Drift HD camera

R

Reg

Branched out member
Location
Victoria, BC
Change your youtube settings to HD for better quality....bottom right corner of the video screen.

Some footage from an Arbutus Tree removal just recently: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MaEzKZGDL_4

The camera is the Drift HD: http://pointofviewcameras.ca/drift-hd-camera.html

The wide angled lens makes for dizzy viewing at times until you get used it, then its actually watchable in the sense that you get to see everything that the climber sees.

The HD obviously brings out the colour better than my old camera, but having said that it also looks a little blurry and lacks the sharpness in motion. The sound is very weak and nasal; the files are massive; the wrist remote was not reliable at all as I realised later that I'd missed lots of clips where I thought it was recording....maybe I'll try a new battery and a plug-in microphone next time.

The camera unit itself which fixes on top of your helmet is surprisingly light and compact.... and the domed shape lens doesn't seem to collect the sawdust which is also a big plus for shooting treework.

Overall I think its pretty good value for money, and a relatively cheap option for anyone looking to make a budget video to promote their business.

The tree-work in the video is nothing too fast or exciting....I just tried to show a little climbing and organizing to showcase the wide field-of-view that the lens offers. Arbutus can be of very slow, taper (as was this one), yet evidently very strong...much like a Euc in fact except with bushier foliage. Thanks
 
Hey Reg,
Watched the video and welcome to the Drift family. A few things I have found about the camera (I have the Drift HD 170 Stealth) is that if you get a large enough SD card you don't have to worry about using the remote. Because the batteries will die well before you reach your limit. Yes the remote is hard to get used to. There is usually a delay so if you press it solid once wait an it should switch for you. I found pressing it multiple times doesn't work as good as one solid press and a pause.

Drift cameras are great cameras especially the new one you have. They made vast improvements on it. Also look into the Drift HD LED cable. It shows when you are recording and you could hang it just in sight inside your helmet.

I am currently looking into the Drift Long Life Battery because then for larger jobs I could swap out batteries. All of my recent videos I shot in 720p. Recording in 1080p takes up a lot of storage and fast.

I always enjoy your videos Reg. I look forward to seeing more in the future.
 
The biggest problems associated with the Drift is that it gives viewers a false sense of height - it makes trees look twice as tall as they actually are.

The other issue with the wide angled lense is that it makes branches and timber look very small, so if the climber is cutting a 2ft diameter section of timber it looks more like 1ft diameter section, and if the climber drops a 40ft top the Drift makes it look like a 20 ft top - the Drift more than any other cam gives a false impression of the work and the reality of the situation.

Its a decent enough camera for capturing the overall scene, but on balance it's presents a false representation of the work.

the Contour gives a much more realistic view of treework. Thats the one I'll be buying. See Treestyler's vids in the Buzz Video.

As far as I have seen from the many helmet cam vids on the net the Contour presents the most realistic image of treework

Treestyler's vid -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNieV0M1Aas

ContourHD-1080p-Full-HD-Helmet-Camera-Review.jpg
 
The contour can only be mounted on the side of the helmet right? Does it have a rotating lens? Can't find the definite answer based off their website. But didn't look to hard.
 
[ QUOTE ]
The biggest problems associated with the Drift is that it gives viewers a false sense of height - it makes trees look twice as tall as they actually are.

The other issue with the wide angled lense is that it makes branches and timber look very small, so if the climber is cutting a 2ft diameter section of timber it looks more like 1ft diameter section, and if the climber drops a 40ft top the Drift makes it look like a 20 ft top - the Drift more than any other cam gives a false impression of the work and the reality of the situation.

Its a decent enough camera for capturing the overall scene, but on balance it's presents a false representation of the work.

the Contour gives a much more realistic view of treework. Thats the one I'll be buying. See Treestyler's vids in the Buzz Video.

As far as I have seen from the many helmet cam vids on the net the Contour presents the most realistic image of treework

Treestyler's vid -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XNieV0M1Aas

ContourHD-1080p-Full-HD-Helmet-Camera-Review.jpg


[/ QUOTE ]

I wouldn't go so far as to say everything looks twice as tall Grover, at least I dont think of it that way....and not if you use say your saw as a reference point (which appears very small). That Arbutus was about 80ft.

The problem with Wouters vid is that you get to see so little, such is the narrow field of view. Even the saw is out of view on some of the cuts and instead I have a view of a branch but I can hear the saw running just out of view.

When I first got the pov1 it came with a 95 degree view, or maybe less. At best I got a view of the saw and the cut if I was lucky....quite frustrating actually. The 110 was an improvement but still whenever I was asked why I dont show any climbing or movement my answer was that theres no point because you wont be able to see which body parts to make it happen. I may as well been working from a bucket for what you could see.

The 170 lens however shows almost everything the climber sees, unlike anything -110 which looks more like tunnel vision. Having used 3 different size lens' now I much prefer the 170 as it shows so much more without even having to think about it. I'll get something else up later from the same job.
 
[ QUOTE ]


I wouldn't go so far as to say everything looks twice as tall Grover, at least I dont think of it that way....and not if you use say your saw as a reference point (which appears very small). That Arbutus was about 80ft.

The problem with Wouters vid is that you get to see so little, such is the narrow field of view. Even the saw is out of view on some of the cuts and instead I have a view of a branch but I can hear the saw running just out of view.

When I first got the pov1 it came with a 95 degree view, or maybe less. At best I got a view of the saw and the cut if I was lucky....quite frustrating actually. The 110 was an improvement but still whenever I was asked why I dont show any climbing or movement my answer was that theres no point because you wont be able to see which body parts to make it happen. I may as well been working from a bucket for what you could see.

The 170 lens however shows almost everything the climber sees, unlike anything -110 which looks more like tunnel vision. Having used 3 different size lens' now I much prefer the 170 as it shows so much more without even having to think about it. I'll get something else up later from the same job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reg

I've made a few Drift (borrowed) vids over the past couple years so I'm only too aware of the wide angled aspect, but for me it's too close to a fisheye lens, trees at the side of the frame bend and warp out of shape, only the centre of the screen stays marginally normal.

Look again at a different vid by Wouter, for me it's real, the height is normal and ok the perspective is narrower but within a short space of time you'd adjust your head movements to capture what was necessary and important to the vid, it's very unlike the Drift which makes everything look like found footage of spaced out canopy researchers that got lost deep in the Peruvian jungle cause they were so wasted on magic mushrooms.

Wouter's 2nd vid -

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


.
 
[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]


I wouldn't go so far as to say everything looks twice as tall Grover, at least I dont think of it that way....and not if you use say your saw as a reference point (which appears very small). That Arbutus was about 80ft.

The problem with Wouters vid is that you get to see so little, such is the narrow field of view. Even the saw is out of view on some of the cuts and instead I have a view of a branch but I can hear the saw running just out of view.

When I first got the pov1 it came with a 95 degree view, or maybe less. At best I got a view of the saw and the cut if I was lucky....quite frustrating actually. The 110 was an improvement but still whenever I was asked why I dont show any climbing or movement my answer was that theres no point because you wont be able to see which body parts to make it happen. I may as well been working from a bucket for what you could see.

The 170 lens however shows almost everything the climber sees, unlike anything -110 which looks more like tunnel vision. Having used 3 different size lens' now I much prefer the 170 as it shows so much more without even having to think about it. I'll get something else up later from the same job.

[/ QUOTE ]

Reg

I've made a few Drift (borrowed) vids over the past couple years so I'm only too aware of the wide angled aspect, but for me it's too close to a fisheye lens, trees at the side of the frame bend and warp out of shape, only the centre of the screen stays marginally normal.

Look again at a different vid by Wouter, for me it's real, the height is normal and ok the perspective is narrower but within a short space of time you'd adjust your head movements to capture what was necessary and important to the vid, it's very unlike the Drift which makes everything look like found footage of spaced out canopy researchers that got lost deep in the Peruvian jungle cause they were so wasted on magic mushrooms.

Wouter's 2nd vid -

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


.

[/ QUOTE ]

Only watched the first minute Tim....I saw his hand a few times, part of the saw with noise and the branches in full as they got further away. I cant watch any more because it reminds me of how annoyed I used to feel looking back over similar footage of my own. A narrow lens is great for things further away but for treework where so much of it is up close it just shows only of a fraction of whats going on.

Edit: That Arbutus truly did have a spaced-out canopy like none other I've personally seen....no need for drugs.
 
Really like the look of the videos. Would you consider posting a pic of the placement of the cam on your helmet, please?
 
I watched 53 seconds of it of full screen HD.

It seemed the still objects, like your body (almost still) were clear and of good quality.

But anything with movement; the tree and background blurred very quickly.

The blurry part almost made me sick, so I stopped it.

I will try another time.

Just giving some real feedback. Sorry if you don't want anything negative.
 
[ QUOTE ]
I watched 53 seconds of it of full screen HD.

It seemed the still objects, like your body (almost still) were clear and of good quality.

But anything with movement; the tree and background blurred very quickly.

The blurry part almost made me sick, so I stopped it.

I will try another time.

Just giving some real feedback. Sorry if you don't want anything negative.

[/ QUOTE ]

I didn't design the camera so I'm not gonna feel bad if you say something negative. I know about the sick part....but you need to try a little more than 53 seconds....you get used to it and then its actually alright, but maybe not the full screen right away. The blurred thing I assume must be a built in anti-shake feature.
 
[ QUOTE ]
... until you get used it, then its actually watchable in the sense that you get to see everything that the climber sees.

....I just tried to show a little climbing and organizing to showcase the wide field-of-view that the lens offers.

[/ QUOTE ]

I thought it did an excellent job in the quoted areas. When I watch something shot from a helmet cam that is what I want to see. All those peripheral activities such as rope tending, foot placement or knot tying are normally lost or lose perspective from shifting the viewed subject matter from one to the other.

I also appreciate proper perspective, like Grover mentions, however I don't think a helmet cam is ever going to adequately compete with a separate on site camera.

Dave
 
A few things Reg that I remember that I think you may want to consider.

Are you shooting in 1080p or 720p?

I ask this because if shooting in 1080p you can only shoot at 30 fps (frames per second)

If you shoot in 720p you can choose from 25, 30, 50, or 60 fps.

This is why I choose to shoot in 720p. You still get decent HD quality that is really good for a youtube video but also get the speed so that you don't get the blur with fast motion.

I think it is better to consider the fps over the video resolution.

And if you do shoot in 720p with 60 fps ignore all this. Just throwing this out there if you didn't.
 
[ QUOTE ]
Really like the look of the videos. Would you consider posting a pic of the placement of the cam on your helmet, please?

[/ QUOTE ]

+1
 
Hey Reg what do you use to edit the video? It might be that you need to tweak the settings to encode at better parameters. The camera compresses the file of course, then it might be getting compressed again by the editor as well as youtube's compression. I would expect better video from that camera. The 1080p that I've shot with mine looks really smooth.
 
I do indeed have it set at 1080. Might be some kind of anti-shake feature that some cameras have. I dont like to drop down from 1080 incase I ever use a specific clip for somthing other than the net....wouldn't want to comprimise the clarity unless (as recommended) its for slow motion.

I'll put those photos on now Jack.
309918-DSC01832-Copy.JPG
309918-DSC01833-Copy.JPG


thats with the microphone hooked up by-the-way which arrived earlier today.
 

Attachments

  • 309918-DSC01833-Copy.webp
    309918-DSC01833-Copy.webp
    37.4 KB · Views: 27
I just got the same camera last week. I've only had the chance to put it up one tree, but I like the results. I shot in 720, and thought it was fine for a little web video. I'll have to try increasing the fps to see how much difference it makes.

I bought two mounts and put one on my newer Kask (more downward orientation) and one on a Petzl helmet (more straight-ahead, horizontal orientation). I like the video quality and the color, but the spatial weirdness does make the rigging look a little odd. As far as the exaggerated height, I hope every homeowner who sees it really believes it. They can watch it, get nauseous and sh*t themselves, and then hire me for their trees as well . . .


Kask.jpg


Petzl.jpg
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New threads New posts

Back
Top Bottom