Camera rating

[davelepka 4]

Quote

i have still only done 2 camera jumps (my last two) and dont think it is as bad as everyone said it was

Really? You mean to tell me that BOTH jumps went well? In that case I owe you an apology from that other thread where I suggested you might need more experience to be safe.

Just to double check, BOTH jumps were OK? Up to, and possibly including 90 seconds of freefall, two openings and two landings? All worked out OK?

[davelepka 4]

Quote

Is a rating without specific BSR's of any value?

Nope.

It's what we have now. The USPA has a suggestion, and several manufacturers have 'requirements' in place (essentailly suggestions as well due to a lack of corrective action).

The industry has proven it's wllingness to play the game when it comes to low time camera flyers. DZOs and TMs pay little attention to the current suggestions in place, and there's no reason to believe that they would pay attention to any new suggestions.

It would have to be a rock-solid BSR to make the difference. DZOs will pay attention to a possible loss of GM status (for now), but more so the legal liability of disregarding the BSR, which would become the 'standard industry pratice'.

Proving that a DZ didn't adhere to 'standard industry practice' is how the lawyers prove gross negligence, and how they can trump the waiver.

[DSE 3]

C'mon, lighten up. As a camera operator, I have run across an active NASCAR track 5 times in the past few years, and haven't been hit by any car zooming towards me at 190 mph. Both me and my camera were fine.
I did see a guy drop his tether once, and the passing car caught it in the rubber. Kinda similar to riser slap, but at much higher speed. Broke his shoulder when the camera was pulled from his shoulder, also broke 3 fingers from the lens grip.
Camera of course, was totaled, he was removed from the production team as a field op.
But it's never happened to me, so I think it's probably safe to keep running across active tracks.

[dragon2 0]

What does a coach rating have to do with filming?

I'd rather see that someone can actually FILM I like the idea of a mandatory quiz/course about photography and videography, maybe even editing too. RTFM is usually too much to ask apparently... I know a few camera people who have no clue about any settings other than "what works" and have no clue about this or that icon in the display, generally on jumprun...

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[DSE 3]

I was at Eloy on a Skyvan load over the holidays. A guy came up to me and said "You're that camera guy, huh?" Can you tell me what this is for (on his Sony HC3 camcorder)? I can't figure out manual focus on this thing, I've been looking for over a month."
Not that it matters much, but on the ride to altitude, I'm thinking of a lot more than his focus problem. RTFM. BTW, if you're that guy and reading this, I wasn't offended, but it is a relevant story. On that particular jump, it was one of my very early wingsuit jumps, so I was somewhat focused on my own experience.
I'm still mulling my opinon over having an actual rating, I can think of a lot of reasons I like the idea and a few reasons I don't. The concept of having a quiz/written exam for camera flyers is a good one, IMO, and basing most of it around safety, but some of it around technical chops means that the camera person is learning more about their craft. If you wanna be a guy that merely straps on a camera to shoot your buddies geeking during a freefly, cool. Have fun, be safe.

But I'm coming to the conclusion that if you're going to be flying 3' away from two others laminated together with only limited control, and you're focused on them and not so focused on your surroundings, being aware of the potential issues that might arise, and how to deal with specific situations (ie; tandem master is an asshat that likes to go to 3K cuz he wants to make the next load, or the student that suddenly goes into a track or cannonball, trap doors on different types of rigs), then I do believe more than just the blessing of a $$-oriented DZO is required. I'm just not yet sure what that requirement should be.

[dragon2 0]

Yeah I get the "can you figure this out for me" quite a lot too, and even if it's a camera model I've never seen before I'm getting awfully quick at finding their lost firewire ports, focus buttons, record buttons, ISO settings etc etc I'm too nice it's way easier to ask me than go look it up yourself

A safety quiz/course would be nice yeah, something about not flying underneath a tandem..???



Topmount vs sidemount, ringsight and other snag issues, flying with wings, burble, exit timing (when late, WAIT and follow), where to be during the jump (tandem/AFF/FS4/...), where NOT to be, where to be on opening, things to look out for on subjects equipment (loose laterals, open flaps etc), stuff like that?

And of course how to earn free beer

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

What does a coach rating have to do with filming?

Not a damned thing!

My comment was in reply to Phree's suggestion that, "Having a rating for people working with students on the other hand is not a bad thing."

My point was that a coach rating already exists mainly for that purpose, so a new rating should not be necessary.

Quote

I'd rather see that someone can actually FILM I like the idea of a mandatory quiz/course about photography and videography, maybe even editing too. RTFM is usually too much to ask apparently... I know a few camera people who have no clue about any settings other than "what works" and have no clue about this or that icon in the display, generally on jumprun...

Yup that was my thinking too. For me, that's just a side issue that I find interesting and sometimes amusing For the most part, the important thing for getting tandem vidi's is knowing how to fly the camera safely. Today's cameras are so idiot proof that pretty much any idiot can get usable footage without knowing anything about photography.

Like I said, I just find it amusing ... i know of an aspiring vidiot who is wanting to learn how to shoot video, but he's not the smartest kid at the DZ, he has no concept of the basics of photography, and most significantly, certainly does not have the APTITUDE to ever really get it. Someday, he'll have the experience to safely shoot paying tandems. Then the day will come when he adds a still camera to his helmet. He will never read/understand the basics of photography, but he'll get some stills nonetheless. Since he really has no interest in photography, and has no desire to read all that boring technical stuff about photography, I'm sure that he will keep his equipment at the DZ and not experiment "on the ground" with it.

Tandem students pay a lot of money for the photography. Should they be entitled to a professionally rendered final product? I think so. Unfortunately, I've seen some real crap delivered to clients at some DZ's. Many clients don't have a clue how much better it could be.

[mrwrong 0]

Quote

A safety quiz/course would be nice yeah, something about not flying underneath a tandem..???



Topmount vs sidemount, ringsight and other snag issues, flying with wings, burble, exit timing (when late, WAIT and follow), where to be during the jump (tandem/AFF/FS4/...), where NOT to be, where to be on opening, things to look out for on subjects equipment (loose laterals, open flaps etc), stuff like that?

This is actually some GREAT ideas. This is something I'm currently asking my fellow cam jumping buddies about so I can be as safe as possible.

Respect!!!!

“The sum of intelligence on the planet is a constant; the population is growing.” - George Bernard Shaw
He who dies with the most toys, wins.....
dudeist skydiver # 19515
Buy quality and cry once!

[AUSkyguy 0]

A rating is not the answer, The DZO/Tandem JM should have the FINAL word on whether or not the jumper can do video/ be in the video rotation. The answer choice that it would just be giving the DZO more money is strangely skewed, I'm positive that if you have a rating the money for that rating goes to the USPA and not the DZO. Therefore some of us would be paying membership, coach rating, tandem rating, and now a video rating fee to the USPA each year. Not to mention a possible video rating course from a course director that would be another expense. I think that a new rating is just a little ridiculous, The USPA if anything should rewrite the BSR's to make it more clear the requirements to jump a camera with a tandem.

-Chris Martin

[dragon2 0]

OK, maybe we can put together a dropzone.com camera flyers FAQ

It should definitely include "all the little things about camera flying"

ciel bleu,
Saskia

[Laszloimage 0]

...60 jumps and going with the tandem.
I can understand the over eager wanna be dude.
But how about the TM/I??? Why would he let someone going along the tandem jump with such a low experince? Even if he wants to brake rules and recommendations... but no common sense at all?
His rating should be pulled.
I wouldn't call him a TM/I, I think he's a retard.

I've been talking about camera rating ever since I'm jumping camera. On an AFF or Tandem jump the camera guy is just as much part of the skydive as the instructors are. So the videographer should be just as much responsible, some kind of qualification (rating) would be smart.
...skydiving businesses probably wouldn't support the idea. It would make it even more difficult to get enough camera staff for relatively low wages.
I can see the "money aspect" of it, more and more DZ would rather go with the handy cam (which is better than nothing but lame IMO).
-Laszlo-

[Cashmanimal 0]

It is a tough thing to try and implement IMO. At bigger dropzones it would be a much more effective tool than at smaller ones, speaking from experience.

My home DZ is a club with only a few camera flyers, two 182's. I started filming AFF jumps at around jump 150, but that was after I had made most of my skydivers with our AFF instructors due to the size of our dropzone. They knew my flying skills and were comfortable with them and I became our full-time AFF vidiot for the summer. I will not say I was the best, but all three of us were comfortable with eachother and it worked out great for our situation where we have 5-6 AFF jumps a weekend.

At my DZ here in California I do no paid video work. THere are much more experienced and skilled people, no use for me yet which is fine with me. I will do my friends' tandems, but once again that is with a TM who I have jumped with a lot in the past and he knows me and has no problem with it, we work very well together.

But I can see where a rating would come in useful for all the out of town people we get, but my home DZ rarely has anybody new come along, and when they do there is a 99.9% chance they want nothing to do with flying cameras for us.

It's just another one of those "gonna-be-different-everywhere" things I think.

I will agree though with whoever said a coach rating and 200 skydives. I think that is a great starting place for who should be doing video works. Perhaps with a set of check-dives, that way if somebody with 350 jumps want to jump with their friend who is going for a tandem while on vacation, they can at least say they met some minimal standards that will keep all three safe. I really don't know, everything in this sport is so circumstantial sometimes.

Edit to point out I am aware of manufacturer recommendations, but perhaps they should be incorporated into this somehow?...

It's all fun and until someone loses an eye... then it's just a game to find the eye

[velocityphoto 0]

Yea what you said! :)
I have actually been on a few dives that went bad.
. One aff in particular i had to take over for the instructors that were not there. Kind of funny when it happened. All worked out good though.

A friend will bail you out of jail , a REAL friend will be sitting next to you in the cell slapping your hand saying "DUDE THAT WAS AWSUM " ................

[jtval 0]

Quote

I talked to a guy this morning who is flying camera w/tandems at 60 skydives.
Looking forward to your thoughts.

Thats just nucking futs! I would like to believe that the S&TA/DZO and TM/AFFI would be the buffer zone to this situation.

Tunnel time or not there's too much shit to deal with to be doing video jumps with only 60 jumps.

There's a kid who jumps in Vegas who bought his gear from his family memeber who quit the sport.

this kid has a camera on his helmet with only 60ish jumps as well.

He came up to our dz and I spoke with him about doing a small way etc and when we get geared up and go to the plane and he puts his camera helmet on.

I was like WTF? I suggested he ignore the video aspect and just jump. I asked him a bunch of safety related questions, asked him to demonstrate his cutaway procedure etc.

I proceded to be "the guy who whines about safety" for a while and we did our jump.

I know the DZO will not let his own students jump camera until 200 jumps min.

the thing is this is not an enforceable "law" as long as they are not jumping with students they can wear a cam helmet.

So, the only thing I can do it beat the dead horse with safety scenarios and questions when this kid comes around.
Im glad to say last time I jumped with him (which is the 2nd time) he did not wear a cam.

My photos

My Videos

[Liemberg 0]

Actually - every cameraflyer I have jumped with was 'rated' on all of his jumps.

Most of the times the TI's are also 'rated'.

Of course, someone has to switch on the video, but from that point on it is unbelievable what you can see on the video's - the camera TELLS if the cameraflyer is somewhere in space and time where he should not be, the camera TELLS if the TI forgot to properly adjust the harness (they suspended TI's ratings on two seperate occasions in the Netherlands based on video evidence) I have seen a cameraflyer ´drop the ball´ during a malfunction of the tandem allmost killing himself in the proces, etcetera, etcetera.

And this is not mentioning out of focus, filming against the sun, looking up and backsliding away from the tandem, filming with the tele in stead of the wide angle / all those things that won´t kill you, wont hurt your passenger but don´t produce good video either.

OTOH I have had guys (usually blessed with a pair of ears on their head) that were rather early in their skydiving career who would LISTEN and do as they were told become accomplished cameraflyers coming in front of me faster and faster as well as closer and closer at almost every consecutive jump.

Problem is however that not always the one who had 200 jumps more than the other proved to be the talented cameraflyer. (i.e. I have seen guys who were succesful from jump one with barely 250 jumps and OTOH guys that were not and never would be with well over 600 jumps. People that studied the camcorders manual and actually went to play with the thing filming on the DZ and filming every landing possible often were the more succesfull ones...)

A a formal rating and a written test - just what the doctor ordered, that should bring about safe skydives and excellent video´s...

(This not to say that any TI who would let someone with as little as sixty jumps come along with a camera should not have his head examined, but I trust that TI´s like that will ignore ratings also...)

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[diablopilot 2]

Quote

What does a coach rating have to do with filming?

I'd rather see that someone can actually FILM I like the idea of a mandatory quiz/course about photography and videography, maybe even editing too. RTFM is usually too much to ask apparently... I know a few camera people who have no clue about any settings other than "what works" and have no clue about this or that icon in the display, generally on jumprun...

Why? Why should the USPA, give a toss about the quality of video or photos?

The only part a rating should address in the safety of camera flyers and those they are filming with a particular emphasis on camera flyers in proximity to students, including tandems students.

My opinion? The camera flyer requirements for Tandem video is already spelled out in the RWS manual. And it's not to much to ask that a video flyer on an AFF jump at least have the minimum free fall requirements an AFF instructor must have.

----------------------------------------------
You're not as good as you think you are. Seriously.

[DSE 3]

sounds like a BSR would have helped in your situation, JT?

[VideoFly 0]

Maybe instead of ratings, video awards for having done so many tandem/AFF videos with stills and perhaps, also having other ratings should be offered. Then the DZOs and instructors can decide whom they want to jump with.

[ficus 0]

Is this really that big of a deal? At the end of the day, the tandem instructor is in charge of the skydive, period.

I expressed interest in doing tandem videos relatively early on and was given a to-do list by one of the head instructors.

"Come see me when you have 300 jumps."

"Go do 20-25 video jumps with that new camera suit and helmet."

"Come with me on a tandem, but don't get very close to me. I want to make sure you are flying that suit and not the other way around. If you don't scare me, you can come again."

I was safe, so he let me come with him to practice whenever there wasn't already video. After I got my skills up, they put me in the rotation. Case of beer. I guess I just assumed that was how it worked for everybody.

To me, if this is actually a problem that needs solving, then the real problem is that we don't trust tandem instructors to decide if someone is safe to jump with them. And if that's the problem...

[DSE 3]

And when the tandem instructor is the roommate of the guy who wants to shoot tandems? The tandem instructor's viewpoint is clouded.
Or when the camera guy is a real hotshot RW worker or had tons of tunnel time?
Maybe where you are, it's a more controlled environment. Flip side, I've seen a DZ where a tunnel rat came in, blew away AFF in 3 jumps, and at 30 skydives, put a camera on his head at a different DZ. He can't land like he should be able to, and I think he's dangerous under canopy, but he's got "mad" freefall skills, so he must be safe, right?
Obviously it's a big enough issue that folks with some serious numbers have something to say about it in this thread.
Or maybe we've all just got too much time on our hands.

[ChangoLanzao 0]

Quote

Or maybe we've all just got too much time on our hands.

I'm retired. What's your excuse?

[rhys 0]

Maybe a camera rating is going a little to far.

Recommendations fir the camera flyer to have 500 jumps etc is excessive.

60 jumps is ridiculous.

200 jumps and a bit of common sence is about the best recommendation I have heard of.

The T/M is responsable for all on the dive.

I was sneaky and jumped with a little over 190 jumps with a tandem, but I had been working very closely and competing in a 4 way scrambles team with the instructor i jumped with. this could be considered a little naughty but sensible.

60 jumps is very naughty and fucking stupid!

"When the power of love overcomes the love of power, then the world will see peace." - 'Jimi' Hendrix

[ficus 0]

Quote

And when the tandem instructor is the roommate of the guy who wants to shoot tandems? The tandem instructor's viewpoint is clouded.

This is my point exactly -- it doesn't have anything to do with camera flying. You could just as easily conceive of a situation where the TI is taking up the 50 jump wonder roommate's girlfriend and he wants to give her a kiss pass.

Quote

Maybe where you are, it's a more controlled environment.

This I have considered. I have been fortunate enough to receive a great deal of personal attention and mentoring.

[Liemberg 0]

Quote

when the tandem instructor is the roommate of the guy who wants to shoot tandems? The tandem instructor's viewpoint is clouded.

As long as he's not downright suicidal, what is the harm in that? With more than 50 percent of the 'wanabee's' failing to produce consistently the images that we want (i.e that we can sell / that is as good as the video of their friend who was here last week / month / year) by the end of the day it is THE FOOTAGE that will decide.

And you know what? I never met a trully unsafe wanabee cameraflyer that produced what we want.
Because running before you can walk (as a characteristic) tends to ruin the footage anyway...

(And since what ficus described is exactly the way I have seen it happen on several occasions at my place, I guess that IS the smart way of doing things. But what do I know - my latest and youngest cameraflyer is a glove... )

"Whoever in discussion adduces authority uses not intellect but memory." - Leonardo da Vinci
A thousand words...

[jtval 0]

Quote

sounds like a BSR would have helped in your situation, JT?

Yep. All I know about it the USPA recommendation.
I remember a graduate of our AFF program bought a camera around jump 100. He was not allowed to jump it until 200 jumps.

But when someone comes to our DZ the only thing we can do is quiz them and throw scenarios at them and at least get a feel for their education.

If they are brain dead I am sure they won't be jumping but the kid I spoke about in the first post had the answers. that was his first and only helmet. he'd been jumping shortly after student status.

My photos

My Videos