I'm ready for something like this as Vegas Plug-in. I'd buy tommorrow. DGrob

Boris Red (The latest) reportedly has this feature as part of Red.

It *is* a Vegas plug-in...

(www.borisfx.com)

kentwolf,

But isn't "Boris" like REALLY expensive?

I wrote 2D3 a while back about creating a Vegas plugin of Steadymove and they seemed interested, however Vegas won't allow look ahead in the timeline (or something like that) so it wasn't going to be possible.

Maybe Vegas 5 will fix the SDK to allow look ahead.

JBJones

Especially when you're thinking about RED! Steadyhand was about $60, last I czeched...

Why not work on the real problem...getting smooth video to begin with. I have worked on this for a over a year now (on and off) and have developed a relatively inexpensive "Steadicam/Glidecam" alternative for smaller cameras. I suppose it's not technically an alternitive to the Glidecam as it works with my Glidecam 2000 Pro. It is the vest/arm for use with Glidecams and it really works. All I have to do is get better at using it.
I am in the process of getting all the suppliers for the parts to produce it in a moderate quantitiy (100 at first)
I will be at the Winter CES in Jan finishing my beta tests which consists of a whole day of shooting. This way I will know first hand how someone will feel after extended use.
May the smooth be with you

It is not rocket science. If you shoothand held frequently get yourself a pair of dumbells with assorted plates and a bar. Do side raises, curls, hammer curls, shoulder presses and one armed rowing with the dumbells and upright rowing, neck press and military press with the bar. Wrist curls too. These exercises will toughen your shooting muscles. Back exercises will build your endurance too.

Shoot WA all the time and if you have to make your picture bigger, walk closer. THe software solution means half ass shooting and "fix it in post". It is better to get it right during the shoot, rather than sitting on your ever-widening butt trying to fix it electronically.

The glidecam technique mentioned earlier is great too. In fact, if you are using a little consumer camera you can get steadicam-like control simply by keeping your retracted tripod affixed to the camcorder.

Peter

What about all the stuff shot 30 years ago?

JJK

Steadying the cam is a relative thing. There's the steadiness you get from a professional hydraulic tripod, or a brand-name steadicam or glidecam system which damps the motion so much it's not significant even when blown up on a 30-foot movie screen--and then there's being able to keep small-screen customers from getting seasick. To me the key factor is fatigue, so for me the first requirement of a steadying contraption is something that is supported by a waist belt rather than my shoulders. Same principle as a hiker's backpack. Plus there's a lot less movement in your hips than in your shoulders (unless you de Man).

One of the drawbacks of prosumer cameras are their size-----Its very difficult to do handheld work with a PD-150 et al--particularly at my age.

sheesh, Rextillion, it is easier to shoot handheld with a full size braodcast camcorder than the PD150/Canon XL1 group. A DSR 500 is about 16 pounds with a full size battery; a D50/DNV5 with battery is at least 25 lbs. Steadiness and lack of fatigue is inversely proportional to weight because I can shoot an enitire hockey game with a 25 lb. camcorder and never break a sweat BUT after holding a PD150 for about 15 minutes I am sweating and my arms ache. After an hour the footage would be so shakey no software program could fix it. Why? The large camcorders are perfectly balanced and just rest on your shoulder. You have only your arms with which to support the little buggers. I am closer to 50 years old than 40, btw.

Peter

Let's get back to the original questions, please. Regardless as to holding a camera steady from the start, the fact is that at times shots will not work out as steady as planned.

Consequently, if such a piece of software is used, does it work?