Question about the video camera on body strap?

The video clearly exhibits gimbal-stabilized video, (so good guess on the DJI products)

Tho if you scroll down on the description, they have links to GoPro Hero8, the gimbal that was used. - as well as a links to some of the other Go Pro gear that they use- which includes a hand grip and monopod. (no helmet gear - I would not use a helmet mount, Helmets are only really ideal for people who do sports. - and the last thing you want to haul on a trip is a hemet!).  Plus having the camera off-helmet allows you to take in and enjoy your travels from every angle while the camera remains shooting forward doing it's thing

They'r pretty lightweight, so it's possible to hand-hold small cameras, maybe not for an hour straight, but in brief walks.

That said, If I were you, for these kinds of videos, I would take a serious look at the Insta360 X3. Not only can it shoot walking videos, but at the same time, will take video of YOU in it! the only downside is that it might not be as high resolution as a GoPro, but it's still high definition and looks great - and gives you so many other great shooting options.

and if one day you get an VR system, you can view your videos in full 360, which is amazing.

There is no easy way to get viewable stabled video without some equipment which can be bulky and heavy. I guess that goes against the "walking" part of the tour.

Think about it, if it is really so easy, why would those videographers in the ball games have that much harness when they run around the field to follow the players.

Also, those professional demo propagation video you saw probably cost 5 figures to produce. Many cameras, many retakes, and fantastic editing.

Sean Nelson wrote:

DMKAlex wrote:

Many cameras, many retakes, and fantastic editing.

I feel like this is the unspoken part of the whole field. You see some fantastic bit of footage and think "I want whatever he used so I can get shots like that". What you don't realize is that the clip you saw was the only one of dozens that turned out that well. It's like the social media videos of people making impossible basketball shots - who knows how many tries it took them to do that?

I was stung by this back in the days of balance-rigged stabilizers. You see great footage, and you don't realize what an frustrating and error-prone process it is to get a take that looks decent. The motorized gimbals are like day and night compared to that.

DMKAlex wrote:

Think about it, if it is really so easy, why would those videographers in the ball games have that much harness when they run around the field to follow the players.

To be fair, the cameras those guys are using are pretty formidable. If you're using a GoPro or even a compact camera like an RX100 you can get away with kit that's a lot less cumbersome.

Actually, If you watch many NFL games these days, some of that footage is now being shot with consumer gear. (Sony A7rIV on a. Ronin Gimbal)

https://www.sportsvideo.org/2020/12/22/fox-sports-worked-a-live-mirrorless-camera-into-an-nfl-broadcast-and-it-caught-viewers-attention/

But for walking around for an hour shooting continuous video, a helmet mount, especially if you can pair it with a compact gimbal, would be a piece of cake to deal with. I use that while kayaking, and the biggest problem I have is remembering that it's there and keeping my head still enough to get some decent footage.

Helmet cams are quite practical for kayakers, bikers..skydivers, etc, or filmmakers wanting a first person view effect.  but clearly not the norm for folks (like the OP) wanting to capture some walking video on travels.

Just stick the camera on a gimbal and a grip of selfie stick. - then you can easily monitor the camera AND get decent footage without having to worry about keeping your head robotically straight ahead and level.     That's also closer to how pro's do it.   or get a DJI camera, which is literally designed for such purposes.

I've shot very long footage while walking just having my Insta360 on a selfie stick sticking out the top of a backpack as well.  But normally I'll just hold the stick so I can be more creative.

The camera height in the video you linked to is pretty high up so I would second the notion of it being mounted on a helmet (on a mini gimbal mounted to the helmet???)  Or something like that.

I personally wouldn't want to walk around hand  holding a gimbal for an hour, no matter how light it is.

sludge21017 wrote:

Off The Mark wrote:

I personally wouldn't want to walk around hand holding a gimbal for an hour, no matter how light it is.

Guess you never tried a DJI Pocket 1 or 2.

No, but I wouldn't want to walk around with my hand held out in front of me for an hour, even if my hand were empty.

Maybe it is just all the injuries / broken collarbones I have had from playing hockey and too many motorcycle accidents.

sludge21017 wrote:

Off The Mark wrote:

I personally wouldn't want to walk around hand holding a gimbal for an hour, no matter how light it is.

Guess you never tried a DJI Pocket 1 or 2.

Indeed.

I don't get it.  the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do..  which specifically states the kind of gear that's used...  yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes. LOL.

Sean Nelson wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do.. which specifically states the kind of gear that's used... yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes.

It's because of the high point of view. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to hand hold a camera above eye height for that long, that's the kind of POV you get from a head-mounted camera. The description in the video lists the photographic equipment but not how the equipment was mounted - however the fact that he listed a wearable gimbal also counters the idea that it was handheld.

Yeah, the high point of view seemed to me that it PROBABLY wasn't being hand held.

Sean Nelson wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do.. which specifically states the kind of gear that's used... yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes.

It's because of the high point of view. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to hand hold a camera above eye height for that long, that's the kind of POV you get from a head-mounted camera. The description in the video lists the photographic equipment but not how the equipment was mounted - however the fact that he listed a wearable gimbal also counters the idea that it was handheld.

The change of title says it all.

Seriously, it's pretty obvious to most how this video was shot , just by watching the video and seeing the moves, how the camera height changes slightly at times..etc.  -if you actually watch the video throughout,  or even skipped thru it a times like I did,  as I noticed the parts that were clearly shot with a handheld with a gimbal. that merely has the option of being wearable., as well as being mounted many other ways.

But let me put an end to this helmet nonsense.

Open up the video, skip to around 22:35.    The Shadow tells the truth.  It's a GoPro on a stick handheld at eye level.

case closed.

Off The Mark wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do.. which specifically states the kind of gear that's used... yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes.

It's because of the high point of view. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to hand hold a camera above eye height for that long, that's the kind of POV you get from a head-mounted camera. The description in the video lists the photographic equipment but not how the equipment was mounted - however the fact that he listed a wearable gimbal also counters the idea that it was handheld.

Yeah, the high point of view seemed to me that it PROBABLY wasn't being hand held.

and turns out you're 100% wrong

Gary3000 wrote:

Off The Mark wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do.. which specifically states the kind of gear that's used... yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes.

It's because of the high point of view. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to hand hold a camera above eye height for that long, that's the kind of POV you get from a head-mounted camera. The description in the video lists the photographic equipment but not how the equipment was mounted - however the fact that he listed a wearable gimbal also counters the idea that it was handheld.

Yeah, the high point of view seemed to me that it PROBABLY wasn't being hand held.

and turns out you're 100% wrong

OK.

But I personally would 100% prefer to use a gimbal on a helmet than hand hold one for 37 minutes.

I wouldn't even want to hold helium balloons out in front of me at eye level for 37 minutes.

But anyone who wants to hold their hand up for 37 minutes, more power to ya.

Off The Mark wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

Off The Mark wrote:

Sean Nelson wrote:

Gary3000 wrote:

the OP gave a 37 minute reference video of the kind of shooting they'd like to do.. which specifically states the kind of gear that's used... yet dudes here are suggesting wearing a gimbal-on-helmet for 60minutes.

It's because of the high point of view. It doesn't make a lot of sense for him to hand hold a camera above eye height for that long, that's the kind of POV you get from a head-mounted camera. The description in the video lists the photographic equipment but not how the equipment was mounted - however the fact that he listed a wearable gimbal also counters the idea that it was handheld.

Yeah, the high point of view seemed to me that it PROBABLY wasn't being hand held.

and turns out you're 100% wrong

OK.

But I personally would 100% prefer to use a gimbal on a helmet than hand hold one for 37 minutes.

I wouldn't even want to hold helium balloons out in front of me at eye level for 37 minutes.

But anyone who wants to hold their hand up for 37 minutes, more power to ya.

first off, the OP didn't specifically say they wanted to shoot a continuous one-shot 37minute (or 1hr) video. People shoot videos like this all the time in various time lenghts and often edit things together.

secondly, a handheld gimbal is superior for filming video vs helmet cam. that's why the professional did so.

thirdly, people opting to shoot eye level with sticks don't just hold the camera out in front of them, they use longer sticks (as seen in the shadow), which allows you to hold the stick lower by your waist. or with elbows against the chest..etc And one can switch off between hands.
it's easy, I've done it.

and lastly, nobody wants to pack a helmet in their suitcase for travels, not when they can do better with a skinny little collapsable stick that can shoot better video!