; Handheld rigs, Dolly's, Tripods, etc. It depends what type of visual language that you're trying to achieve with the movements.

A steady cam doesn't replace the feel of a weighted camera with multiple points of contact. It's a different look entirely.

[kye]

9 hours ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

Probably a small gimbal is the solution.

The newer Crane Ms and the Feiyu G6 Max (I have one) and the newer Scorp Mini could easlily handle a OG BMPCC and a 12-35 2.8. Even the original Crane M, that could be bought very cheap probably could handle it.

The challenge is that I want to keep the rig as small as possible - the beauty of the camera is that it's so small.  I also own the BMMCC but with a monitor and cables you get strange looks which I'd like to avoid.  A gimbal would make the vertical size of the camera 10x larger, hardly a compact solution!

Realistically, the smallest addition would be a side-handle, but even then it's doubling the width of the camera and making it look far more odd to the public.  

1 hour ago, webrunner5 said:

I am serious about using a Steadicam. I have the small one and it works great for the OG. What do you think movie sets use, Steadicams, or the high end Movi gimbal that has batteries and monitors etc. adding weight to it that only they can afford.

Trouble is you have to do the duck walk with any of them, so you look like you lost a bet using it. 

I was using it in wind so strong that I couldn't keep the camera still enough with my two hands.

A steadicam would probably break in the kind of conditions I was in - let alone make the shaking worse by acting as a large sail.

1 hour ago, BenEricson said:

They use all kinds of things; Handheld rigs, Dolly's, Tripods, etc. It depends what type of visual language that you're trying to achieve with the movements.

A steady cam doesn't replace the feel of a weighted camera with multiple points of contact. It's a different look entirely.

Yeah, the handle / viewfinder is the typical solution, but it doesn't work well for what I want.  Firstly, the viewfinder is great if you want to make your cinematography "I shoot from eye-level" but that's not a great way to make interesting images.  The handle underneath the camera also doesn't work in strong winds as the issue is that the wind hits the camera from the side and the camera rotates around where you're holding it - which in that case would be below the camera - creating a roll.  

People don't seem to understand my original post - I was cradling the camera with my left hand which was under the body of the camera and holding the lens, and my right hand was firmly on the hand-grip on the right-hand-side of the camera (and is actually quite a good grip as it's quite deep and covered in grippy rubber) but the camera was still being severely shaken with the wind.

[webrunner5]

3 hours ago, BenEricson said:

They use all kinds of things; Handheld rigs, Dolly's, Tripods, etc. It depends what type of visual language that you're trying to achieve with the movements.

A steady cam doesn't replace the feel of a weighted camera with multiple points of contact. It's a different look entirely.

It looks way more natural than a Gimbal. I am a old ENG guy I know what a weighted camera does. But they weigh 20 plus pounds. And even then you don't learn how to use them overnight, or a Stedicam either.. Video is hard.

[Marcio Kabke Pinheiro]

12 hours ago, kye said:

The challenge is that I want to keep the rig as small as possible - the beauty of the camera is that it's so small.  I also own the BMMCC but with a monitor and cables you get strange looks which I'd like to avoid.  A gimbal would make the vertical size of the camera 10x larger, hardly a compact solution!

Realistically, the smallest addition would be a side-handle, but even then it's doubling the width of the camera and making it look far more odd to the public.  

 

That's why I only mentioned the smallest gimbals out there - I only use small cameras / lenses as possible (that's why I will never go full frame unless there is no option), and the smallest possible gimbal, to attract minimum attention on the streets when travelling.

My last setup travelling pre-Covid was a GX85 with the 12-32 and the OG Crane M. Not a single glance from anyone. My current camera is a bit larger (X-S10) but the G6 Max is much smaller than the OG Crane M (it indeed almost look like a bottom handle), probably will not get attention too.

But you are right, with a monitor and cable, probably will not be so discreet. 

And @webrunner5 have a point too, gimbals have a visual very different from handheld. 

[kye]

1 hour ago, Marcio Kabke Pinheiro said:

That's why I only mentioned the smallest gimbals out there - I only use small cameras / lenses as possible (that's why I will never go full frame unless there is no option), and the smallest possible gimbal, to attract minimum attention on the streets when travelling.

My last setup travelling pre-Covid was a GX85 with the 12-32 and the OG Crane M. Not a single glance from anyone. My current camera is a bit larger (X-S10) but the G6 Max is much smaller than the OG Crane M (it indeed almost look like a bottom handle), probably will not get attention too.

But you are right, with a monitor and cable, probably will not be so discreet. 

And @webrunner5 have a point too, gimbals have a visual very different from handheld. 

The P2K is under 70mm tall.  The Crane M is 346mm tall, and the rig looks like it would be taller with the camera mounted on it...  so literally 5 times taller!

I'm not even sure it would fit into my bag either 🙂   

Maybe you don't get odd looks when you're using it in public, but I've used a phone gimbal before and people looked at me like I was carrying a sword rather than a gimbal.  I'm not entirely convinced that it would hold up in the howling wind either, which is basically the point - if the wind wasn't so strong I wouldn't have had so much of a rotation problem to begin with and OIS would have been fine.

[BenEricson]

On 8/3/2022 at 4:25 PM, kye said:

Yeah, the handle / viewfinder is the typical solution, but it doesn't work well for what I want.  Firstly, the viewfinder is great if you want to make your cinematography "I shoot from eye-level" but that's not a great way to make interesting images.  The handle underneath the camera also doesn't work in strong winds as the issue is that the wind hits the camera from the side and the camera rotates around where you're holding it - which in that case would be below the camera - creating a roll. 

I don't know what to tell you man! Acting like you're against shooting "eye level," when literally every still photograph, every piece of 16mm, Super 8 etc, is all shot from eye level. You seem to have issues with literally every practical solution!

The "head on a swivel" type movements you can get with an EVF create much more interesting footage than swaying from the hip.

I think you need to prioritize the stability of the camera over the exact camera height. The Bolex 16mm cameras ergonomically are far better than other cameras I use regularly. You can use your body to get lower for lower angles etc.

To summarize, there's really only a few solutions that can solve your problem. The more you add, the smoother your footage will be.

- More Weight

- More Points of Contact (EVF / Pistol Grip.)

- Wider Lens

[leslie]

what about one of these ?

not as bulky as the tube based steady cams or  quite so obvious. If a slr balances on it your camera should do it easily. Plus probably less than $30 so its not a huge outlay if it goes pear shaped. 

I'm of the opinion that with the rise of youtube you see a lot more people waving cameras and phones around mostly phones but i see the occasional camera, also seen a few of those  dji osmo things as well.

I also think if you feel self conscious then it will show. maybe throw on some hi vis and a press shirt... you know face your fears 😀 

another thing i notice if people are around then they will look, however if their any where near the front of the camera they look everywhere but the camera  

If its any sort of event sporting or whatever there going to be other with cameras and or phones,  i like to think i look like a serious amateur. well thats what i tell myself anyway 🙄

Only issue i face i guess is pulling the drone out, That can be quite polarizing. Theres a 50/50 chance of running into someone named karen 😨

[kye]

20 hours ago, BenEricson said:

I don't know what to tell you man! Acting like you're against shooting "eye level," when literally every still photograph, every piece of 16mm, Super 8 etc, is all shot from eye level. You seem to have issues with literally every practical solution!

The "head on a swivel" type movements you can get with an EVF create much more interesting footage than swaying from the hip.

I think you need to prioritize the stability of the camera over the exact camera height. The Bolex 16mm cameras ergonomically are far better than other cameras I use regularly. You can use your body to get lower for lower angles etc.

To summarize, there's really only a few solutions that can solve your problem. The more you add, the smoother your footage will be.

- More Weight

- More Points of Contact (EVF / Pistol Grip.)

- Wider Lens

I'm not being deliberately problematic, just stating why the answers provided don't really suit me and how I shoot.  That's fine - not all solutions have answers (if they do then I want the 100g Alexa Pocket for $100!), but you don't find out unless you ask - sometimes you ask the question and someone comes up with an answer you hadn't thought of or didn't know about, so it's worth a bit of a discussion.

I'm perhaps putting more emphasis on this than what people might think is reasonable, but it's actually the tip of a large question for me.  Currently I shoot with IBIS cameras (GH5, GX85) in auto-modes but am actively considering moving to a more cinema-camera style of shooting without IBIS or auto-modes when it's time for my next upgrade as that can get me a bump in image quality, so there's many thousands of dollars in camera bodies / lenses / accessory purchases that depend on things like me being able to get acceptably stable shots in windy situations.

In this sense my problem isn't "how do I get good stabilisation with an OIS only lens", it's really "does OIS give me stable enough shots, in the situations I encounter, with how I shoot".  

3 hours ago, leslie said:

what about one of these ?

Not so useful in conditions so windy I can't hold the camera steady with both hands! 🙂 🙂 

3 hours ago, leslie said:

I also think if you feel self conscious then it will show. maybe throw on some hi vis and a press shirt... you know face your fears 😀 

another thing i notice if people are around then they will look, however if their any where near the front of the camera they look everywhere but the camera  

If its any sort of event sporting or whatever there going to be other with cameras and or phones,  i like to think i look like a serious amateur. well thats what i tell myself anyway 🙄

Only issue i face i guess is pulling the drone out, That can be quite polarizing. Theres a 50/50 chance of running into someone named karen 😨

I think you nailed it by talking about being self-conscious, which definitely applies to me.  If I could change how I feel then I would do it immediately, but that's not how it works!  Getting older is gradually making me give less shits, but I'm not there enough yet 🙂 

In terms of running into Karen's, I've found they're everywhere in terms of giving you dirty looks and giving you the non-verbal equivalent of the viral videos you see, which just makes it not worth it for me.  That's why I like to do what I can to fly under the radar and not trigger it to begin with.  I also shoot a lot in places you're not allowed to be pro in, like museums and galleries and all the other types of private spaces that hold all the interesting things.  You never know when you're going to run into a power-hungry security guard who is going to teach you a lesson - unfortunately this seems to be the majority of security guards (although it probably isn't the case it certainly seems like it).

[webrunner5]

I think what you are looking for just doesn't exist. You have to either look like a production studio with a Cine camera and rig from hell or buy an Osmo Pocket II and Velcro it to your chest.  I don't think there really is a middle ground. Even the GH5 is a pretty weak camera compared to a Red Komodo. The old, "go big or stay home" saying sort of applies I am afraid.

[leslie]

kye, you need to desensitize your self. I'd suggest some car races first.  lots of fans, lots of others with cameras, lots of noise, the smell of burning high octane fuel. whats not to like 😀 Better go before the price of fuel kills off these fun activities.  

don, not sure i agree with you. There been a couple movies made with an iphone now. Whether its easy or harder  or even a good idea to make  a movie an iphone, i dont know. All  i know is it can be done.

kudo's to you if you do manage to make a a movie regardless of camera i'm thinking.