Drone Photography

[mollyc]

I'd be curious what specific drone/options/apps she's using!

I think she uses a Mavic Air and edits in PS/ACR.

She actually has a class about drone and go pro work.

Diary of a Creative Storyteller with Melissa Richard - Hello Storyteller

hellostoryteller.com

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I got a drone about 5 years ago and as has been discussed on here quickly discovered most of the areas you'd want to fly a drone and shoot photos or video is illegal. I was able to use it on our cabin property which is about 20 miles from the closest town, but you can only do so much of that and the novelty quickly wore off. Toss in paranoia about battery life and going out of controller range and not wanting it to just fly off into the distance never to be seen again.

My most adventurous usage was flying it up a river while walking a parallel dirt road about 50 ft from the river with trees blocking the view. I couldn't even see the drone and had to entirely rely on the live video feed on my ipad to navigate somewhat low to the river and not hit any tree branches and do it all in under 20 minutes from take-off to landing. There's also a gradient to the river (duh) so I had to steadily but slightly increase the altitude as it went forward while trying to not have any jerky movements. I'll just say there weren't a lot of reshoot attempts. A drone going down over a river isn't going to end well.

 

[Eric]

I got a drone about 5 years ago and as has been discussed on here quickly discovered most of the areas you'd want to fly a drone and shoot photos or video is illegal. I was able to use it on our cabin property which is about 20 miles from the closest town, but you can only do so much of that and the novelty quickly wore off. Toss in paranoia about battery life and going out of controller range and not wanting it to just fly off into the distance never to be seen again.

My most adventurous usage was flying it up a river while walking a parallel dirt road about 50 ft from the river with trees blocking the view. I couldn't even see the drone and had to entirely rely on the live video feed on my ipad to navigate somewhat low to the river and not hit any tree branches and do it all in under 20 minutes from take-off to landing. There's also a gradient to the river (duh) so I had to steadily but slightly increase the altitude as it went forward while trying to not have any jerky movements. I'll just say there weren't a lot of reshoot attempts. A drone going down over a river isn't going to end well.

I still have a really old one from many years ago and it was basically the same experience for me, novelty that wore off pretty quickly, and this was before restrictions were put into place. One of the things I see a lot of owners complain about (seemingly more than anything) is others either staring at or confronting them, either over privacy concerns or the loud buzzing going on over head. Many said they've given up as a result of this.

All that said it's also really exciting tech that we would've never imagined as children, something literally hovering and moving like a humming bird at the control of your fingertips. From that perspective I dig watching the evolution of it all.

 

[Chew Toy McCoy]

I still have a really old one from many years ago and it was basically the same experience for me, novelty that wore off pretty quickly, and this was before restrictions were put into place. One of the things I see a lot of owners complain about (seemingly more than anything) is others either staring at or confronting them, either over privacy concerns or the loud buzzing going on over head. Many said they've given up as a result of this.

All that said it's also really exciting tech that we would've never imagined as children, something literally hovering and moving like a humming bird at the control of your fingertips. From that perspective I dig watching the evolution of it all.

I shoot a lot of videos and photos, but with a drone it feels like you really need to shoot with purpose like you're working off a movie storyboard while being concerned about if you are breaking any laws. The battery time limitation just adds to that pressure.

I did a couple where I took consecutive photos and then stitched them together, but at least as far as straight down shots you could probably just use Google Earth and get the same result if it's mostly a generic landscape shoot with nothing specific going on.

 

[mack]

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.

Saying the drone is taking the photo is like saying that if you use the self-timer on your camera the camera took the photo not you. Sure you're not there hitting a physical shutter button on the drone, but you still have to get it where you want, point it where you want, pretty much all the same compositional tricks you would on the ground, just remotely. And you still have to get the exposure right, even more so since most have smaller sensors and thus less latitude in post to fix exposure errors! As good as they are, auto still does not work well on drones and most good drone shots you see were shot with manual exposure.

That said, with drones still being kind of new and novel it's a lot easier to get a "good" photo. You can sort of just throw it up there, point it anywhere, and the shot will look cool just because it's a new perspective we're not used to seeing. But as we get more used to seeing aerial photos, just as much thought will need to be put into composition as done on the ground. And we're already getting there, 10 years ago you could throw a drone in the air, point it down at trees, and everyone would be completely amazed. Now that same photo is just meh, because it's not as novel. If that garden shot above didn't have the hose laid out like it is, I think it would be a lot more boring of a photo.

Overall, drones are just a way to take a photo from higher up. To say drone photos are gimmicky is to say that putting your camera low to the ground and pointing it up is gimmicky. Sure it may not be your style, and it's probably not worth the $500+ to most people for the ability to move your camera higher, but it's just as real of a composition tool as getting low to the ground.

 

[Eric]

Saying the drone is taking the photo is like saying that if you use the self-timer on your camera the camera took the photo not you. Sure you're not there hitting a physical shutter button on the drone, but you still have to get it where you want, point it where you want, pretty much all the same compositional tricks you would on the ground, just remotely. And you still have to get the exposure right, even more so since most have smaller sensors and thus less latitude in post to fix exposure errors! As good as they are, auto still does not work well on drones and most good drone shots you see were shot with manual exposure.

That said, with drones still being kind of new and novel it's a lot easier to get a "good" photo. You can sort of just throw it up there, point it anywhere, and the shot will look cool just because it's a new perspective we're not used to seeing. But as we get more used to seeing aerial photos, just as much thought will need to be put into composition as done on the ground. And we're already getting there, 10 years ago you could throw a drone in the air, point it down at trees, and everyone would be completely amazed. Now that same photo is just meh, because it's not as novel. If that garden shot above didn't have the hose laid out like it is, I think it would be a lot more boring of a photo.

Overall, drones are just a way to take a photo from higher up. To say drone photos are gimmicky is to say that putting your camera low to the ground and pointing it up is gimmicky. Sure it may not be your style, and it's probably not worth the $500+ to most people for the ability to move your camera higher, but it's just as real of a composition tool as getting low to the ground.

I would agree that it seems more novelty than gimmicky, in the end it's another tool for photographers should they choose to use it and make no mistake, if I thought I would/could actually get the right usage out of it I would definitely buy one. For the photography I like to do it's mostly off-limits unless you want to do it illegally and/or put people at risk in traffic or forbidden airspace.

BTW welcome to the site, great first contribution!

 

[mac_in_tosh]

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.

I've considered getting one for a while now, both to add to my photography toolkit and the opportunity to learn something new, while maybe having a little enjoyment along the way. But living in a suburban area I also am wondering just where I would fly it. Most open areas (parks, school properties, etc.) don't allow them. I wouldn't want to potentially antagonize my neighbors by flying near their houses and if I restrict myself to my backyard I think that would get boring very quickly.

To add to the hesitation, I came across the following comment in the Q&A section for the DJI Mini 2 Fly More Combo on B&H's website. Can someone comment?

If you take a picture and look at it you're ok. Take a picture and show it a friend to inform them how leaves change color in the fall......Boom! They got you. You're no longer a recreational flyer and you are now using your drone for educational purposes. Consequently, you are required to adhere to a Part 107 license. Take a pic your and a passerby says "wow, I'm impressed with your pic, your ego is has now been inflated. As stated by the FAA, compensation is NOT limited to money. Its specified that it is NOT whether you receive money that determines recreational status. Another one- hey nice picture, you deserve half a Skittle. Boom! They got you hooked again. Any if these actions would render you liable and youd be bound to have and adhere to a Part 107 license in accordance with the FAA. The regulation is self defeating as its extensiveness makes many say that they will just risk it. Part 107 is only one portion too. Ridiculous and absurd. Oh, and yes, I have a degree in criminal law.
Answered by no Mar 28, 2021

 

[Eric]

I've considered getting one for a while now, both to add to my photography toolkit and the opportunity to learn something new, while maybe having a little enjoyment along the way. But living in a suburban area I also am wondering just where I would fly it. Most open areas (parks, school properties, etc.) don't allow them. I wouldn't want to potentially antagonize my neighbors by flying near their houses and if I restrict myself to my backyard I think that would get boring very quickly.

One comment that I read really stuck with me, they said something like "I got tired of people telling me how annoyed they were at the loud sounds and finally gave up flying it". As tempting as they are to buy it's a lot of money for a decent model and I would want to justify the expense by using it regularly, I just don't see how I can do that with all these limitations.

To add to the hesitation, I came across the following comment in the Q&A section for the DJI Mini 2 Fly More Combo on B&H's website. Can someone comment?

If you take a picture and look at it you're ok. Take a picture and show it a friend to inform them how leaves change color in the fall......Boom! They got you. You're no longer a recreational flyer and you are now using your drone for educational purposes. Consequently, you are required to adhere to a Part 107 license. Take a pic your and a passerby says "wow, I'm impressed with your pic, your ego is has now been inflated. As stated by the FAA, compensation is NOT limited to money. Its specified that it is NOT whether you receive money that determines recreational status. Another one- hey nice picture, you deserve half a Skittle. Boom! They got you hooked again. Any if these actions would render you liable and youd be bound to have and adhere to a Part 107 license in accordance with the FAA. The regulation is self defeating as its extensiveness makes many say that they will just risk it. Part 107 is only one portion too. Ridiculous and absurd. Oh, and yes, I have a degree in criminal law.
Answered by no Mar 28, 2021

There seems to be a lot of gray areas around it, anytime I ask one of them about something specific around the legalities of how they were able to get a shot from some of these locations I get real vague and round about answers. My guess is you have to risk it, that on top of the fact that it could drop out of the sky or wreck is enough to hold me off, at least for now.

 

[Herdfan]

If you take a picture and look at it you're ok. Take a picture and show it a friend to inform them how leaves change color in the fall......Boom! They got you. You're no longer a recreational flyer and you are now using your drone for educational purposes. Consequently, you are required to adhere to a Part 107 license.

Nope. The law is based on the intent. Did you intend to show it to someone? If not, then you are good.

A couple of years ago there was a very bad accident on the interstate about 2 miles from my house. One semi crossed and hit another head-on and both ended up on fire. This closed the interstate down for about 12 hours beginning at rush hour. So none of the news crews could get there. Being curious I got my drone and hiked about a mile over to where I could see the smoke and sent it up to get video. Because I was curious in a train wreck sort of way.

Later that evening I sent my footage to a local news station and they aired it on their 10 & 11 o-clock news casts. I did receive credit on screen, but no money. I was able to do this because my original intent was for personal use only.

I have lots of footage of my house that I took when I first got it. That footage will be used when we list it because my intent at the time was just to see what it looked like from above.

As long as you aren't out marketing and advertising your done footage, you will be fine.

 

[Herdfan]

One comment that I read really stuck with me, they said something like "I got tired of people telling me how annoyed they were at the loud sounds and finally gave up flying it". As tempting as they are to buy it's a lot of money for a decent model and I would want to justify the expense by using it regularly, I just don't see how I can do that with all these limitations.

They can be loud at low levels. Can barely hear it when it is above 200'.

 

[Eric]

They can be loud at low levels. Can barely hear it when it is above 200'.

Unless you're out in the sticks it has to take off and land and everyone in the vicinity turns their heads because it's so loud, I've personally witnessed this at public places and it was never out of earshot and I don't think many fly it that high, at least in the cities.

 

[Herdfan]

Unless you're out in the sticks it has to take off and land and everyone in the vicinity turns their heads because it's so loud, I've personally witnessed this at public places and it was never out of earshot and I don't think many fly it that high, at least in the cities.

Recreational limit is 400'. But stupid the way the software calculates it.

For example, if I take off at the bottom of a hill, I can go up 400' at which point it stops climbing. Even if that doesn't get me over the top of the hill. But if I take off from the top of the hill, I can fly up 400' from there AND go down to the bottom of the hill.

 

[mac_in_tosh]

Nope. The law is based on the intent. Did you intend to show it to someone? If not, then you are good.

So to be clear - if you are, say, a volunteer at a non-profit park and you take some footage (uncompensated) for them to use in their social media, you would no longer be considered a recreational flyer?

Edit: To expand on my question, consider these two cases:
(a) I take some drone footage for myself but in reviewing the results I think some of it might be helpful to the non-profit so I send it to them and they end up using it in their social media.
(b) The non-profit asks me to take footage of a specific area in the park which they then use in their social media.

Is there a distinction here, in that my initial intent with (a) is different than with (b) and would (b) make me no longer a recreational flyer but I would remain so with (a)?

 

[Herdfan]

So to be clear - if you are, say, a volunteer at a non-profit park and you take some footage (uncompensated) for them to use in their social media, you would no longer be considered a recreational flyer?

Edit: To expand on my question, consider these two cases:
(a) I take some drone footage for myself but in reviewing the results I think some of it might be helpful to the non-profit so I send it to them and they end up using it in their social media.
(b) The non-profit asks me to take footage of a specific area in the park which they then use in their social media.

Is there a distinction here, in that my initial intent with (a) is different than with (b) and would (b) make me no longer a recreational flyer but I would remain so with (a)?

Yes.

In a) you would be considered a recreational flyer because your intent was for personal use.

But in b), your intent was to take it for the non-profit, so that makes you a Part 107 pilot.

Now I don't think for a minute the FAA has time to track down every drone video/pic that gets posted online and who took it and what their intent was. But if you are advertising yourself as a drone photographer, that is different.

Here is what the FAA says:

https://www.faa.gov/uas/recreational_flyers

I personally don't think anyone who is not trained should be flying a drone that weighs anywhere close to 55lbs. Mine is around 2lbs. But 55lbs falling out of the sky could cause some real damage (not that 2lbs can't, but still).

 

[mac_in_tosh]

This has been very enlightening. My main use, were I to get a drone, would be to provide footage for the non-profit where I volunteer (requiring their permission to fly it) and I hadn't realized that would classify me as non-recreational even though no payment is involved and the drone is under 259 g. It sounds like too much trouble to go through the red tape and retest every two years (with a $160 test fee each time) for what would amount to occasional use, so I think I'll pass. Thanks.

 

[Eric]

This has been very enlightening. My main use, were I to get a drone, would be to provide footage for the non-profit where I volunteer (requiring their permission to fly it) and I hadn't realized that would classify me as non-recreational even though no payment is involved and the drone is under 259 g. It sounds like too much trouble to go through the red tape and retest every two years (with a $160 test fee each time) for what would amount to occasional use, so I think I'll pass. Thanks.

The other option is to really go rogue and hope you don't get caught, it's time consuming and risky but you can get some great shots.

 

[mac_in_tosh]

The other option is to really go rogue and hope you don't get caught, it's time consuming and risky but you can get some great shots.

I can't seem to locate the penalty for violation of part 107 right now, but while the chances of getting caught might be slim the monetary consequences can be quite significant.

 

[Eric]

I can't seem to locate the penalty for violation of part 107 right now, but while the chances of getting caught might be slim the monetary consequences can be quite significant.

Even if it were all legal and above board my biggest concern would be sending a $1700 camera into the sky like that with all the variables out there, I cringe at the thought of crashing or breaking it. I did own a consumer level drone a while back and while I'm sure it's much more stable these days I did wreck it a few times and eventually lost it to a huge tree.

 

[Herdfan]

Even if it were all legal and above board my biggest concern would be sending a $1700 camera into the sky like that with all the variables out there, I cringe at the thought of crashing or breaking it. I did own a consumer level drone a while back and while I'm sure it's much more stable these days I did wreck it a few times and eventually lost it to a huge tree.

I won't say it won't happen, but you almost have to try.

Growing up my dad and I flew RC planes and you had to be on your toes at all times watching and controlling those planes. But with these new quad-rotor drones, you can just let go of the sticks and it will simply stop and hover without any input from the pilot.

Plus the collision avoidance on these things is pretty sophisticated and on the newer ones works in all 4 directions. Of course anything can happen, but they are rare. The biggest issue is losing connection and even then it will automatically return to home when it decides the battery is getting too low.

Of course, as you noted, they are now $1,700+. Mine was half that just a few years ago. But the prices on the mini's are as low as $300. Not a bad entry point to dip your toe.

This has been very enlightening. My main use, were I to get a drone, would be to provide footage for the non-profit where I volunteer (requiring their permission to fly it) and I hadn't realized that would classify me as non-recreational even though no payment is involved and the drone is under 259 g. It sounds like too much trouble to go through the red tape and retest every two years (with a $160 test fee each time) for what would amount to occasional use, so I think I'll pass. Thanks.

Someone would have to know and then report you. And I figure the FAA has better things to do than harass someone shooting some drone video for a non-profit. I would do it as long as I wasn't actually paid. I have given many of my neighbors photo's of their homes from the air. One printed it and has it hanging in his office. As long as you aren't causing a disturbance, I figure they will leave you alone.

Lots of info here: https://dronepilots.community/ They have different sites for each brand plus a Commercial Pilot forum.

 

[mack]

One comment that I read really stuck with me, they said something like "I got tired of people telling me how annoyed they were at the loud sounds and finally gave up flying it". As tempting as they are to buy it's a lot of money for a decent model and I would want to justify the expense by using it regularly, I just don't see how I can do that with all these limitations.

The new ones significantly quieter than the older ones, but even still it's annoying. Right now my rule for flying the drone is to only fly it in loud places or where I'm alone. If I'm at a pull off near a highway with constant cars/trucks going by, I don't worry about ruining any pristine quiet. Likewise if I'm at a campsite and people are running their generators or blasting music, I'm not going to worry about flying my drone. On the other hand, if I'm out in nature and there are other people around I'm not going to fly it. It's way quieter than the old ones, but it's still louder than nothing!

Of course I find loud traffic and generators annoying too, so I try and get myself to places where I wouldn't want to fly the drone