One of the benefits of DSLR filmmaking is the incredibly small physical package an HDSLR and lens represents. But start adding professional accessories to simplify certain aspects of shooting, and something odd happens. Your rig can grow to be quite a medusa with wires and cables and arms all over the place. Case in point…the following behind the scenes photos from a music video shoot directed by indie-legend Robert Rodriguez. The Canon 7D rig they shot with is a good example of the need for a good support system once you begin to add pro accessories.

You can see more of these behind the scenes images in this blog post over at Zacuto (that’s a Zacuto support system underneath what looks like about 700 cable ties). There’s also a further explanation from the DP on the rig and it’s myriad cables. Cool to see Robert shooting on these new cameras, but is anyone really surprised? He always seems to embrace new formats.

If you’ve not been following Shane Hurlbut’s blog on his and the Bandito Brothers use of Canon DSLRs for video, well you should be. They’ve been pushing the limits of DSLR filmmaking, applying their professional tools and knowledge to these very imperfect, but oh-so-tasty visual tools.

In Shane’s latest post, he talks about why he doesn’t like to add gyro stabilizers to his handheld HDSLR rigs. If you’ve never shot with a gyro before, it’s a small grenade shaped device that attaches to your rods and restricts jiggles and fast movement. They come in larger sizes as well. It can be an issue for whip pans, and Shane makes the case that it’s simply not necessary on these type of rigs (unless you are filming from a helicopter, etc).

This is not to slam gryos…they have their place in filmmaking. I’ve used gyros before for air-to-air shooting, and they are an invaluable tool in that application. They are also pretty reasonable to rent…around $150/day for a small camcorder gyro at places like Abel Cine.

A friend of mine just turned me on to the Zoom R16, an 8-input, 16-track recorder and portable mixer. It’s fully loaded with XLR inputs, phantom power, can be USB bus-powered or run on AA batteries, records to standard SDHC cards, and features REAL BUTTONS and sliders.

Price for one of these bad boys? $399. $399! Holy crap. I will own one of these. It really looks like an unbeatable system at this price point. Here’s a review at audiomidi. And for the non-B&H users, here’s an Amazon link at $379.

A couple weeks ago, Cinema5D posted an extensive review series of gear for DSLR video rigs. They tested various kits and accessories from eleven manufacturers in total. I was excited at first when I heard about this large review, but my excitement quickly abated when I dug into their opinions and findings. Much of what was stated in the Cinema5D review is in direct contradiction to my own experiences with the same gear. And a number of the statements made in the review aren’t just a difference of opinion, they are factually incorrect.

I cannot address every rig tested in this review, I’ll only speak about the systems that I’ve personally used. But knowing the errors and omissions in their review for the gear I have used, well, that calls into question the information they present on gear I haven’t personally used. Another concern: in the week following the review, information surfaced that indicated that when the reviewers first contacted manufacturers, a condition of submitting gear for review was that the reviewer got to keep the gear that won. Seriously? That’s akin to demanding a ransom if you want your gear reviewed. This was never stated publicly by the reviewers, until a company not participating in the review (Zacuto) outed the information.

Somewhere in the shakeout following the review, previous Cinema5D supporter Cinevate was banned as a sponsor. It’s unclear to me why that came to be. Some commenters have complained that the fact the stated winner of the review (Vocas) was a Cinema5D sponsor indicates bias. I don’t think that’s a fair point to make, it’s impossible to prove there was any bias as a result of a sponsorship (and Cinevate was a sponsor too, until they were banned) so it’s really a non-sequitur as far as I’m concerned.

At FreshDV, we know full well how hard it is to present a well-researched, thoroughly-tested review. In particular, it’s VERY hard to do a proper side-by-side comparison review where a single unit or brand is declared the overall winner. It’s almost impossible to address every concern for every unique configuration…and declaring an overall winner is rarely a useful exercise for filmmakers, as needs and uses vary so widely. It is not my belief that this Cinema5D review was biased or determined by any ulterior motive. It is my observation that they simply bit off more than they could effectively chew. The scope of this review series is ambitious, and I believe that they simply did not have enough time and production experience to properly evaluate and test each system. As such, it’s my opinion that their findings, and their final star ratings in particular, are inconclusive. Regardless of any bias allegations from the community, there are a few factually incorrect issues in the review that I’d like to address below…

Shortly after the review was posted, Redrock Micro requested that their portion of the review be removed, citing specific concerns with incorrect configurations used and faulty setup of their products. Redrock’s Brian Valente wrote a detailed list of his concerns, two of the most obvious which I will quote below:

- Not the Rigs we sent:
We never submitted anything the “tripod” category. In fact, we weren’t even made aware there was such a category until after the review was published. Apparently to fill the gap, the reviewers configured their own version of a Redrock tripod rig based on parts (some of which we didn’t even provide), and then were critical of what they created. What they ended up with does not represent Redrock, and based on the pictures they showed, I wouldn’t use or recommend what they developed either. Of the two rigs we did provide, the first was modified from the configuration we sent (see below), and the second one (theEvent) wasn’t even included in the review.

- Changed rig configurations provided:
One of the concerns stated the review on the eyeSpy rig was that it didn’t sit flat when put down, due to a single handgrip configuration. The rig we sent for review included two handgrips and the handlebar (which you can see in their picture on the “first contact” page) which allows it to be balanced when set down, but for unknown reasons this was later removed for the evaluation portion. In addition, no mention was made that the Redrock eyeSpy rig is the only one that can be directly attached to a tripod using the integrated baseplate in the shoulderpad - a feature we specifically designed to allow easy setting down of the rig and fast change between shouldermount and tripod. This misrepresents our product and its capabilities.

The faulty analysis wasn’t limited to Redrock. The product reviewers slammed Cinevate gear, calling it “a lot of cheap looking plastic parts, and unfortunately, poorly manufactured gear.” There are many ways to criticize and opine on all kinds of gear, and one is certainly entitled to one’s opinions. But calling Cinevate gear in general “cheap plastic” and “poorly manufactured” simply doesn’t jive with reality. Cinevate nearly always uses CNC aluminum and stainless steel components in their gear…it’s the opposite of poor manufacturing, and certainly not cheap to produce.

As a recent example, Cinevate’s Durus follow focus is one of the strongest, toughest follow focus systems I’ve ever used. It oughta be…it’s largely constructed of CNC aluminum! There are certainly flaws in any system, but low quality and cheaply built it is not. I encourage you to watch my review of the Durus follow focus and compare that to the Cinema5D review findings.

They also took a few shots at Cinevate’s carbon-fiber rods, calling them “poorly-crafted” and suggesting they would wear out sooner than competing rod designs. This is a direct contradiction to my own findings with Cinevate’s carbon rods. I know this, as I purchased a set of Cinevate carbon rods in 2007, their original hollow carbon design. After noting a few issues with inconsistent widths along the length of the rods, I spoke with Cinevate about the issue. They went back to the drawing board and completely replaced their stock of hollow carbon with solid carbon fiber rods. I’ve been using a set of solid-carbon Cinevate rods on a regular basis since then (over 2 yrs). They’ve never even so much as shown any wear, and their design, specifications, and manufacture is of excellent quality.

There are a number of other errors and mistakes in regards to Cinevate gear in that review, so much so that Cinevate’s Dennis Wood took time to respectfully but firmly address them in a video here. I encourage you to watch the Cinevate response video and compare to the opinions stated in the Cinema5D review.

Another product that was (in my opinion) unfairly maligned in this review was a mattebox from Genus. The reviewers called the quality and workmanship of the mattebox into question, complaining about noisy rattles, loose screws, and a french flag that would not adjust properly. Ironically enough, when this review went live, it just so happened that I was I putting the finishing touches on my own Genus mattebox review. And my findings are completely at odds with nearly every complaint they had. Notice a pattern here? I found the Genus system to be a delight to use, well-crafted, and basically everything the Cinema5D reviewers did not. It’s mindboggling how differently we see the same product. Contrary to their findings, I found the quality vs price proposition for the Genus mattebox to be perfectly balanced. I encourage you to watch my review of the Genus mattebox here, you can see me working with it, shaking things (it’s rather quiet, thanks), and decide for yourself.

I have a few other more opinion-related issues with the review in general. For instance, they lauded the ARRI MFF-1 follow focus with a lot more praise than I believe is warranted. It’s a good system, sure. But I personally find it more at home driving an HD camcorder like the EX1 than a full cine lens kit. In particular, ARRI’s arm design has (in my opinion) too many points of adjustment and can slip away from the lens. It’s not as solid as other systems I’ve used. It also requires both hands to adjust the arm, as it tends to flop around. Ironically, that’s something the Cinema5D reviewers dinged the Cinevate handheld rig grip design for, but they don’t seem to mind it on this follow focus. It’s a good example of the clear lack of consistency throughout the entire review. To me, that means this is less useful as a head-to-head, feature-to-feature comparison review, and really more of a large lump of personal opinions from a few self-professed filmmakers. Here is the Cinema5D reviewer’s curt response to criticism of his opinions and findings.

In short, and at best, it’s my opinion that the overall conclusions of this review series are inconclusive and lacking. Speaking for myself, I’ve taken the review as a whole with a larger-than-normal portion of salt. I encourage you to do the same. Opinions are fine, but reviews should be based on a consistent “yardstick” or standard measure. As users and consumers, we should demand a higher standard of gear reviews.

Editor’s note: This article was written as a response to what we believe to be an inconclusive, poorly presented review series by Cinema5D that presents information that may not be factually accurate. As FreshDV has been sponsored in the past by a few of the brands noted in this article, I think it’s important to reiterate that this article was not created as a defense for any particular sponsor or relationship. Any prior sponsor relationships had nothing to do with the impetus to write this article. Rather, my first concern is that faulty information was being presented to filmmakers. Secondly, I have a concern that reviews like this one will cast a bad light on reviewers in general. For FreshDV to be able to present gear reviews and information, we depend on manufacturers being willing to provide their gear for testing. They assume that their gear will get a fair and complete evaluation and that the facts be presented. I worry that when flawed reviews like this one are presented, it casts a bad light on reviewers in general, and I want to distance FreshDV from that. Our reputation for fairness and reasoned review analysis is very important to us. Finally, I cannot address every point I disagree with in this extensive review. So in the above article I simply refer to specific gear and products that we’ve actually used and tested first-hand in real production environments, and stick with addressing things that I know to be incorrect in the Cinema5D review.

Why do tools like the follow focus, mattebox, rods, shoulder supports, monitors, jibs, dollies, and camera stabilizers exist? There is no question that these tools are real-world solutions to common problems. But there is also another, less obvious, reason to use these tools.

A mattebox allows you to keep light flare off your lens and to quickly and easily add filtration and problem-solving filters in front of the lens (a polarizer is a great example of a problem-solving filter). A follow focus enables the operator or 1AC to efficiently and accurately pull lens focus and to set consistent marks for multiple takes of the same action. Rods, support kits, and shoulder supports are the structure that you build your camera and it’s accessories on…without a solid, configurable base, even the best accessories in the world are basically useless. Good production monitors enable you to accurately see critical focus, framing, and color information in the frame. Cranes, dollies, jibs and stabilizers were created to enable specific camera moves and smooth motion. These tools have arisen to fill a need, and in many cases they have been directly inspired or engineered by the very people on the ground who use them on a daily basis (Exhibit A: Garrett Brown).

Let me expound now on another, more controversial reason, to outfit your camera kit with accessories. And that is appearance. Before you hang me for heresy, let me explain. Or, in Paul Newman terms, “Don’t shoot, Boss. Shaking the bush.”

We’ve all heard the phrase “dress for success.” Well guess what? There are legitimate reasons why this principle also applies to your production kit, and the current crop of compact HD cameras and HDSLRs in particular (and Red Scarlet, soon). This new breed of compact camera systems are tiny in comparison to traditional broadcast and what the public considers to be “professional” gear. In many cases, this small size is an advantage…documentary work sometimes requires a stealthy presence, so this diminutive size is a huge advantage in that field of production. But for people working in other levels of production, bigger is, at times, better for appearances.

In my recent review of the Genus mattebox system, I took a few minutes in the video review and talked about how the mattebox enhanced the professional look of my 5D MKII HDSLR camera package. This little rabbit-trail is about 6:40 into my review. For instance, if you are filming an interview with a corporate executive, they are likely used to seeing a large camera package like a Varicam. In almost every shoot with my HDSLR, I am compelled at some point to explain “yes, this is a real video camera.” It’s a fair concern from the standpoint of the client…the camera body is tiny, and it doesn’t even look like a video camera. I don’t blame them for asking. Now, when they see the footage, there are never any questions. In most cases, the client is floored. But in that critical first few moments of a shoot, you have to make a good first impression, and one way to deliver a more professional appearance is to build a camera package up with accessories. Maybe it’s not entirely necessary to shoot that two-camera sit down interview with a mattebox. But if I’ve got time, I’ll still mount that mattebox, because if the client or agency I’m dealing with isn’t worried about the camera, then they can concentrate on the interview or task at hand and deliver a better performance.

This also applies to experienced actors (perhaps moreso). There was an interesting side-note from a 2006 Showreel article from “24″ DP Rodney Charters. They were testing small HD cameras and 35mm lens adapter systems on the production set, and Keifer Sutherland made the comment that he feels that he delivers a better performance to a more professional-looking camera. I wrote about this back in 2006 in this blog post, the exact quote from Rodney was:

“I told Keifer we were testing more small cameras for drama use and he said again that he doesn’t feel he can perform as intensely in front of a small camera as when he faces a large Panaflex. So I’ll start by reiterating a point I made last time: it’s a good idea to use large matte boxes if you intend to use HDV for drama, so that the actors feel there is something of substance there they can address obviously not for taking an eyeline down the lens, but at least to act as an audience.”

I know what you are thinking, and it’s exactly what I’m thinking…these issues shouldn’t matter. The final result is what should really matter. And I agree 100%! A competent shooter with DIY gear can nearly always deliver better results than a subpar shooter with the best gear in the world. But so many times we are thrust into situations where the client or on-camera talent doesn’t have a previous relationship with the shooter, and all they have to draw on are those first impressions. It’s important in these situations to put forth the best possible image, and in some cases, if you’ll pardon the euphemism, that means having the biggest rig in the room.

In something of a surprise to me, it appears that many of the most vocal dissidents downplaying the new iPad are seasoned technogeeks. Ironically, many are among the so-called Apple faithful. It’s a very interesting, very polarizing product launch, to say the least. Over at PVC I’ve put together a compendium of the most insightful and thoughtful articles and blog posts on this new device from Apple, and I encourage you to check it out for a little perspective.

Monty Python would also like to offer a little perspective. Watch below.

This guest post was contributed by Ryan Bilsborrow-Koo; he is the winner of the 2008 Webby Award for Best Drama Series and one of Filmmaker Magazine’s 25 New Faces of Film. He is currently working on a number of transmedia projects that he hopes will make it out of development hell, and he blogs to maintain his sanity at nofilmschool.com, where he recently authored The DSLR Cinematography Guide.

The Apple iPad offers a number of exciting new possibilities for filmmakers and story architects thanks to its screen size, connectivity, and interactivity. At first glance it may seem like just a big iPhone, but it’s priced to move and — whether you plan on buying one or not — in 60 days it will be in the hands of millions. For filmmakers and independent creatives, there’s a lot of brain candy contained in that thin body; here are seven ways I think the iPad will change filmmaking and interactive storytelling.

1. Interactive interfaces

The above image (apologies for the blurriness; taken from the iPad’s live announcement, courtesy Gizmodo) demonstrates a couple of simple possibilities for interface overlays on top of video. For live sports broadcasts, these interfaces may be merely informational, but for narrative content, touch-based widgets offer a whole new world of interactivity. From “choose your own adventure”-style video content to multi-angle controls, by giving audiences real-time interfaces on screen, filmmakers can turn viewers into a participants. TV and set-top manufacturers are increasingly integrating internet connectivity and on-screen widgets as well, but none of them have the immediate tactile control of a iPad. While widgets are an easy-to-visualize example, the touch screen itself offers all sorts of interactive affordances; you don’t need something displayed on top of the video to allow viewers to interact with your content.

2. It’s a book, it’s a movie, it’s… an app

Anthony Zuiker (CSI) released a “digi-novel” last year, wherein a printed book contained a URL every 20 pages; readers could enter the URL into a browser and watch a related online video. In a lot of ways transmedia storytelling to date has been mostly about promotion (The Dark Knight, for example, used an Alternate Reality Game to promote its theatrical release), but the iPad offers a different set of possibilities: instead of these experiences existing as separate, promotional entrypoints, they can all be brought together on one platform. This is not to say that a project can’t have a live component that exists separately, but the iPad will play a pivotal role in bringing together different forms of storytelling: words, still images, moving images, audio, and interactive experiences can all live together on one handheld, connected device. The iPad will profoundly blur the line between book, movie, and game, and it will do so by offering these new-media experiences for sale through iTunes as… an application. When you’re developing a cross-platform story, what happens if you can’t define your project along clear lines? Should I say it? “There’s an app for that.”

3. Serialization (of payment)

In the old world, you’d develop a feature — a two-hour piece of content — and spend years making and distributing it. Then, on your next project you’d start the whole process all over again — possibly with a different studio — who then spends a lot of money on P&A to (re)mobilize an audience for another round of one-time payments. In the new world, as a filmmaker it is your responsibility to own your audience and mobilize them, not only from project to project but also from episode to episode. There’s a reason almost every movie in the local multiplex is a sequel, and it’s not just because Hollywood is risk-adverse; it’s also because audiences come back to stories and characters they like. So where does the iPad fit in with all this? Well, not only can you sell a hybrid book/movie/game as an app, but you can also charge the viewer a la carte for entries within the series. Apple calls this in-app subscriptions, which means the iTunes season pass — where a customer must decide on the spot to buy an entire TV season — isn’t the only option. Instead, your interactive application allows you to bundle installments however you like. For example, you can bundle “acts” of a show, where each act consists of several episodes, or if your storyline branches, charge separately for different paths. While it may be hard to convince someone to part with $20 all at once (the iTunes price for a high-def new release), if you’ve got a good story you may be able to convince them to part with that same $20 through a series of micropayments.

4. Charging money for digital content

Every newspaper and magazine in the country was hoping for something more than the iBook functionality that Steve Jobs demonstrated on stage, and while subscription print models are probably in the works — it’s not clear yet — one thing’s for sure: people are used to buying content through iTunes. There are currently 75 million iPhone users who have collectively downloaded 12 billion apps, songs, and movies; those numbers will only grow once the iPad is released. In an era where everyone’s struggling to monetize content with free, ad-based models, the iPad (by virtue of its large, high-quality screen) offers an even better platform for filmmakers than the iPhone. The iPad’s tech specs show that it plays back h.264 video at 720p (identical specs to the Apple TV), and its IPS screen will be bright, accurate, and viewable from a wide angle (meaning more than one person will be able to watch). The challenge for independent creatives comes in figuring out how to get indie content into iTunes (previously it was nigh impossible, and these days there are conflicting reports; chime in with a comment if you know better). The revenue split between creators and Apple is generally 70-30 in your favor, and iTunes does a good job of convincing customers to pay for 1s and 0s (this is the whole reason the iBook application gives you a nice-looking bookshelf: you feel like you’re buying something tangible). The iPad means more potential customers for filmmakers because:

5. Everyone’s connected to the internet

FreshDV’s Matt Jeppsen tweeted the following during the iPad’s announcement: “Know who desperately needs the iPad? Grandma. That +3G access is all she needs. No interface in the way, no routers to worry about.” He’s absolutely right: don’t underestimate the value of the built-in 3G. If you’re reading this, obviously you have decent internet access. But there are a lot of people who don’t have broadband — 40% of the US last I checked — and for content creators, they’re all potential customers. Previously, these people were unreachable through the series of tubes, and while I doubt an old-fashioned household without broadband access was going to buy an iPhone or $1,000 Macbook, they just might spring for an iPad. This is why Apple wanted to get the entry price point so low: to bring iTunes to a huge, previously untapped market, who will now use the iPad as their portal to a world of paid content (which Apple takes a cut of). With the addition of the iPad, iTunes TV and movie sales should jump significantly; now more than ever, your digital distribution strategy is key (see: Peter Broderick, Jon Reiss).

6. Flash is suddenly valuable again

If you’ve released a video online, you’ve likely been reliant on Adobe’s rich-media platform Flash (it powers the players at YouTube, Vimeo, and basically every other online video portal; we distributed The West Side using a custom Flash player). But Apple has famously kept Flash off the iPhone, and it looks like the iPad will be no different. With the iPhone bypassing Flash and serving up separate h.264 videos and with HTML5 looking to push Flash further towards irrelevancy, how is the iPad a good thing for Flash? Because of Adobe’s announcement that Flash CS5 will support iPhone app development — and now iPad development as well. Suddenly there are millions of Flash developers who can develop rich-media applications for Apple’s mobile platforms. While Flash won’t be an ideal development platform for applications that rely on hardware interactions (camera apps, for example), for filmmakers interested in extending their experience beyond “traditional” movies, this is a big deal. Why? Because with Flash, you can develop your rich-media experience once, and then output to web, iPhone, iPad, set-top boxes, and Blu-Ray platforms all at once. It remains to be seen how effective Flash will be implemented on some of these devices, but for productions with smaller budgets, being able to output to several different platforms without incurring huge costs will be… well, huge. And the iPad, I suspect, will be the crown jewel in Flash’s cross-platform strategy.

7. Communal watching

A world where everyone walks around staring at little screens doesn’t sound like very much fun. Many of us (still) enjoy watching movies at the theater, where every laugh, groan, and gasp in the audience becomes part of the experience. However, movies are increasingly viewed less and less in the theater and more and more at home (or on the go). Here’s where the iPad offers filmmakers an opportunity: a connected viewing device like the iPad can afford the viewer a new community-based watching experience. With an always-on internet connection, it’s possible to implement real-time comments, twitters, audio chats, and on-screen pointers… the possibilities are endless. No one’s saying it’s a good idea to overlay your cinematic masterpiece with a chat window, but watching a live TV broadcast while Skype-ing someone almost feels like you’re there in person; with the iPad, this type of “virtually there” experience could be even more integrated. It’s not a replacement for the “real” thing, but we have to embrace the fact that our content is going to be viewed in all sorts of conditions, and giving viewers the ability to watch something together is only a good thing. It’s our duty as filmmakers to offer our audience the best viewing experience we can, and the iPad places more of that power in our hands than ever before.

The iPad was just announced yesterday, and these were the first 1,000 words that came to mind. I’m sure there are plenty of other ways the iPad will change filmmaking — which you may feel is for better or worse — but one thing’s for sure: it’s an exciting time to be creating content. Let me know what you think in the comments, and stay tuned at FreshDV and nofilmschool for more.

Here’s a really unique follow focus option for HDSLR users. It’s called the iDC Follow Focus, and it’s basically a modified rubber skateboard wheel that seats up against your rubber lens focus ring.

It’s one of the most simple, interesting designs I’ve ever seen, and with the small baseplate mounting system from iDC it allows you to shoot run-n-gun without a 15mm rod system. And with two of the wheels mounted, you can run zoom and focus on long lenses like the Canon 70-200mm (shown below).

Check out more details and images over at Bruce Dorn’s blog. We’ll try to get a unit in hand for testing and addition to our follow focus review series.

 Genus Matte Box Review [9:52m]: Download

About two years ago, FreshDV started an in-depth matte box video review series as an extension of a review we wrote for DV Magazine. We’re updating that series today with a review of the Genus Mattebox, an affordable, lightweight design that’s at home with compact HD camcorders and DSLR rigs.

The Genus review has been posted at PVC here, and also added to our full mattebox review series here.

 Cinevate Durus Follow Focus Review: Download

Way back in the fall of 2007, FreshDV kicked off a follow focus review series. Our aim was to take a look at the popular units for 35mm adapter and film camera rigs, and to establish a baseline standard for performance testing.

Since then, we’ve added to the series with several new and updated units. To date, we’ve tested and reviewed ten follow focus systems and also created a short instructional video series on the role of a First Assistant Cameraman & Focus Puller.

Today’s new addition to that review list is the Cinevate Durus follow focus, an interesting single-arm design that features one of the most solid gearboxes we’ve tested to date. You can see how the Durus performs in our monster video review playlist here.

Shooter Martijn Schroevers has come up with an innovative way to use the Zacuto ZFinder as a viewfinder for the Sony XDCAM EX1 (or EX1R?). Watch below.

How to use the Z-Finder as a viewfinder for the Sony EX-1 from Martijn Schroevers on Vimeo.

We’ve reviewed the Bartech Remote Follow Focus system in the past, and have interviewed the Viewfactor guys at NAB 2009. So I was interested to run across a new solution soon to hit the market, called the Wireless iRis. This remote zoom/focus system has a unique trick; it runs from your iPhone or iPod Touch. Very interesting!

From the video below, it appears to be realtime and very accurate. The fact that the controls are in software enables all sorts of features, which they appear to be taking full advantage of. However, I’d be curious to see how it works in a production environment, and if the iPod/iPhone angle is more of a convenience or an annoyance. My guess is that most of the AC’s I know would rather have a real wheel in the palm of their hand. Watch below.

After Red’s October and November 30th Epic & Scarlet announcements, there’s been some confusion about the various configuration options and what exactly they can do. I ran across a great thread over at Reduser that talks about these common questions, and provides a little exposition on features and camera options. Check it out.

Cinevate’s Pegasus “heavy lifter” system is a fantastic slider (Cinevate likes to call ‘em Linear Tracking Systems) that I’ve used on many an occasion with excellent results. It’s particularly well-suited to small HD camcorders and VDSLRs. But with a weight limit around 30lbs, it’s slightly under what you’d want for a full-on Red One or serious camera rig. So they came out with the Atlas, with a weight limit of 200lbs. Now you’re talking! I’ve embedded their creative promo for the Atlas rig below.

Atlas Linear Tracking System from Cinevate on Vimeo.

Ah yes, the lowly video capture capabilities of the iPhone 3GS. Nasty compression, horrid rolling shutter skew, and a form factor that defies smooth camera movement. How would you possibly combat these issues and produce a high-end commercial? The brilliant people at The Mill did one such spot recently, and instead of fighting these challenges, they embraced them. Watch and learn.