RunRyder RC
WATCH
 1 page 895 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterAerial Photography and Video › Quad copters changing the photo world
06-16-2013 02:24 AM  5 years agoPost 1
mustang67ford

rrKey Veteran

Central Pennsylvania

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

I seen a quadcoper at our club today with a gopro strapped to it. Seems like these are much better for aerial photography and cheap. Almost anybody could fly them. Kindof takes the wind out of the traditional camera rigs with an electric heli and gimbal hanging off the front. Just about a year ago i was considering building a camera rig. It would now be out of date. I no longer see a benifit to the traditional camera rig.

Team HeliProz - Retired
AMA #513507
IRCHA #4011

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-17-2013 02:28 PM  5 years agoPost 2
Chris Bergen

rrElite Veteran

cassopolis, MI USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Just like most things, it depends on your application/needs.

For right now anyway, you're flight times and payloads are still somewhat limited with electric powered Multirotors.

So if your needs are to fly for an hour or more, then you'll need to use something else.

If you want to carry a larger camera, larger than say a standard DSLR, then you'll need to use something else.

There is no doubt that multirotors have given many more people the ability to put a camera in the air, wether that's good or bad is yet to be seen.

Chris D. Bergen

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-17-2013 06:34 PM  5 years agoPost 3
electro212

rrVeteran

Lancaster Pa

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Amen

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-18-2013 01:52 AM  5 years agoPost 4
Al Austria

rrElite Veteran

Sacramento, CA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

So if your needs are to fly for an hour or more, then you'll need to use something else.

If you want to carry a larger camera, larger than say a standard DSLR, then you'll need to use something else.
Curious, speaking purely in the realm of aerial photography/videography as the topic suggests(no unmanned/autopilot assisted mission type operation), how many shooting/filming situations would require an airframe that is capable of flying for over an hour continuously without landing?

Chances are a human operator would land several times within that time frame, and that in itself would be tantamount to swapping batteries in a multirotor. Having worked with a few production companies piloting a multirotor with a separate camera gimbal operator, I can say that the idea of flying for an hour straight(no landings) not only sounds extremely stressful, but counterproductive.

Also talking about lifting camera bodies larger than a DSLR(ie. C300, FS700, Reds), there are a decent number of multirotor offerings that have been lifting these cinema level bodies for a few years now. Flight time in this type of application is even less critical as most shots are planned, and you'll be hard pressed to EVER see a cinema level aerial shot that lasts longer than 30 seconds in real time...

IMHO, when it comes to aerial photography/videography, I feel that multirotors have the edge...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-18-2013 03:21 AM  5 years agoPost 5
classic

rrElite Veteran

All over the place!

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Flight time in this type of application is even less critical as most shots are planned, and you'll be hard pressed to EVER see a cinema level aerial shot that lasts longer than 30 seconds in real time...
Not to be mean but If you think 30 seconds of film equates to 30 seconds of filming,
sorry, not even close. Film crews can work and practice all day to wind up with just 30 seconds of action film not to mention what gets cut and edited off final product..

I would listen to Chris,
He has been in this hobby and has been involved with the multi-rotor systems long enough to know what he is talking about.

There are UAV electric/gas helicopters out there that easily get 30 minutes to well over an hour of flight time depending on cutomer payload.

Which is worse, ignorance or apathy? I don't know and I don't care!

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-18-2013 03:42 AM  5 years agoPost 6
Al Austria

rrElite Veteran

Sacramento, CA - USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Not to be mean but If you think 30 seconds of film equates to 30 seconds of filming,
I completely realize what it takes to create 30 seconds of video.

The point is that that 30 seconds of video is not the product of single, continuous, hour long flight without landing.

Rather, it is the result of hours and hours planning, performing, and redoing the same shot over, and over, and over...

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-18-2013 01:21 PM  5 years agoPost 7
Heliguychris

rrKey Veteran

Perth, West Australia

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Multis have the edge on stability, and smoothness.
Tons of other benefits as well.

For some things like super sensitive magnetic type sensors, you cant use electric tho, and gassers are still the only way to get the job done.

I work full time in UAVs for aerial video and photography, and 30 seconds of vid can occasionally be done in one 8 minute flight, and it just as often takes 2 hours for all the elements to come together!

If i ever write a book on aerial cinametography, it will be call Again, and again, and again! lol

Licensed (CASA) UAV operator certificate holder 1-YFOF5-01 www.helicamaerial.com.au

PM  EMAIL  HOMEPAGE  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
06-18-2013 02:30 PM  5 years agoPost 8
Chris Bergen

rrElite Veteran

cassopolis, MI USA

My Posts: All  Forum  Topic

Al makes some obviously very good points, but if you limit your world to very tight specifics, then that's all you'll ever accomplish.

Aerial Photography encompasses so MUCH more than strictly cinematic, let your imagination run free, consider why someone WOULD need these requirements instead of coming up with reasons why they would not.

As I stated, it's all about your needs. If your needs are strictly 8 minute flights with high end cameras, absolutely use a specialized Multirotor.

If your needs are to stay in the air for 3 hours, taking pictures of powerlines with a special camera looking for line leakage, I suggest that gas power was better suited, AND using an autopilot system was certainly a huge help in accomplishing this Aerial Photography mission in South Africa.

I like to leave my options open, offer different tools for different applications instead of a "One hammer fits all" philosophy...

Chris D. Bergen

PM  EMAIL  GALLERY  Attn:RR  Quote
WATCH
 1 page 895 views POST REPLY
HomeAircraftHelicopterAerial Photography and Video › Quad copters changing the photo world
 Print TOPIC  Make Suggestion 

 5  Topic Subscribe

Friday, November 16 - 10:43 pm - Copyright © 2000-2018 RunRyder   EMAILEnable Cookies

The RC discussion world needs to consolidate. RR is now one choice for that. Its software is cutting edge. It hosts on-topic advertising. Help RR increase traffic buy making suggestions, posting in RR's new areas (sites) and by spreading the word.

The RunRyder Difference

• Category system to allow Rep/Vendor postings.
• Classifieds with sold (hidden) category.
• Classifieds with separate view new.
• Answer PMs offsite via email reply.
• Member gallery photos with advanced scripting.
• Gallery photo viewer integrated into postings.
• Highly refined search with advanced back end.
• Hosts its own high end fast response servers.
• Hosts thousands of HD event coverage videos.
• Rewrote entire code base with latest technology.
• No off-topic (annoying) click bait advertising.
Login Here
 New Subscriptions 
 Buddies Online