Photography by Tom Reynolds and Matt de Neef

Behind the scenes: live-streaming the Shimano SuperCrit with on-board cameras

by Tom Reynolds - December 18, 2014

Last Sunday, CyclingTips live-streamed the elite men's race at the St. Kilda Cycling Club Shimano SuperCrit including live footage from on-board cameras. As far as we're aware, it's the first time on-board vision has been used for a live race broadcast anywhere in the world.

It wasn't perfect by any stretch, and we weren't expecting it to be. Rather it was a chance to test the technology and show that it is possible. After all, you have to start somewhere.

We asked one of the brains behind the operation, Tom Reynolds from CharterMason Giant Racing, to give us the low-down on the system they used, what worked, what didn't and what the future might hold.

Cameras on bikes. It’s one of those inexplicably complex and tedious issues that cycling must deal with. We’ve all seen the first on-bike videos released as post production efforts, but I wondered: “Where are the live cameras?”

And while I’m sure that the-powers-that-be have more than just Astana, shortened Grand Tours and sock height to concern themselves with, we thought the best way forward on this issue was just to forge ahead.

Co-conspirator on this bikecam project Andy Richardson and I cut our teeth in motorsport. Andy was chief engine engineer for a V8 Supercar team and then moved into production vehicles. Today he is the chief engine engineer on the most powerful Australian car ever produced. He’s good with his hands, can solder, design and print 3D parts, make carbon fibre bits ‘n’ bobs, program devices and troubleshoot in a pressure environment like no one I know.

While he’s been making cars go fast, I’ve been a team media manager or series media manager in Superbikes, V8 Supercars and Australian Rally. Each of these series rely on on-board cameras to tell the story to a massive degree. So when I became involved in the National Road Series in 2012 I was aghast that even a simple on-board camera was banned at all levels.

Having decided that an on-bike camera streaming live was a good idea in theory, we realised early on that hacking existing technology would be the go. As avid drone enthusiasts — I made last year’s SuperCrit video, while Andy recently built a six-rotor drone on his day off — we wondered whether it would be possible to hack existing drone tech into a workable solution.

Of course it turned out to be far more complex and difficult than originally thought. A drone-based two axis gimbal was overkill (and too heavy!) as bikes don’t pitch front to rear — they just go left to right, whether tipping into a corner or when the rider is standing to sprint.

Andy not only hacked a standard gimbal down to a single axis, he then rewrote the software to make it work. The initial results were super-promising. The biggest issue we faced (and still face) is that the camera is effectively on the end of a tiny springboard and mild vibrations are amplified. As usual we “have a theory” on that and will be testing an improved setup shortly.

The setup we ended up with was:

Mobius Camera (Beta version!) now to a GoPro4 -> Analogue out -> Transmitter -> over-the-air back to base station -> analogue out into TV capture USB device -> UStream streaming software -> **HOPE**.

After some testing at the St. Kilda Cycling Club White Street circuit (testing transmitter range) and out at Sandown (thanks to Carnegie-Caulfield Cycling Club), it was apparent that the tiniest glitch could result in the system entirely falling over.

There were too many links in the (above illustrated) chain. The camera inexplicably stopping transmission, camera cabling breaking, gimbal failing (it came loose during one test!), transmitter and battery failing (we had to go bigger for the gimbal and it still fell over after one hour) …

With “disastrous embarrassment” as a motivator, we decided three days before the SuperCrit to build a second/fall-back, basic-as-can-be rig with a GoPro4, no gimbal and a transmitter (see the video at the end of the post for a video comparison of the two setups).

In our discussions with CT, I was super pessimistic as there were just so many things that had gone wrong and our experience in motorsport told us that it’s a pretty risky trying to test while racing. SuperCrit was upon us and while we’d done a fair bit of testing, we also knew that some things just had to go wrong.

Murphy’s Law being the bastard that it is, the things that did go wrong were things we had not even considered or had never failed previously. First the video capture device decided that it was not going to accept an audio input. Then the sun came out and overheated the laptop, causing it to hang and then crash.

Umbrellas were provided, the computer restarted and then the audio worked. Our video switcher also failed. We ended up manually switched plugs - hence the lag in shots. This was now so primitive that perhaps watching it on a 4:3 CRT TV was the go…?!

The things that went right were pleasing: the gimbal rig worked for 70 minutes. This was not the full race distance, but we can improve on that and it was around what we expected. The gimbal-less GoPro4 and transmitter worked right to the end. We think there may be 100 minutes of transmission possible from that rig; a terrific outcome.

The Telstra 4G we feared would slow to a crawl was utterly brilliant and we could have upped the quality were we not worrying about everything else. Our pre-race speedtest indicated 28mb/sec upload. While it was great at White Street, South Melbourne, a change of location will inevitably bring challenges.

After the SuperCrit — and over a beer — we started planning version 2.0. The GoPro 4 footage is just outstanding, so while we could go to a tiny 3CCD system, the weight saved will be offset by a loss of quality and no on-board recording facility.

For transmission we have two options, and these are budget dependent. A full MotoGP-spec system is possible, but at a cost of at least $10k. There best be a compelling business case or an angel investor if we’re going to get that up and running!

For domestic Australian cycling (especially crit racing) we already have a new system in the pipeline with multiple digital receivers and gear which auto-switches between signals as the bikes come into and out of range. This could offer much improved full-lap coverage.

We could do this using our new, more stable gimbal system which now has super-stiff custom-made carbon brackets and is 30% smaller than the SuperCrit prototype. This system would be amazing at Bay Crits, the Nationals and even at club racing. We could live stream a feed to a big screen on site or once again to the internet.

We’re even keen on building a seat-based camera with remote pan. This is yet another hack from drone technology. Hell, we could even build a camera that you could view via goggles and then pan left or right by turning your head!

So what about WorldTour or other professional stage racing? As it stands, we believe it would be possible to build a live on-board rig … with some pretty big ifs. We see it like this:

1. We’d need a system not too far different to what we currently have, but with a bespoke smaller camera system with on-board recording and a slightly better transmitter system. Costly, but it would work.

2. Footage from the cameras would be beamed to a helicopter above or perhaps to a motorcycle and then on to the chopper.

3. Due to battery issues, a software system to “wake” the camera up and then send it to sleep is important. You could perhaps get 90 minutes of live broadcast at best with existing smaller batteries. “Wake-up” software would mean you could “check in” with a rider and then sleep the system so you are good to go for the finish.

4. The bike build might have to be unique to reduce ballast, run custom wiring and aerial locations. Weight would be down to 500gms in total.

5. On mountain stages it might even be possible to get the rider to change bikes. It was done in the Tour de France in the past.

As we see it you can either wait for the future to come to you, or you can just get out there with a soldering iron, some heat shrink and a hobby website and get amongst it. Stand by.

Tags: 2014 St Kilda Supercrit, onboard video

jules

this is a great idea and well overdue. having played around with cameras, my view (no pun) is that you get a better result mounting the camera on your helmet. some people argue this reduces the helmet’s effectiveness (i doubt that) and it has a clear aero penalty, but it reduces vibration and following the rider’s line of vision often (not always) enhances the viewing experience.
- Neil
  
  Unfortunately our local Commisaires have been told absolutely no modifications or attachments to helmets. Apparently it’s due to the Schumacher crash and the fact he was wearing a GoPro.
  - jules
    
    i think the bigger reason is that attachments are disallowed by the Australian Standard. allowing fixtures on the helmet has the potential to alter their crash protection performance and certification. so it’s kind of fair enough. but common sense says that if the fixture is frangible (will take less force to snap off than would be needed to deform the helmet) then it’s not a risk.
    - Dave
      
      It’s not so much the deformation of the helmet which would be a problem but the fact that the fixture could:
      (a) catch on the ground and cause a neck rotation where a modern helmet has a smooth plastic outer specifically engineered to slide along without causing a rotation, or
      (b) if you landed directly onto the camera it would be like hitting a rock - this was the issue caused by the camera in the Schumacher ski crash where the helmet was split in two by landing directly on top of the GoPro.
      
      No matter how weak the attachment was made, these would still be real risks until you designed a camera than would instantly crumble into sand at the slightest impact.
      - jules
        
        fundamentally, those actions (neck rotation, splitting helmet shell) would require the helmet mount to transmit sufficient force to cause them. it is possible to construct a mount that would do that, but most are deliberately made to be frangible.
        
        if the force required to cause those injuries/breakages is, say 1kN and the mount will break off at 300N - then it’s unlikely to be the cause. the more likely cause of Schumacher’s helmet fracture was it hitting a large rock! incidentally the claim about the GoPro was promoted by the resort management, who were under scrutiny for their signage.. (clever strategy that)
        
        Dave
        
        You don’t need a huge amount of force to cause a neck rotation, those old fabric helmet covers which were popular in the 1990s were enough to cause a problem.
        
        The force of landing directly on the camera is not something that the mount would be able to do anything about even if it completely disintegrated, landing on the camera (especially a GoPro or Contour with their toughened cases) would still be like landing on a pointy rock.
        
        With the Schumacher crash, I thought the rock he hit was fairly flat, which would support the GoPro theory. He was apparently well-known for going off piste, so I don’t see the relevance of the signage issue except for entertaining the hacks at whorehouses like La Gazzetta dello Sport.
        
        But at the end of the day it’s about plain common sense. A lot of engineering goes into a modern helmet, best to trust it. The helmet manufacturers would all have to know that there will be a huge amount of money in it for whoever comes up with the first helmet to safely mount a camera, I’ll wait until one of them gets there.
        
        jules
        
        there’s a principle in physics known ‘the path of least resistance’ which applies to stuff like helmet/camera crashes. would the camera get squashed between the spherical shape of the helmet and impacting rock, or break free and be flung away? if the mount is not strong enough to hold it (and the GoPro one isn’t), then that principle gives a good guide to what will happen. it won’t smash the helmet.
  - Robert Merkel
    
    if somebody could improve the footage quality from those camera sunglasses (there was a review on CT a couple of years ago) that wouldn’t be a bad substitute.
    - Dave
      
      Are you talking about the Australian-designed SheLeft Hawkeye?
      
      They have a 1080p model now: http://www.hdvideocamerasunglasses.com.au
- John
  
  Look up how Michael Schumacher has faired with his skiing accident and the main cause of his devastating injury. The Go Pro case is super tough and protects the camera through all sorts of crashes, unfortunately it goes straight through your helmet and into your skull in high impact accidents like skiing and bike racing. I clip mine low under bars or seat out of the way.
  - jules
    
    good advice!
    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/michael-schumacher-accident-french-journalist-recants-gopro-camera-comments-9798784.html
http://conza.tumblr.com/ Conza

All part of the process for progress. Well done!
AJ

I watched some of the footage live but found the image quality not great as well as it freezing up. Not sure if the recorded footage will be better and thus worth going back and watching. Lack of audio was obviously a downside too.
The perspective at handlebar level is one thing I don’t think quite works as it’s hard to get a sense of where the rider is in relation to the rest of the peloton. Helmet or sunglass cameras might be better so the vision comes from head high.
Having said that, kudos to the team involved for having a crack as it will only lead to improvements in the future. Cycling is lagging well behind other sports in this regard so onboard footage, combined with rider data (power, HR etc) is definitely going to open up a whole new frontier giving an amazing insight into a race.
And hopefully the various governing bodies that have banned some of this coverage to date remove these restrictions.
dbranson

Very cool setup! This is exactly what the us fans want to see, thanks for breaking the ground. Can’t wait for more.
Andy B

Its easy to say that cycling is lagging behind other sports but I think it is a very different concept to motorsports; bicycles are manually powered machines and having an importance on weight its obviously easier said than done to provide a reliable package that will not go flat and provide reliable footage
I can’t think of another manually powered sport that has on-board cameras (that comes to mind anyway)
Its very different to motorsports with the much higher number of riders, higher potential for bike swaps, importance on weight, no engine to provide power back up, huge length of races and varied terrain meaning transmission needs to be reliable and work without fixed infrastructure
Also sometimes the footage captured from on bike cameras isn’t perhaps as good at telling the story as a motorbike & helicopters can be

I think having power data and speeds transmitted to Television motorcycles would be an easier concept to integrate at this level without considerable investment into onboard cameras
- http://t7omask.tumblr.com/ t7omask
  
  left field thought - what about a hub dyno to charge the batteries on the go? couldn’t need much more power than a standard LED dyno light? then give the rider carrying the cam / dyno a weight advantage on the bike to offset the drag.
  - Robert Merkel
    
    On a flat circuit with relatively fast corners like St Kilda, weight makes SFA difference. You’d have to give an impractically large weight offset.
  - jules
    
    lithium-ion batteries are so compact these days a dyno would be unnecessary
  - Dave
    
    The drag of the dyno would make that a non-starter. For a long road race, you’d be better off with dual battery slots (one in use at a time allowing the other to be swapped, like the memory stick slots on a XDCAM video camera) that the rider could swap with fresh ones from the team car.
    
    Batteries are improving every year, where a GoPro is good for an hour and a bit of filming at 1080p, my Drift Ghost-S easily achieves well over three hours. I haven’t yet had a chance to play with a GoPro Hero4 yet, but I hope they’ve brought the battery up to the standard of the competition.
- thomasrdotorg
  
  If the current minimum bike weight is maintained, then adding cameras while reducing ballast is perhaps the answer!
  In F1 before every car had an on board camera, if you didnt have a camera you had to carry the housing (more drag) and ballast.
- Dave
  
  Live telemetry would be good, even if the will is not there to go to onboard vision.
  
  Putting fixed (or remote controlled like onboard cameras in NASCAR and V8 Supercars) forward/rear facing cameras on the commissaires’ cars could be a cheap way to increase the options available to the coverage director. For an individual time trial these could also be swapped to team cars allowing for more riders to be covered than they can do at the moment.
- Mark
  
  Weight isn’t an issue. All you need to do is make sure they other makes still have the same weight requirements. eg 6.8kg limit people!
  - Dave
    
    Until the tech improves and broadcasters can bring in proper MotoGP-style rigs, this is one advantage of restricting it to criterium racing, because it’s the Twenty20 of cycling. If it’s heavy enough to bring a non-ballasted bike over the 6.8kg limit, simply pay the rider to take the camera as a substitute for any potentially lost prizemoney and they are still better off than compromising a major race.
    
    When the Big Bash League starts at Adelaide Oval tonight we’ll see players batting with live cameras on their helmets, but there’s no chance of seeing that happen in an ODI (Milan-San Remo or Paris-Roubaix) or a Test Match (the Tour de France).
    
    Come to think of it, if a cash-strapped TV network like Ten can do that for domestic cricket, surely the units they are using are (a) relatively inexpensive and (b) probably adaptable for criterium races if it’s light enough to be carried by the players on the field.
  - Andy B
    
    Agreed there is a lot of room for cameras In that 6.8kg, I imagine all the bikes in the peloton now use weights or heavier than necessary components to increase their bike to this level
Rob

I have a Contour Roam camera and came across this setup online - specifically developed for motorbike videography to take into account the leaning and cornering effects. Pretty nifty gyro engineering. Perhaps food for thought for CT and the video crew??

http://revenanteagle.org/checksix/gyrocam/
Peter

A couple of slo mo shots from the sidelines… On board is much better.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AG0KHLms3-w

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8TxAkihZgfA
Cipo

Fantastic Work. Great effort by all parties involved especially Andy, amazing brain mate!
It seems as tho there is a fair way to go to get all aspects dialed in. The heavy ‘white noise’ interference reminded me of 80’s VHS quality. (no disrespect)
Up and up from here gents. Outstanding efforts so far.
Southernhoax

Just brilliant, keep it up lads!!
Free Wheely

I actually think the non gimbal footage is better, gives more of a feeling of being on the bike and not just of a camera following the action.
puma.will.pounce

There is no way you guys are beaming the signal to a helicopter or motorbike to integrate into a live TV broadcast. You are simply using wireless signal that is not compatible with the current RF microwave feed that TV helicopters and motorbikes use.
David

This is an amazing demonstration of what is possible using current technology. I love how you guys have gone straight to actually testing if such a setup is possible and then actually delivering.

The streaming coverage when you think about it is quite impressive, the obvious immediate and non-technical improvements can come with a better fixed camera location. As was shown by last years drone footage - height is important. More height = more coverage area. Thinking towards something like the criterium race at the Nationals in Ballarat. A fixed camera being on the top of the Town Hall or the Myer building on Sturt St would give a nice high vantage point from which to work off. Height for the receivers should also give a better line of sight and more on-bike coverage range. In addition to the 4g signal, there is also the potential to use the portable Wi-Fi hotspots that Telstra have been rolling out at the old pay-phone locations.

Thinking towards something like the Tour of Bright, whilst some of the locations would appear to be difficult to cover, there is actually a large amount of infrastructure on the top of hills/mountains as this is where major Microwave radio and mobile phone base stations are installed.

I am loving how you guys are already thinking of versions 2.0, 3.0 and 4.0 of this setup and I am looking forward to seeing more races from the comfort of home if I can’t personally get to the race itself.

Keep up the great work.
http://nathangoss.com Nathan Goss

I recently saw this gimble, which looks promising:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s_P69RGeLrM
Dan Carmody

: I was wondering about a mobile app that showed on a phone where several riders were in the Peloton, letting people choose say 6 riders they want to follow.
Don’t know how it would work (Luddite), but perhaps some sort of GPS chip on bikes.
I find bike racing difficult to watch because it is hard to identify riders, and there are so many of them.
Charles Walton

There are sunglasses that have small camera’s built in to them. I don’t see why a helmet could not be made that is safe and has the camera system integrated in to it and still maintain the helmets integrity of protection.