On 4/1/2014 11:09 PM, Savageduck wrote:
On 2014-04-02 02:44:35 +0000, Peter Jason said:

On 1 Apr 2014 04:45:45 GMT, Sandman
wrote:

In article , Peter Jason
wrote:

Sandman:
Will make you look pretty stupid, but a pretty nifty solution for
stabilizing your camera.

http://petapixel.com/2014/03/30/smal...etaphorically/


Instead,

tie the camera to a heavy brick. The weight of the
assembly will resist vibrations.

I sort of have the idea that in the idea in the link, the stabilization
will be from two points, not one. A dangling brick will most likely make
the camera more unstable, and even one string you step on will only
give it
perpendicular stabilization, while this three-point idea will give
you both
lateral and perpendicular stabilization.

The camera is tied firmly to the brick; it doesn't
dangle at all.

Oh for crying out aloud! Buy a damn tripod, monopod, or a decent
stabilized lens.


there are a lot of places that don't allow tripods, or monopods. But, I
guess the string should give you at lease 1-2 extra stops.

--
PeterN