Should You Give the Client a Wireless Video Monitor?

Caleb Pike released a string of interesting and fresh camera hacks over the past year. This time, he's tackling wireless monitoring; a problem that we all know can be expensive and time consuming. Does this leave you open to criticism before you've even finished the shot? Is it the equivalent to handing over raw images? Let's talk about how to do it, and why you should do it.

Wireless transmitters can be the holy grail on set from time to time. When a camera is mounted high above, or is on a moving rig, you end up with little choice. I don't know about everybody else though, but I've always been worried that a client will see a bad shot and lose their confidence. Or worse, they'll see a shot that will need serious post-work, and assume that it's the finished product. Let's not put the cart before the horse though; how are these rigs made?

Making a Cheap Wireless Monitor

There are huge swathes of complete systems available, with all sorts of uses. However for the most part, it's expensive to be able to hand a client a wireless monitor – at least one that doesn't have a string of wires and batteries connected to it. Pike may have hit upon a decent guideline for us all to learn from, especially if we already own a monitor.

Getting over the biggest hurdle involves acquiring the wireless transmitter itself. The options range from IDX's $670 dongle, all the way up to the more powerful, $12,000 Paralinx systems. What we're going for here though, is something cheaper. Pike is using a Nyrius transmitter, which is intended for home entertainment systems. It will have some delay, more than the competition, but Pike figures his clients won't notice or care about the slight delay. He's not using it as his primary monitor so there's room to lower the budget here.

Other items for the rig that Pike is using can be found on this list:

• Neewer hand grip

• Small Rig carbon fiber rods

• Mount for the monitor

• A sizable battery to power it all

That adds up to a cool $117 for the rig, $250 for the wireless transmitter, and whatever monitor you prefer to mount onto the rig. If you'd be willing to sacrifice latency, I'm sure this is a viable approach for a lot of photographers and videographers.

In saying that though, I'm not a huge fan of using a rubber band to hold part of the rig together, nor can I vouch for using a a smaller battery on the camera. It's also worth noting that some cameras come with wireless capabilities built in, like Panasonic's G7 and GH4. If you have an iPad at the ready, you'll be good to go! Watch out for that latency though.

Should You Hand It over to a Client?

It's not that you mean wrong, or that you don't trust the client. There's simply a worry that the person you're handing this monitor to might not understand the process involved in the shoot. Do you need to stabilize in post? Are you shooting in a flat picture profile? I'm certainly not saying that you should be hiding the quality of your work of course. While I've never had a bad experience myself, and I usually let the client see the footage if they ask, there has got to be times when avoiding this practice is key. 

One way to keep it for yourself (that I've seen), is to walk into the next room. This is where an iPad may fall apart, but a proper system will allow it. Leave the client where the action is, keep an eye on the footage coming through without interruption, and then make sure the person shooting knows you may return with remarks. Not ideal, but if your objective is to double check focus and the like, you stand a better chance of getting away with it without a pixel peeping client.

On the other hand, it's obviously beneficial to the shoot if your client understands the process. If they want something changed, and know how to get it, then where's the harm?

I'm wondering how other people feel about this. What's the worst case scenario? Has anybody had to explain that post-work will fix their gripes, and ask for the clients trust? Let us know!

[Via DSLR Video Shooter]