Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

shop.soloshot.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

141–150 of 175 posts

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#141

Post by MichaelGG »

lvs wrote: post #117
Istof wrote: post #109

Place a remote controlled gun next to that camera and you have a remote hunting system? (probably illegal in most jurisdictions though)

Uh, one that shoots at you? How are you going to get the tracking beacon onto your target?

Setup system across from office entrance a month beforehand. Drop the tag into the target's coat at restaurant coat check. Trigger remote system based on proximity. Someone's probably already done this in a spy movie.

It'd be a much better idea to simply have a remote controlled system, using tech that's been around for decades. Though I suppose if you're truly paranoid, you might be worried about signals tracking. Maybe have it connected to the Internet and use thermite to wipe out the evidence after shooting.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#142

Post by fake44637 »

davnicwil wrote: post #12

Looks to be an amazing piece of engineering but seriously, what's the usecase? It looks to be targeted at the amateur market ('shoot like the pros') and I just don't see the demand or workability in this space. To pick on a few hinted at on the page: A game of football: Leaving a camera on a tripod on the sideline while I'm focused on the game? Not in any park I've ever played in. Taking the stick from my teammates f…

Skiing: Putting a camera on a tripod, unattended, on the piste? Then get the lift up to the top so you can ski back down towards the camera? Again, I can't see this ending well for the poor old camera.

On the other hand, this represents a great business opportunity for ski resorts. The ski resort has a few soloshots mounted near the snowboarding rail park, and $5 lets you wear a tracking armband for 5 minutes. Drop it in the bucket at the end of your run, get an ID number which will allow you to download your footage at the end of the day.

In fact, if a ski resort wanted throw a ton of money at this problem, they could put soloshots along the entire mountain, and you rent an armband for an entire run down the mountain. That would however require sophisticated software on their end to collate all of the camera feeds and stitch together a single video file of your run down the mountain.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#143

Post by superuser2 »

ctdonath wrote: post #56
davnicwil wrote: post #12

Looks to be an amazing piece of engineering but seriously, what's the usecase? It looks to be targeted at the amateur market ('shoot like the pros') and I just don't see the demand or workability in this space. To pick on a few hinted at on the page: A game of football: Leaving a camera on a tripod on the sideline while I'm focused on the game? Not in any park I've ever played in. Taking the stick from my teammates f…

Immediate use: presentations, accurately tracking the speaker without having to hire someone to keep camera on subject the whole time. Even moreso when multiple cameras. Just need one A/V control booth person, much cheaper to buy several of these than hire several cameramen. Think TED Talks, Apple Keynotes, anything fairly big-budget where chasing the random motions of the speaker just doesn't look on par with the mo…

Live production is ALL about reliability. A boring lights-up lights-down corporate show ALWAYS has 2 $100,000 light boards in active/hot standby even though one $50 DMX controller would do.

We always opt for wired where possible, even if wireless exists. We are paranoid about secure and safe cable runs. When wireless is necessary, we transmit on multiple frequencies with smart frequency-hopping algorithms so that if two of them get interference, the content still comes through on the third.

We have a visceral distrust of rechargeable batteries. We swap out AAs and 9-volts (only the brands we trust) obsessively. A good sound engineer is made very uncomfortable by (and thus obsessively monitors) battery-powered devices in the critical path.

In short: there's no way you're going to get respectable production companies to trust this thing. One, it flies, Two, it's battery. Three, it's RF. Under these circumstances, we proceed with EXTREME caution. We'd much rather build truss to get a camera where it needs to go, run cables to it, mat and tape them as appropriate. Automation is okay, but there is existing, battle-tested camera automation and it's not even that widespread yet.

Film production, maybe. A blown take isn't free, but it's pretty cheap. A flying camera at WWDC hitting battery starvation, motor failure, RF interference, etc. is the end of the world in that line of work.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#144

Post by jseliger »

CodeCube wrote: post #21
davnicwil wrote: post #12

Looks to be an amazing piece of engineering but seriously, what's the usecase? It looks to be targeted at the amateur market ('shoot like the pros') and I just don't see the demand or workability in this space. To pick on a few hinted at on the page: A game of football: Leaving a camera on a tripod on the sideline while I'm focused on the game? Not in any park I've ever played in. Taking the stick from my teammates f…

I think you underestimate the utility. Think of parents or family members that attend football games. They're often stuck watching the game "through the viewfinder" if they want to film it ... this frees them up to look with their eyes. You also underestimate extreme sports where you want to film a trick over a given obstacle. This would be fantastic for skateboarders. Boxers who want to film themselves during a work…

I'm surprised too that no one has mentioned the adult industry (either actual professionals or possibly among some amateurs / semi-pros). One could easily imagine this sort of ting being useful there, where quality is probably "good enough" and an actual cameraman too expensive.

Others have added that this version has a minimum range of 25 feet, which may scupper it for many, but long video lenses are available.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#145

Post by TheGRS »

nadams wrote: post #137
IanDrake wrote: post #125

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>People come up and take them as soon as we're more than 200m away. I don't have this problem where I surf, but here's some thoughts I've had about it... - Attach a motion alarm (made for purses and such) that will go off and at least attract attention if someone moves it. - Put a sign on it that says "Do not touch. My buddy is watching this camera." or "Due to recent theft, I have a HIDDEN camera recording this came…

I wonder if you could put up a sign that says: "If you steal this camera you agree to pay a $200 fine" - just having a sign is a deterrent but not a strong one. Though, a better idea is to attach a speaker to it and when someone steals it blast vulgar sounds through it like "I'M A MOFO THIEF LOOK AT ME HAHA". I doubt any thief would want attention drawn to what they just did. I've been wanting to do a social experime…

This sort of candid camera experiment has been done many times, there are many who will return the items and some who won't. If you truly don't want your things stolen then you just need a buddy to watch your stuff.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#146

Post by smackfu »

nicklovescode wrote: post #79

Would it be possible to mimic these features in post prod? Essentially gather a giant high res shot, using the money spent on fancy feature on higher res. Then run the same algorithms in post to get a similar video?

You could go up to 4K video for $1500 or so. But that will only get you 4 1080p screens stitched together, so you can really only focus in on a quadrant.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#147

Post by jack-r-abbit »

fake44637 wrote: post #142
davnicwil wrote: post #12

Looks to be an amazing piece of engineering but seriously, what's the usecase? It looks to be targeted at the amateur market ('shoot like the pros') and I just don't see the demand or workability in this space. To pick on a few hinted at on the page: A game of football: Leaving a camera on a tripod on the sideline while I'm focused on the game? Not in any park I've ever played in. Taking the stick from my teammates f…

Skiing: Putting a camera on a tripod, unattended, on the piste? Then get the lift up to the top so you can ski back down towards the camera? Again, I can't see this ending well for the poor old camera. On the other hand, this represents a great business opportunity for ski resorts. The ski resort has a few soloshots mounted near the snowboarding rail park, and $5 lets you wear a tracking armband for 5 minutes. Drop i…

That is brilliant. But nothing says they have to stitch the video for you. Giving you access to all your clips would be enough, specially if there is some footage overlap. You might want to transition from one clip to the next in a unique way.

The problem I see with that setup though would be deciding which person to follow when two trackers are competing for camera time. I imagine the base has some sort of logic to make that decision but it would suck to be the person that keeps getting missed because you are always right behind someone that the base gave a higher priority.

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#148

Post by mirimir »

ronilan wrote: post #119
trose wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So next we need to add some stabilization to this platform and then you can just stick it out on a bouy ^_^

or weaponize the camera so that it can protect itself... :)

Maybe an autonymous paintball sentry?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RxBa5bQfTGc

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#149

Post by kristinac820 »

ntaylor wrote: post #134
biturd wrote: post #132

Seems to me the Lilly is a better product and can do what this one does more or less, check it out, I love it, wish I had the money to get one. They are several discounted if you pre-order, around 600, then almost 1000 when they are officially on sale. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OWrApA8oRbI

Not sure if it's necessarily better . The Lilly also requires a tag to work, but it can only handle 20 minutes of battery with no way to insert a backup. This is relatively low-tech and seems to be capable of enhancing your existing hardware, rather than replacing it. That's a big win. Still, the Lilly is really cool.

Different use cases. Soloshot lasts for 4 hours. If you are doing an athletic endeavor you are likely doing it for longer than 20 minutes

Re: Soloshot: Automatically film outdoor activities without a camera operator

#150

Post by Istof »

lvs wrote: post #117
Istof wrote: post #109

Place a remote controlled gun next to that camera and you have a remote hunting system? (probably illegal in most jurisdictions though)

Uh, one that shoots at you? How are you going to get the tracking beacon onto your target?

couldn't you use the signal from the target's phone instead? ... cell, wifi or bluetooth.... whichever suits you
Post reply on HN