Acceptable Drones for Alamy Pix

[Paul Glendell 5]

What drones are acceptable to upload still images to Alamy. I have looked at the Alamy info re drones but it is a long time out of date its basically saying DSLR or DJI inspire but things have changed a lot since the alamy info was posted. Is anyone getting images from the DJI Mavic Pro and/or mavic pro 2, or Mavic Zoom Drones accepted by Alamy.  I don't need replies re the law or qualifications to do this, just drone camera quality.   I have searched alamy forum but can't find anything within the last two years on this. Any help would be greatly appreciated.   Many thanks  Paul

[spiegel 6]

Phantom 4 Pro is accepted. 

Mavic Air can be accepted, but must be carefully choosen (noise problem sometimes).

 

Mavic 2 pro, the "Hasselblad", should be accepted, photos look good.

But I did not try yet to submit to Alamy. .  

[Paul Glendell 5]

4 minutes ago, spiegel said:

Phantom 4 Pro is accepted. 

Mavic Air can be accepted, but must be carefully choosen (noise problem sometimes).

 

Mavic 2 pro, the "Hasselblad", should be accepted, photos look good.

But I did not try yet to submit to Alamy. .  

Many thanks Speigel, that is really helpful..  Any idea about the mavic pro ( not pro 2) as its cheaper but has a lower spec camera .  Paul 

[spacecadet 2,207]

From what I see that has a 1/2.3" sensor, or about 6x4mm. It's very unlikely to be able to pass QC. The limit seems to be about 13x9 as in the RX100, which I know a lot of contributors here use, and even that requires care.

You must know from your own subs that DSLR sensors are vastly bigger.

Edited November 22, 2018 by spacecadet

[spiegel 6]

24 minutes ago, Paul Glendell said:

 Any idea about the mavic pro ( not pro 2) as its cheaper but has a lower spec camera .  Paul 

 

I think, it is the same camera as in the Mavic Air. 

So not optimal, but, when shot with good light and make some PP against noise, it is accepted by Alamy, no matter about  the tiny sensor. 

 

But in fact the photos made by the Mavic 2 pro (not Mavic 2 zoom)  are better then photos made by the Mavic Air (or Mavic pro).

So if you want to use it and not just have a toy, it is worth to invest 500 Euro more and get the 2 pro

 

 

 

 

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by spiegel
wrong link

[spiegel 6]

17 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

 The limit seems to be about 13x9 as in the RX100,

 

As far as I know, the sensor in the Mavic 2 pro is identical as in the RX 100. 

[RedSnapper 1,001]

For LiveNews, the P4P is plenty good enough, as will be any of the Mavics ......

 

km

 

[spacecadet 2,207]

50 minutes ago, spiegel said:

 

As far as I know, the sensor in the Mavic 2 pro is identical as in the RX 100. 

OP was referring to the cheaper one.

[spacecadet 2,207]

3 minutes ago, RedSnapper said:

For LiveNews, the P4P is plenty good enough, as will be any of the Mavics ......

 

km

 

Was that a news sub?

[Paul Glendell 5]

2 hours ago, spacecadet said:

From what I see that has a 1/2.3" sensor, or about 6x4mm. It's very unlikely to be able to pass QC. The limit seems to be about 13x9 as in the RX100, which I know a lot of contributors here use, and even that requires care.

You must know from your own subs that DSLR sensors are vastly bigger.

Yes thanks, its the tiny sensor the concerns me and why I was asking, the extra cost of the mavic 2 pro seems worth it.  Yes I get the issue with uploading via news would not be a problem but sometimes if off for a few days its not always practical to upload each day.

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by Paul Glendell
extra information

[Paul Glendell 5]

Thank you to everyone who has replied its really helpful 

3 hours ago, spiegel said:

Many thanks Spiegal  I'll try and stretch to the pro 2 I think - sounds like it's worth the extra money  -  paul

I'

3 hours ago, spiegel said:

I think, it is the same camera as in the Mavic Air. 

So not optimal, but, when shot with good light and make some PP against noise, it is accepted by Alamy, no matter about  the tiny sensor. 

 

But in fact the photos made by the Mavic 2 pro (not Mavic 2 zoom)  are better then photos made by the Mavic Air (or Mavic pro).

So if you want to use it and not just have a toy, it is worth to invest 500 Euro more and get the 2 pro

 

 

 

 

 

 

[Steve Valentia 131]

As mentioned above, The Mavic Pro has a 1/2.3” (CMOS) sensor, (Effective pixels:12.35 M). The Phantom 4 Pro (1 & 2) and the Phantom 4 Advanced (less expensive but no rear sensors)  have a  1’’ CMOS sensor (Effective pixels: 20M). 

This was taken with the Phantom 4 Advanced - not a news image and I've never had a fail via regular QC with that drone. But, it does need the right light and weather conditions, careful use of camera settings and careful post processing. I also recommend the "intelligent flight" mode of "tripod", to keep it extra stable.

 

Edited November 22, 2018 by Steve Valentia

[Steve Valentia 131]

44 minutes ago, JeffGreenberg said:

 

Please explain, if possible.

What I read about "tripod" fuction seems related to video results, not photos?

 

Jeff from what I’ve read, you are correct that it was designed for videography rather than stills. I do feel though that the drone has added stability for longer exposures when shooting stills in that mode.

 

It may be all in my mind, but for critical sharpness I usually set it, and always in windier conditions. I’ve no idea if it would work well for very long exposures though as I try to keep mine quite short. 

 

Ihave been advided, though, that optimum aperture is probably closer to f5.6 or f6.3, than closed right down on the Phantom 4. 

[Steve Valentia 131]

15 hours ago, JeffGreenberg said:

 

for 1" sensor, f4 to f4.5 is best, AFAICT. (e.g., Sony RX10 series)

(f4 on 1" = ~f10 on FF)
down to f2.8 still acceptable IMO,

but above f4.5 diffraction gets worse & worse, many say.

 

My image above (ferry) is at f7.1. I've never gone wider than f5 for all my accepted Alamy drone images. I'll try a few at f4 and f4.5 for comparison of diffraction and DoF. 

[spiegel 6]

On 23.11.2018 at 18:52, JeffGreenberg said:

I'd be gobsmacked if drone can be perfectly still for more than 1/4 sec. !!!!!

 

You are right, the drone itself is permanently moving (small amounts). 

But modern camera-drones like phantom or mavic have a very fast and exact gimbal. 

The gimbal compensates the movements perfectly, so that long exposures beyond 1/4 second should also be possible. 
For this reason, the tripod mode is not required for still photos. 

However, I haven't tried it myself yet, in Germany flying in the dark is forbidden. 

 

This was done with a old drone that is technically inferior to the Phantom 4 or the Mavic 2. Certainly longer than 1/4 second exposure time:

https://www.fotocommunity.de/photo/karlsruhe-night-i-fliegendes-stat-stefan-zimmermann/36112505

 

 

[Paul Glendell 5]

1 hour ago, spiegel said:

 

You are right, the drone itself is permanently moving (small amounts). 

But modern camera-drones like phantom or mavic have a very fast and exact gimbal. 

The gimbal compensates the movements perfectly, so that long exposures beyond 1/4 second should also be possible. 
For this reason, the tripod mode is not required for still photos. 

However, I haven't tried it myself yet, in Germany flying in the dark is forbidden. 

 

This was done with a old drone that is technically inferior to the Phantom 4 or the Mavic 2. Certainly longer than 1/4 second exposure time:

https://www.fotocommunity.de/photo/karlsruhe-night-i-fliegendes-stat-stefan-zimmermann/36112505

 

 

Well this has been a very interesting discussion I am very pleased l started it. I had no idea that it was possible to do long exposure pictures with a drone. This opens up some very interesting possibilities.  Thank you all for the help

 

Edited November 25, 2018 by Paul Glendell
Grammer

[spiegel 6]

A lot of questions that cannot be answered the same way for all drones. 
Let's stick with the Phantom:

In hovering flight, i.e. at one point, the threats try to remain as stable as possible. For this it uses the GPS and the compass at higher altitudes. Whether the barometer also plays a role, I do not know. 
In closer distance to the ground, the exact number of meters depends on the version, ground cameras are also used (a phantom has beside the photo camera also a quite momentum cameras and sensors installed). 
The whole thing makes the drone quite stable, but not yet perfectly stable for long exposures. This requires the gimbal, which compensates small movements. 
The maximum exposure time then depends theoretically only on the camera specs(with little wind).

However, this is limited to 8 seconds with the Phantom 4, as far as I know. 

 

But there are also great and expensive drones under which you can hang a DSLR on a great gimbal.

In fact, a drone can be used like a real "tripod in the air" under good external conditions. 

 

Translated with www.DeepL.com/Translator

[Paul Glendell 5]

Just completed my CAA Civil Aviation Authority course - just mountains of paperwork to send out now !  So  now I have to make the final decision of which drone to buy I am hearing rumours that the Mavic pro 2 with 1" sensor is not as good as it claims - the story I hear is that it is not using  the whole sensor area.  Does anyone know if this is true or just a theory being spread around because the images need to be adjusted post shooting.  If anyone has a Mavic pro 2 out there how big are the files on a still image when opened ?    

[spiegel 6]

Yes, it is a bit cut, resolution is 5472 x 3648 px.

 

Here

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A5kkznkUoynKEl1B_wq3MJfMUUuBnaUl

 

you can download a original DNG-file of mavic 2 pro, from first flight, automatic mode.

[spacecadet 2,207]

5 minutes ago, spiegel said:

Yes, it is a bit cut, resolution is 5472 x 3648 px.

 

Here

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A5kkznkUoynKEl1B_wq3MJfMUUuBnaUl

 

you can download a original DNG-file of mavic 2 pro, from first flight, automatic mode.

I wouldn't expect that to pass QC as-is.

Maybe resized to minimum with some extra sharpening.

[spiegel 6]

8 minutes ago, spacecadet said:

I wouldn't expect that to pass QC as-is.

Maybe resized to minimum with some extra sharpening.

 

Of course you must develop the DNG-Rawfile with LR or something similar.

P4P and Mavic Air pass QC, if photos were taken under good light conditions.

 

Mavic 2 Pro I did not try photos yet, but here a panorama, which passed QC:

 

https://www.alamy.com/360-degree-panoramic-view-of-360-degree-panorama-of-a-field-and-a-gravel-pond-next-to-a-forest-and-a-country-road-taken-with-the-drone-in-flight-image227170360.html?pv=1&stamp=2&imageid=21C003BC-FB91-4EBD-8470-522E8953C7DD&p=538862&n=5&orientation=0&pn=1&searchtype=11&IsFromSearch=1&srch=foo%3Dbar%26st%3D11%26sortby%3D2%26qt%3Dshore%20aerial%20forest%20pond%26qt_raw%3Dshore%20aerial%20forest%20pond%26qn%3D%26lic%3D3%26edrf%3D0%26mr%3D0%26pr%3D0%26aoa%3D1%26creative%3D%26videos%3D%26nu%3D%26ccc%3D%26bespoke%3D%26apalib%3D%26ag%3D0%26hc%3D0%26et%3D0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3D0%26loc%3D0%26ot%3D0%26imgt%3D0%26dtfr%3D%26dtto%3D%26size%3D0xFF%26blackwhite%3D%26cutout%3D%26archive%3D1%26name%3DFrank%20Heinz%26groupid%3D%26pseudoid%3D{A0FBD2BD-73F6-4A9C-83CF-5809C92A67E1}%26userid%3D%26id%3D%26a%3D%26xstx%3D0%26cbstore%3D0%26resultview%3DsortbyPopular%26lightbox%3D%26gname%3D%26gtype%3D%26apalic%3D%26tbar%3D0%26pc%3D%26simid%3D%26cap%3D1%26customgeoip%3DDE%26vd%3D0%26cid%3D%26pe%3D%26so%3D%26lb%3D%26pl%3D0%26plno%3D%26fi%3D0%26langcode%3Den%26upl%3D0%26cufr%3D%26cuto%3D%26howler%3D%26cvrem%3D0%26cvtype%3D0%26cvloc%3D0%26cl%3D0%26upfr%3D%26upto%3D%26primcat%3D%26seccat%3D%26cvcategory%3D*%26restriction%3D%26random%3D%26ispremium%3D1%26flip%3D0%26contributorqt%3D%26plgalleryno%3D%26plpublic%3D0%26viewaspublic%3D0%26isplcurate%3D0%26saveQry%3D%26editorial%3D1%26t%3D0%26edoptin%3D

Edited December 7, 2018 by spiegel

[Paul Glendell 5]

On 12/7/2018 at 18:38, spiegel said:

Yes, it is a bit cut, resolution is 5472 x 3648 px.

 

Here

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A5kkznkUoynKEl1B_wq3MJfMUUuBnaUl

 

you can download a original DNG-file of mavic 2 pro, from first flight, automatic mode.

Thanks that is really useful. I have just been having a play with the image and it seems okay after a bit of work in lightroom.  Interesting that a file of that size looks similar in quality to my old Nikon D100 photos which I think would still pass QC even now, although its a bigger file. 

[Paul Glendell 5]

On 12/7/2018 at 18:38, spiegel said:

Yes, it is a bit cut, resolution is 5472 x 3648 px.

 

Here

 

https://drive.google.com/open?id=1A5kkznkUoynKEl1B_wq3MJfMUUuBnaUl

 

you can download a original DNG-file of mavic 2 pro, from first flight, automatic mode.

Thanks that is really useful. I have just been having a play with the image and it seems okay after a bit of work in lightroom.  Interesting that a file of that size looks similar in quality to my old Nikon D100 photos which I think would still pass QC even now, although its a bigger file. 

[Paul Glendell 5]

On 12/7/2018 at 18:50, spiegel said:

 

Of course you must develop the DNG-Rawfile with LR or something similar.

P4P and Mavic Air pass QC, if photos were taken under good light conditions.

 

Mavic 2 Pro I did not try photos yet, but here a panorama, which passed QC:

 

https://www.alamy.com/360-degree-panoramic-view-of-360-degree-panorama-of-a-field-and-a-gravel-pond-next-to-a-forest-and-a-country-road-taken-with-the-drone-in-flight-image227170360.html?pv=1&stamp=2&imageid=21C003BC-FB91-4EBD-8470-522E8953C7DD&p=538862&n=5&orientation=0&pn=1&searchtype=11&IsFromSearch=1&srch=foo%3Dbar%26st%3D11%26sortby%3D2%26qt%3Dshore%20aerial%20forest%20pond%26qt_raw%3Dshore%20aerial%20forest%20pond%26qn%3D%26lic%3D3%26edrf%3D0%26mr%3D0%26pr%3D0%26aoa%3D1%26creative%3D%26videos%3D%26nu%3D%26ccc%3D%26bespoke%3D%26apalib%3D%26ag%3D0%26hc%3D0%26et%3D0x000000000000000000000%26vp%3D0%26loc%3D0%26ot%3D0%26imgt%3D0%26dtfr%3D%26dtto%3D%26size%3D0xFF%26blackwhite%3D%26cutout%3D%26archive%3D1%26name%3DFrank%20Heinz%26groupid%3D%26pseudoid%3D{A0FBD2BD-73F6-4A9C-83CF-5809C92A67E1}%26userid%3D%26id%3D%26a%3D%26xstx%3D0%26cbstore%3D0%26resultview%3DsortbyPopular%26lightbox%3D%26gname%3D%26gtype%3D%26apalic%3D%26tbar%3D0%26pc%3D%26simid%3D%26cap%3D1%26customgeoip%3DDE%26vd%3D0%26cid%3D%26pe%3D%26so%3D%26lb%3D%26pl%3D0%26plno%3D%26fi%3D0%26langcode%3Den%26upl%3D0%26cufr%3D%26cuto%3D%26howler%3D%26cvrem%3D0%26cvtype%3D0%26cvloc%3D0%26cl%3D0%26upfr%3D%26upto%3D%26primcat%3D%26seccat%3D%26cvcategory%3D*%26restriction%3D%26random%3D%26ispremium%3D1%26flip%3D0%26contributorqt%3D%26plgalleryno%3D%26plpublic%3D0%26viewaspublic%3D0%26isplcurate%3D0%26saveQry%3D%26editorial%3D1%26t%3D0%26edoptin%3D

 

Thanks that is a great photo, I didn't realise it was possible to do 360 degree pix with the mavic pro2 . I get the feeling that with a bit of work and the right light conditions it will pass QC perfectly okay. thanks again - paul

[spiegel 6]

Yes. fotos pass QC, here my first submitted:

 

 

 

 

 

Edited December 16, 2018 by spiegel