Drone Photography

[Eric]

I have a friendly rivalry going on some local groups both on FB and Reddit with other well known photographers, the biggest disadvantage I have is that I can't compete with some of the drone shot vantage points they get of the bridges/city. I have considered getting one but everything I can find says it's illegal to fly them in the areas these other guys are getting the shots from, so it's not worth that kind of money and risking getting caught to me.

I work hard to find unique locations and personally being behind the lens for proper framing, composition, manual changes, etc. so I don't think it's for me anyway but just wanted to vent my frustrations around it. I suppose it's another tool for the job and I can't knock them for that, but it feels like the playing field isn't level.

 

[mollyc]

i live in a no fly zone so i feel you.

 

[Scepticalscribe]

Personally, I am not a fan of drone photography (or the use of drones for photography) in residential areas for reasons of privacy.

 

[Citysnaps]

I can find says it's illegal to fly them in the areas these other guys are getting the shots from,

Near an airport?

IIRC my architect friend who uses drones for documenting features during different stages of construction, and for marketing his home designs, came across that. Apparently purchasing an insurance policy for a particular shoot is a way around that, and (also IIRC) that can be done with a credit card online no hassle. This information is from 5 years ago, mid SF peninsula, so things might have changed since then.

 

[Herdfan]

I have a friendly rivalry going on some local groups both on FB and Reddit with other well known photographers, the biggest disadvantage I have is that I can't compete with some of the drone shot vantage points they get of the bridges/city. I have considered getting one but everything I can find says it's illegal to fly them in the areas these other guys are getting the shots from, so it's not worth that kind of money and risking getting caught to me.

Is it illegal, or is it one of those locations that require permission?

Obviously within the flight path of any airport is illegal and no permission will be given to rec flyers, but some other locations that would be illegal to someone who just showed up and launched a drone can get permission from the FCC. I haven't done it because I don't need to where I live, but it is supposed to be all online with quick turnaround.

Now if they are flying a DJI drone (Mavic, Spark), then they got permission as DJI geo-locks their drones to not fly in these locations unless the approval is entered into the system.

I have an Autel and I bought it because there is a DJI no-fly zone where we ride, but it is for an abandoned airstrip that they haven't taken out of their system. Autel doesn't geo-lock areas. But they also don't support legacy models for more than 5 minutes.

Also, if you want to fly for any reason other than for fun, (ie sell your photos), you would need to take and pass the FAA Part 107 test and be licensed as a drone pilot.

I fly mine for fun, but I did get some aerial footage of a major crash on the interstate that ended up on the local news (both directions of the interstate were closed and traffic was so backed up that the news vans couldn't even get there).

The one weird rule, is that they are limited to 400' AGL, or above ground level. So if I take off in a valley, I might not even make it over the tops of the mountains right beside me. But if I walk to the top of the mountain, I still get 400' AGL from there. It really should be no higher than 400' AGL of the nearest, highest point.

 

[Pumbaa]

I have had a quadcopter for several years but don’t get to fly much, restricted airspace all over the place and now there are also new regulations over here so I would need to get a license first. Not really a huge problem, sure, not particularly expensive or difficult, but rules are rules.

Even if I were to get the license and drag my bacony ass to a location where it is legal to fly, I would need to get all photos/videos approved before publishing them. Not really worth the hassle. I do enjoy the flying part, I will get myself a license one of these days, just won’t bother with the photography part.

 

[mollyc]

yes, it's my understanding that if you hold a license and get permission from the FAA for a specific project that you can fly in a no-fly zone. Typically this is left for commercial work...professional photographer, realtor, news, etc. I know there are some areas here that are the same no-fly zone that I am in where drones have been used, but I assume they have permission.

we had a tree hit our house a few weeks ago and a contractor brought out a Mavic of some sort to assess the roof so they didn't have to climb a ladder. I was actually surprised that it even lifted, and he barely went over our roof, which is by far shorter than the trees that surround us. I still thought it wouldn't get up that high, though.

 

[mollyc]

Personally, I am not a fan of drone photography (or the use of drones for photography) in residential areas for reasons of privacy.

I know plenty of photographers who use drones only in their own backyard of their kids/families/selves. Not everyone who uses them is trying to sneak around to the neighbor's, but I get the general concern. It's just such a distinctive vantage point unavaliable with traditional cameras.

 

[Eric]

From what I've read it's flat out illegal over the bridges and directly in the city without the proper permits and justification, there are some gray areas but those areas are forbidden as is most of the city. Laws have really tightened up in the last couple of years, here is a pretty good article on it.

What I'm learning is that in most of these cases, they're doing it illegally and risking it, something I'm not willing to do personally, I was also told that some also ensure there is no identifying numbers on it in the event it crashes in traffic or an off-limits area. Their photos will always be better as a result, at least with this type of photography, but to them it's worth it.

 

[Citysnaps]

From what I've read it's flat out illegal over the bridges and directly in the city without the proper permits and justification, there are some gray areas but those areas are forbidden as is most of the city. Laws have really tightened up in the last couple of years, here is a pretty good article on it.

What I'm learning is that in most of these cases, they're doing it illegally and risking it, something I'm not willing to do personally, I was also told that some also ensure there is no identifying numbers on it in the event it crashes in traffic or an off-limits area. Their photos will always be better as a result, at least with this type of photography, but to them it's worth it.

Any thoughts on getting licensed and doing it legally?

 

[Herdfan]

From what I've read it's flat out illegal over the bridges

Flat out illegal, permit or not, to fly over moving cars. That is a huge no-no.

 

[Eric]

Any thoughts on getting licensed and doing it legally?

I don't think I'll go through the effort because legally you can't really fly over the major areas which is the only reason I would want to do it. The others doing it for recreation so close to the bridges are clearly not legal, I get it if you have money to risk but I wouldn't want to invest in it.

I'm jealous but also law-abiding so I'll just have to live with the shots I can take behind the lens, which is how I prefer it anyway, just drool over some of their shots lol.

 

[Eric]

Flat out illegal, permit or not, to fly over moving cars. That is a huge no-no.

Right, it happens and still hasn't stopped them. Every time I'm near the bridge there are drones buzzing around everywhere.

Drones fly illegally and crash at the Golden Gate Bridge in hunt for photos

Since late 2014, five drones have crashed on the Golden Gate Bridge’s roadway, but a...

www.sfchronicle.com

 

[fischersd]

I think most of us (that are addicted to technology / toys) thought that drones were a lot of fun when they first came out, but it's become apparent to most that the number of uses that don't fall within the realm of creepy privacy invasion scenarios are few and far between.

Unless you live near a national park, landmark (Grand Canyon), etc, there's very few areas that you can realistically use these.

 

[Eric]

I think most of us (that are addicted to technology / toys) thought that drones were a lot of fun when they first came out, but it's become apparent to most that the number of uses that don't fall within the realm of creepy privacy invasion scenarios are few and far between.

Unless you live near a national park, landmark (Grand Canyon), etc, there's very few areas that you can realistically use these.

The camera tech in them is also getting better and better with sensors now exceeding 1" so you can take these wide spanning shots and then crop out exactly what you want in post without losing much detail, which in the world of social media isn't needed anyway unless you plan on selling prints. So I'm excited by the tech but a good drone is not cheap and the limitations/risks aren't worth the cost, at least for now.

 

[Clix Pix]

I guess I'm old-fashioned but to me using a drone with a camera in it/attached to it is not at all the same as using a camera in one's hands or on a tripod and carefully composing the scene and adjusting one's settings as needed in order to achieve a specific result. That said, of course I can understand the appeal, especially to landscape photographers or real estate photographers but it's definitely not for me. In essence the drone is taking the photo, not the person controlling the drone.

 

[mollyc]

Here are two examples (these are not my images) of photos that can only be taken with a drone. There is no tripod tall enough to take images like this, and even off a balcony, you can't get a view below/past your feet. Using a drone is no different than using a remote or an intervalometer, it's just the camera is in the sky, rather than in someone's hands or affixed to a tripod. There are lots of times the person manning the camera isn't actually touching it.

Well composed drone images are often very graphical in nature and make you think about your surroundings and how things look vastly different from a bird's eye view.

 

[Eric]

Here are two examples (these are not my images) of photos that can only be taken with a drone. There is no tripod tall enough to take images like this, and even off a balcony, you can't get a view below/past your feet. Using a drone is no different than using a remote or an intervalometer, it's just the camera is in the sky, rather than in someone's hands or affixed to a tripod. There are lots of times the person manning the camera isn't actually touching it.

Well composed drone images are often very graphical in nature and make you think about your surroundings and how things look vastly different from a bird's eye view.

View attachment 14842

I think the main difference here is you can take a blanket image of a huge area and then crop. While we all do that an extent, a drone shot from 100 to 300 ft gives you a ton more data to work with, almost like a satellite image.

I don’t think it takes nearly as much skill as it does on a much smaller scale and shallower focal length, i.e. being behind a lens at somewhere between 15 to 200 mm (on average) composing and being thoughtful about the subject.

 

[mollyc]

i know drone photography is typically very wide angle. but most of the people i know who are doing it are making more intimate and deliberate images like i posted. they likely are cropped, but i’ve always assumed the drone isn’t super far up to maximize detail and resolution. maybe i’m wrong on that. it’s just one variation of drone work but images like those are what interest me. but i can’t shoot like that in my own backyard.

 

[Eric]

i know drone photography is typically very wide angle. but most of the people i know who are doing it are making more intimate and deliberate images like i posted. they likely are cropped, but i’ve always assumed the drone isn’t super far up to maximize detail and resolution. maybe i’m wrong on that. it’s just one variation of drone work but images like those are what interest me. but i can’t shoot like that in my own backyard.

Right, would be interested in seeing the full shot, for example the people on the court could’ve been cropped out of 2 city blocks.