First Aerial Still Images

[Trackhead]

After 9 months of tweaking and mainly shooting vid, I finally got out to shoot my first stills with the helicam.

There is definitely a learning curve for the following reasons.
1. The heli is constantly moving, it's very difficult to hover perfectly at high elevations with wind, thermals, etc.
2. You have to get a feel for what lens you're using, how it's focal length will affect the height/distance you need.
3. You have to tell your 'photographer' what you're after, what you want framed, etc. Constant communication is necessary.
4. Seems like it currently takes 20 shots to get one you want. Just fire a bunch off, and then fire some more.

Here are a few. They were all taken mid-day because the rest of the time we were out on the lake, or doing other stuff. But with early morning or evening light, some good things could be done.

Bear Lake, with over water pucker factor. Hanging nearly $4k over the water is a bit nerve wracking.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums/aerial/Bear_Lake_Boat.jpg

Practicing the money making game of real estate slutting. That's where most rc/helicams are making money.
http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums/aerial/realty2.jpg

http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums/aerial/realty3.jpg

http://fritzrips.com/Gallery1/albums/aerial/realty4.jpg

I'm hooked on the possibilities.....just need to get out in good light.

[MeatPuppet]

That's so very cool.

Are you using any kind of through-the-viewfinder video feed, or is the framing of the shoot an educated guess?

[Trackhead]

That's so very cool.

Are you using any kind of through-the-viewfinder video feed, or is the framing of the shoot an educated guess?

I'm using a mini camera with a similar focal length. The center of both cameras is the same, but the focal length is not identical.

You can't be a tripod geek to work this way. You have to have an open mind and quick fingers. Staunch photographers may not be able to overcome the inability to change this or that because the camera is not in their hands. But if you can get over that, it's pretty cool.

[MeatPuppet]

I'm using a mini camera with a similar focal length. The center of both cameras is the same, but the focal length is not identical.

But if you can get over that, it's pretty cool.



It sounds like it.

I don't know if the weight penalty would be worth it, but have you considered something like this (http://www.huntsphotoandvideo.com/detail_page.cfm?productid=AZV109) tethered to a transmitter and then viewing the image on something like this (http://www.i4u.com/article3132.html)?

Once you started shooting, you could fly by the view through the eyepiece to frame the shoot.

[criscam]

how much for the first cabin :)




seroiusly though, nice work.

[Trackhead]

It sounds like it.

I don't know if the weight penalty would be worth it, but have you considered something like this (http://www.huntsphotoandvideo.com/detail_page.cfm?productid=AZV109) tethered to a transmitter and then viewing the image on something like this (http://www.i4u.com/article3132.html)?

Once you started shooting, you could fly by the view through the eyepiece to frame the shoot.

I have seen those, but I am trying to keep the money hanging in the air as low as possible. One crash and you destroy your camera, lens, blades, battery, tail boom, on and on......

The less money in the air, the more willing you are to use it.

[MeatPuppet]

The less money in the air, the more willing you are to use it.


Yeah, I can see how that would influence your decisions.

This setup has so much promise. I'm really looking forward to seeing the images you produce this winter. Thanks for sharing the progress with us.

[Trackhead]

This setup has so much promise.

I have another type of aerial imaging tool in skunk works now. This thing holds promise for long establishing video shots. As in long fly-ins over peaks, across bowls, etc, etc.

This winter is gonna be interesting.

[Tippster]

4. Seems like it currently takes 20 shots to get one you want. Just fire a bunch off, and then fire some more.

With a very few "happy accidents" most professional photography these days is just that, especially with moving subjects (or in this case, a moving camera.) Don't sweat it - fire off a shitload. 2GB cards are cheap.

I'd set the camera to auto-bracket just to have even more leeway. Also, don't forget: the wider you are (shorter your focal length) the less critical your focus needs to be since your Depth of Field is larger. On bright, sunny days this won't affect you as much as it will on overcast or (gasp) snowy ones.

[Trackhead]

With a very few "happy accidents" most professional photography these days is just that, especially with moving subjects (or in this case, a moving camera.) Don't sweat it - fire off a shitload. 2GB cards are cheap.

I'd set the camera to auto-bracket just to have even more leeway. Also, don't forget: the wider you are (shorter your focal length) the less critical your focus needs to be since your Depth of Field is larger. On bright, sunny days this won't affect you as much as it will on overcast or (gasp) snowy ones.

Yup, already auto-bracketing.

I have a 18-35 on their now. I want something wider. Again, funds are a bit low after 9 months of spending, a few crashes, etc, etc.

[MeatPuppet]

I have another type of aerial imaging tool in skunk works now. This thing holds promise for long establishing video shots. As in long fly-ins over peaks, across bowls, etc, etc.

This winter is gonna be interesting.


:biggrin: :biggrin: :biggrin:

[AstroPax]

I'm hooked on the possibilities.....

Dude, that flying cam is way too cool.

Just think...you could hook-up with one of the tabloid pubs...take aerial pics of outdoor celebrity weddings in California.

Trackhead, the "aerial paparazzi".

-Astro

[ski_adk]

For early/late lower light, are you concerned about blur/noise? Or is that camera good enough that noise isn't an issue at higher ISOs?

//forgive me, I still use the original digital rebel.