=========
it would be really easy to come up with some ceiling or wall mounts, maybe even magnetic, to hold a camera to a T-bar grid, I-beam, column, etc. upside-down.
===========
I would stay away from magnets , because the digital media ( sd cards, chips in camera etc ) are not happy with magnetic stuff. Magnets tend to kill those things... so forget that idea.
You could use 750 pidgeons taped or screwed to walls, ceiling etc..or c-clamps with 750 stud to I beams, lots of stuff to use..with a gobo head and a PIN in head with thread on end to attach your camera ( can use thread adapters to go from 3/8 to 1/4 or 5/16 etc as needed ).. so anyway, however you attach doesnt matter but no magnets.
Turning cameras ( dutch angles, or vertical ) is common. With green screens of "people" its very common to turn camera vertical to get the MOST resolution for post work... and when that post work is DONE the result is put back into the horizontal frame for export. Here is sample of what I mean ...
http://www.reduser.net/forum/showthread.php?79720-Shooting-vertically- more-resolution-in-post
You can see that the person FITS into frame better with vertical frame ( camera turned sideways )..so for post work you get more resolution to do that work. THEN when done with that you have to put that into a horizontal frame for export and final product....cause thats how we watch movies.
Cameras dont care how you turn them etc.. so the fact of " generational " loss etc is up to your editing program and how it handles the data and export etc.. has nothing to do with what 'angle' you shoot at etc. Of course, if you go to horizontal from vertical like with sample above, you are "reducing" the image of the person to fit the horizontal frame in the end product...so you don't lose anything except the size of person.. and again, all this boils down to what your editing software can do regarding exports in general. So, no , you don't lose anything going upside down, cause who cares ? Not the camera.
