It don't seems that your question is actually related to the problem you intend to solve. The bending of a beam is explained mathematically by the
Euler–Bernoulli beam theory. But don't ask me for details, because I lack the mathematics necessary to understand it. This isn't of practical application to your case either but it's related and may interest you. Note that all real beams bend when given perpendicular load (like the camera). Sometimes it's not noticeable or negligible.
If it's about recording from the tip of that beam with a car in movement I wouldn't recommend it. A moving car has a lot of high amplitude vibration due to the road imperfections and changing velocity. A beam not only bends but resonates, exacerbating the effect. You'd need a very stiff beam for it to not to bend significantly, but even a perfectly rigid beam attached to your car is going to exacerbate the movement. There's also the problem that the top of the car isn't rigid. If you climb there, you will notice; it may even bulge downwards. The beam works as a lever and the camera is at the far end, so motion is exacerbated.
If you want to film from a car or other moving vehicle, use a short lens (small focal length) so that the movement won't be so appreciable. Cropping would neglect this advantage. You must take this into account artistically.
You can also try to move the car slow and then digitally change the speed of the video. This will reduce the shaking due to the beam resonation provoked by car irregular motion, but increase the shaking provoked by wind and similar factors.
Don't forget to release your work under a
free license!. The CC BY-SA is a good idea, see the license of this message (below). Restricting the distribution of intellectual works by Copyright is an anti-service to society taking advantage of a fallacy (that of carrying the concept of property from physical objects to information). It's a fallacy because information intrinsically costs nothing to copy [1] and can be used by an unlimited amount of users, unlimited amount of times in parallel without affecting each other while physical objects can't. Therefore the restriction given by Copyright can't be morally justified on the same basis, and whether it can be justified as an artificial social convention of artificial scarcity that gives a benefit to society is
highly debatable.
[1] There's the
Laudauer's principle that says that computation (I.e: manipulation of information) requires a minimum amount of energy and so it can be said to have an
intrinsic cost, but it's extremely small. I don't know if copying information is included as a case, but at any rate, current technology is orders of magnitude above this lower bound but even then the
current technological cost in practice of copying information is tiny, and it's
not intrinsic to the act of copying (because it depends on the state of technology) nor does it constitutes a cost to any parties but those performing the copy which almost never includes the author or the Copyright holder. Landauer's principle don't applies to quantum computing AFAICT.
Regards.
----
This message is Copyright © 2014 Mario Castelán Castro and it is licensed under the Creative Commons
Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International license.
