2010General Discussion forum
Achieving balance and operability with heavy 3D steadicam rigs
16 years old. Gear and prices may have changed since.
DisputedParticipants disagreed and reached no conclusion. Read the findings as positions, not as an answer.
What the thread found
- Dynamic balance is often impractical or unnecessary for large 3D rigs because whip panning is not typically performed during 3D work
- Static balance is the standard approach for heavy 3D steadicam setups, with regular balance being challenging enough due to weight distribution
- The Element Technica Neutron rig with Si-2K cameras represents a more manageable 3D steadicam configuration compared to heavier alternatives
- Mounting camera bodies upside down on 3D rigs helps centralize mass and improves overall balance
- Positioning the gimbal higher on the dovetail, with adequate clearance for the handle, allows for 360-degree rotation capability
- IDX batteries that stack into each other can shift weight distribution backward to improve balance
- Different camera choices on the same rig frame dramatically affect balance and operational difficulty
- Fiber cables and external recorders add significant weight and complexity that impacts steadicam operability
Depends on
- Experiences reported are from specific camera and recorder combinations that may not apply to all 3D rig configurations
- One operator reported the Neutron rig worked well with Si-2K cameras but acknowledged different results with Sony P1 cameras on the same frame due to front-heavy weight distribution
- Reports mention equipment in various locations that had unknown maintenance history
- Heavy 3D configurations with certain camera combinations have been deemed impractical for steadicam work by some operators, though others found solutions
- Physical toll of operating heavy 3D rigs is a recurring concern but varies by setup