JeffGreenberg

do you regret "goin' drone"?

Recommended Posts

Did you get drone fever?

Did you get over initial thrill?

Did you find too many drone stock shots turn out to look less than salable?

Did time involved to get each drone shot cut into your handheld stock shooting time?

Did drone shooting turn out to be a hobby rather than a source of income...?

Comments from dronists-dronites-droners appreciated.

 

Am still in fever stage, but on just completed regional trip

had chance to imagine how often & how time-consuming each drone

shot would have been & how many fewer handheld shots

would have been "traded off" for drone time...

Edited by JeffGreenberg
  • Upvote 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

An interesting alternative take on drone use here. Stick a very, very powerful light on one and you can get some amazing lighting effects. :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On a commercial level, way too many people out there doing an “all you can eat buffet” of drone photography for dirt cheap rates. As such, I’ve decided to leave them to it.

Bearing that in mind, anything I bought would have to pay for itself purely from stock sales – which means a drone capable of carrying a serious camera, and lots of sales to pay for itself.

It’s not looking likely, so answer to original question, yup, it would be a toy/hobby, I’m afraid.

:(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you consider Sony RX100 a serious drone camera?

And what smallish drones will carry it & come with ability to remote operate it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you consider Sony RX100 a serious drone camera?

And what smallish drones will carry it & come with ability to remote operate it?

 

I doubt you can find a smallish drone that will carry it.  As small as it is, it seems to be a little brick.

I have two RX100s. The original and the MK111.  So I'm interested in your question, too.  I have a son-in-law that makes his own drones, but I've not had a chance to query him on any of this.  He has been strictly interested in video. I think it would take a $1000 plus drone to carry a RX100.  

Unless you know somebody into drone stills, and that person could build you a drone.  You can order drone parts much cheaper than buying a ready-made drone.  My birthday presents to him are cash, because he always has a part he wants to order.  :D

Edited by Betty LaRue

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I once had a client comment that they liked my aerial photography. Strange because I had never shot from an aircraft or a drone.  However I never missed the opportunity to shoot from an elevated position. Such as a clifftop, bridge, second story, mast, tree; platform on roof of car, ladder, observation deck, cable car; mobile elevated work platform. Lots of places where you can shoot with a big camera on a tripod.

 
You really do not need a drone because most great aerial shots are taken at an elevation of around 40 feet or below.
 
Here is a “drone type” shot taken from a bridge.
 
champlain-college-at-trent-university-on
  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Do you consider Sony RX100 a serious drone camera?

And what smallish drones will carry it & come with ability to remote operate it?

I'm still running Canon slr's - utterly no experience of Sony kit, though evidently Betty and many others here get great results with them.

Drones capable of lifting heavier stuff are here, though you've then got to figure out the remote side of things.

I've no doubt it can be done, my doubts are to the economic viability of doing so, i.e. return on investment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Do you consider Sony RX100 a serious drone camera?

And what smallish drones will carry it & come with ability to remote operate it?

 

I'm still running Canon slr's - utterly no experience of Sony kit, though evidently Betty and many others here get great results with them.

Drones capable of lifting heavier stuff are here, though you've then got to figure out the remote side of things.

I've no doubt it can be done, my doubts are to the economic viability of doing so, i.e. return on investment.

I'm shooting Fuji mirrorless, but the Sony is what's always with me when I'm not on a deliberate shoot.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about one for my 10" x 8". Found the perfect model, it's called a Chinook!  :)

  • Upvote 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 I have a son-in-law that makes his own drones, but I've not had a chance to query him on any of this.  

 

A busy bee, I guess.  :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I thought about one for my 10" x 8". Found the perfect model, it's called a Chinook!  :)

 

Nadar used a balloon.

Arthur Batut a kite.

 

Nadar had to go up with his camera; Batut invented a self-timer (with a burning match I believe).

Not sure if they went all the way up to 8x10 though. Batut started with half a 13x18: 9x13.

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind if you are using it for commercial purposes, stock photography is just that (despite the poor returns ;) ), you need an  operator's licence and to work within very strict rules, have an operations manual/procedures, line of sight, maximum height, overfly rules, restricted airspace, insurance, ... In the UK the Civil Aviation Authority is the licencing body and they do prosecute, not so long ago a drone operator who had overflown our Goose Fair at night, football matches etc was fined very heavily, had his equipment confiscated and possibly more, I cannot recall.

 

I seem to recall it costs about £10k to get a licence - that is a lot of stock licences before you add the cost of the hardware and time.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I thought about one for my 10" x 8". Found the perfect model, it's called a Chinook!  :)

 

Nadar used a balloon.

Arthur Batut a kite.

 

Nadar had to go up with his camera; Batut invented a self-timer (with a burning match I believe).

Not sure if they went all the way up to 8x10 though. Batut started with half a 13x18: 9x13.

 

wim

William Garnett used to fly his own plane and in the early days shoot with a 5" x 4" out of the window at the same time. Obviously didn't affect his flying as he died at home at a ripe old age!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

I thought about one for my 10" x 8". Found the perfect model, it's called a Chinook!  :)

 

Nadar used a balloon.

Arthur Batut a kite.

 

Nadar had to go up with his camera; Batut invented a self-timer (with a burning match I believe).

Not sure if they went all the way up to 8x10 though. Batut started with half a 13x18: 9x13.

 

wim

William Garnett used to fly his own plane and in the early days shoot with a 5" x 4" out of the window at the same time. Obviously didn't affect his flying as he died at home at a ripe old age!

 

He got through a lot of dark slides, though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

 

I thought about one for my 10" x 8". Found the perfect model, it's called a Chinook!  :)

 

Nadar used a balloon.

Arthur Batut a kite.

 

Nadar had to go up with his camera; Batut invented a self-timer (with a burning match I believe).

Not sure if they went all the way up to 8x10 though. Batut started with half a 13x18: 9x13.

 

wim

William Garnett used to fly his own plane and in the early days shoot with a 5" x 4" out of the window at the same time. Obviously didn't affect his flying as he died at home at a ripe old age!

 

He got through a lot of dark slides, though.

 

:lol: I was using the 10" x 8" on a restricted MOD area of the Cheviot Hills when the wind took my darkslide sheath off like a frisbee. I ran on to the hillside to retrieve it when a convoy of army jeeps drove past. The officer in the front jeep made it clear by his gestures that he thought I was a d***head for running on to an area possible containing unexploded ordnance. There were signs saying "do not encroach on this area" but my darkslide was more important. Or rather, the picture in contained. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind if you are using it for commercial purposes, stock photography is just that (despite the poor returns ;) ), you need an  operator's licence and to work within very strict rules, have an operations manual/procedures, line of sight, maximum height, overfly rules, restricted airspace, insurance, ... In the UK the Civil Aviation Authority is the licencing body and they do prosecute, not so long ago a drone operator who had overflown our Goose Fair at night, football matches etc was fined very heavily, had his equipment confiscated and possibly more, I cannot recall.

 

I seem to recall it costs about £10k to get a licence - that is a lot of stock licences before you add the cost of the hardware and time.

I was looking into it and it seems it costs about £2000 for the course  to get permission to fly. Then about £120 per year to maintain the permission  plus insurance. I was beginning to think it would be worth it as I can't see many investing the money and time. I was a bit surprised to read that so many people are apparently doing it already.  The trouble is, if the CAA do not police it properly with the stock agencies, everyone will be simply taking pics for "personal use" (if asked) and then later upload to stock sites.  If that happens it will not be a level playing field for those who are "legit".

Edited by JohnB

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bear in mind if you are using it for commercial purposes, stock photography is just that (despite the poor returns ;) ), you need an  operator's licence and to work within very strict rules, have an operations manual/procedures, line of sight, maximum height, overfly rules, restricted airspace, insurance, ... In the UK the Civil Aviation Authority is the licencing body and they do prosecute, not so long ago a drone operator who had overflown our Goose Fair at night, football matches etc was fined very heavily, had his equipment confiscated and possibly more, I cannot recall.

 

I seem to recall it costs about £10k to get a licence - that is a lot of stock licences before you add the cost of the hardware and time.

When I looked into this earlier this year, you can get a course of instruction, plus the exam and (hopefully, assuming you pass) a CAA license for £1200.00.

Which added to the costs previously mentioned, becomes quite a tidy sum to recover from commercial shoots and stock.

For comparison's sake, there's a chap here in the South West area, who'll go along days in advance and do a full site recce, then return on the allotted day, set up the drone, do the site checks, tape off the take-off/landing site, do the shoot, provide all the files - for about £150.00. :o

 

Which I believe fully explains why I won't be bothering to join in...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Drone video on assignment could be a speciality. Flying at lower levels, where helicopters or fixed wing aircraft are forbidden, can yield some spectacular video. However drone video should be a speciality.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Bear in mind if you are using it for commercial purposes, stock photography is just that (despite the poor returns ;) ), you need an  operator's licence and to work within very strict rules, have an operations manual/procedures, line of sight, maximum height, overfly rules, restricted airspace, insurance, ... In the UK the Civil Aviation Authority is the licencing body and they do prosecute, not so long ago a drone operator who had overflown our Goose Fair at night, football matches etc was fined very heavily, had his equipment confiscated and possibly more, I cannot recall.

 

I seem to recall it costs about £10k to get a licence - that is a lot of stock licences before you add the cost of the hardware and time.

When I looked into this earlier this year, you can get a course of instruction, plus the exam and (hopefully, assuming you pass) a CAA license for £1200.00.

Which added to the costs previously mentioned, becomes quite a tidy sum to recover from commercial shoots and stock.

For comparison's sake, there's a chap here in the South West area, who'll go along days in advance and do a full site recce, then return on the allotted day, set up the drone, do the site checks, tape off the take-off/landing site, do the shoot, provide all the files - for about £150.00. :o

 

Which I believe fully explains why I won't be bothering to join in...

 

 

I hadn't realised the licence could be be achieved so cheaply now. But as you suggest one is not going to cover professional setup and running costs (maintenance, travel, insurance etc) at £150 per day! Or with personal use licences.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We used to have helicopters flying over Manhattan. There was a popular chopper pad on the roof of what was then the Pan Am Building, the tower that's connected to Grand Central Station. One took off one day and it malfunctioned. There was a crash and 5 people were killed. Since then no commercial helicopters are allowed to fly over this island; they can still fly over the two rivers. 

 

My guess is one of these drones will malfunction and fall out of the sky and kill someone, and that will be the end of private and commercial drones. 

Edited by Ed Rooney

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

> Since then no commercial helicopters are allowed to fly over this island

Stock concept suggestions:

Helicopters kill, guns don't kill
Helicopters don't kill, pilots & mechanics kill
Vote early vote often

Edited by JeffGreenberg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

<>

 

My guess is one of these drones will malfunction and fall out of the sky and kill someone, and that will be the end of private and commercial drones. 

 

Too bad that didn't happen when someone was killed by the first automobile. We would all be using bicycles. And horses of course; donkeys maybe; dog carts.

Now I think of it people are being killed by bicycles; horses; donkeys and dogs too.

And what about guns. What if they had been banned after the first person got killed by a gun? We would all be using bow and arrows. Wait, of course also bow and arr...

 

Isn't this the way people argue that if salt or sugar would be discovered today, it would never be allowed?

 

wim

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When I was last in Amsterdam, someone said there were 350,000 bikes rolling in the city.

 

Sorry, wim, but I'm not buying your line. There's something about stuff falling out of the sky that I don't like. In fact there are a lot of things about drones I don't like. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now