Jump to content

Drone's


Devin Johnston
 Share

Recommended Posts

I picked up a Phantom 3 4K for $800 new just a month ago. It is pretty incredible, and the limitations of that particular version are not really an issue due to the new FAA regulations. It is still capable of far exceeding what the regulations allow. I have found it very easy to control, but have had issues with the live view on my Nexus 6. Connected to an iPad mini with no problems though, so their 'supported devices' list is something to consider.

 

If you are okay with standard HD footage then the Phantom 3 Advanced is the same price as the Phantom 3 4K but has the range to match the $1,200 Phantom 3 Professional.

 

Not using mine commercially though, so there's that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I have found the footage to be good. I do get better pictures from my other cameras, but I can't easily send those up hundreds of feet into the sky.

 

This is a still shot with it at my grandparent's house, I couldn't get the preview to work on my phone at the time so I was shooting blind:

 

DJI_0002.jpg?psid=1

Link to comment
Share on other sites

That looks SWEET, want one myself!

 

However, that link shows a 1080p camera. Don't you think you should go for 4K? Even if you do not need that much resolution, having it future-proofs you to a degree, and you have 'overscan' to allow secondary stabilization in After Effects or similar, plus re-framing (cropping) so that you do not have to be quite as precise with shot framing.

 

Also, with the higher-res data you will get better 3D photogrametry reconstruction. That shit's the bomb--full 3D models, textured. I've just been using it with screen-grabs from Google Earth and Apple maps, and the results are great (though point-cloud based surfacing--lots of little triangles). You could build an entire town in 3D, with trees, hills, whatever, in a half-hour with results from your drone (but you would need shots from all sides to build all sides).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had Agisoft Photoscan for about a year, was part of the reason i wanted a drone...however, the photogrammetry software options that work from video footage are considerably more expensive. Not sure if Autodesk's ReCap accepts video footage, but that could be an option as well if you have some Autodesk subs, since those cloud credits can be used for little else otherwise.

 

Looking at that bundle, it is very similar to what I have ended up with buying piece by piece. I did get a set of polar pro CP and ND filters, not so sure that they were necessary after messing around with the drone since exposure is controlled easily enough from the remote.

 

The 4K sensor is a Sony rated at about 12MP, compare that to the Advanced at 2.7K and 12MP and they are not so different.

Edited by beestee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I kept meaning to try a number of photogrametry apps, DLed a bunch, but never did. The one did just try is https://www.capturingreality.com/ as a trial beta. Their server to license the trial SUCKS, but so far, the app rocks. All I've fed it were 2K screen-grabs from Google Earth and the results are very impressive. Working from video you could just save a set of frames and you are good to go.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ernest how detailed can the models get, I ask because of the biggest headaches I have when compositing is all the rotoscoping that has to be done. It would be great if I could generate a detailed model of foreground objects like trees using this software and not have to spend hours cutting them out of the video.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

very detailed, but then LOTS of little triangles. The program I'm trying can do a good reduction, but still a lot. For trees and such, you will get great results. As I mentioned, so far I've only used fake photos from Google Earth and Apple 3D grabbed on my ipad. Real photos would be better. When I brought the results into my scene and scaled, the results were very accurate to the parts I had already built (the George Washington Bridge and the NY and NJ sides).

 

There is a great potential to used a drone to get the entire area, then build a textured 3D from the images and then fly through that in 3D rather than composite into camera matched footage. You wouldn't have moving traffic or some other aspects of footage, but still could be an interesting way to approach some shots. I would love to try it.

Edited by Ernest Burden
Link to comment
Share on other sites

From a news item I just saw on nbcnewyork.com :

 

"A small drone crashed into the 40th floor of the Empire State Building Thursday night and then fell to a 35th floor landing, authorities said. Police said a New Jersey man was flying the drone in an attempt to take pictures and apparently lost control of the aircraft.

 

Investigators said Sean Nivin Riddle was arrested at the scene and is expected to face criminal charges. He was being questioned by officers at the Midtown South police precinct."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On using a photogrametry scene made from drone shots:

 

Yes cars are in the mesh, and messy, but you can place low-poly models over the close ones, you can delete or push lower the roads and build them.

 

And how about this--the generated scene can be used for reflection/refraction only (not seen by camera) and/or used for shadowing. That could be really helpful for comping a glassy building into aerial footage.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It seems like an over reaction to arrest someone for something like this, how much damage could it actually do to the building? Now if it's illegal to fly drones in NY and the guy was breaking a specific law I can understand.

 

There are laws in Texas governing the use as well. HB912, 2167,1481 and 3628

 

If you get one, make sure to carry signed authorization from the bldg/land owner or just become a licensed realtor. Apparently, the realtor lobby is quite strong in Texas. They get a specific exception to limits.

 

This summary is for Austin but it pretty much lists the state limits:

http://overaustin.com/dronerules/

 

Sec.A423.002.AAOFFENSE: ILLEGAL USE OF UNMANNED VEHICLE OR

AIRCRAFT TO CAPTURE IMAGE. (a) A person commits an offense if the

person uses or authorizes the use of an unmanned vehicle or aircraft

to capture an image without the express consent of the person who

owns or lawfully occupies the real property captured in the image.

 

There's something like 38 exceptions. It's a good read. The limits seem to cover any image(s) taken from a height of over 6 feet.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

So I just wanted to update the thread and let you guys know what's happened in the drone department. I went ahead and purchased a Phantom 3, which was about a week before the Phantom 4 was released and that kind of bothered me but I did get a good deal. It's been a relatively pain free learning experience, after about 10 flights 6 of which were for an actual project I think I've got the hang of how to fly it and video at the same time. All of my flights are under 400 feet, with a 12 megapixel camera at that altitude the pictures are good but don't expect a tremendous amount of detail. The 4K video is beautiful and smooth as glass and overall I'm very happy with the quality. I purchased 2 additional batteries so I have a total flight time of about 66 minutes which is more than enough to capture any project that I'll be working on. The only problem with the system I've seen is the propellers tend to get into the frame from time to time depending on your orientation to your subject. This can really screw up a shot and cause you to have to fly the same path several times. The camera lens has a 94 degree FOV and surprisingly very little distortion and motion tracking the footage hasn't been as difficult as I'd feared. Over all I'm happy with the drone but if I were doing this all the time I'd probably go for a more robust option like the Inspire 1 or pro. This machine has a much better camera and is designed in a way so that you don't have that pesky propeller in your shot problem, the downside is it's 4 times as expensive as the Phantom 3/4.

 

I’ve learned that anyone flying a drone whether it’s for commercial or personal uses must register the craft with the FAA, and yes it costs money to do this. This is so that if the drone causes problems it can be identified and the owner can be held accountable. There are also several rules you must abide by as John pointed out, airport airspace being one of the biggest. I’ve also found that people in general are very paranoid about seeing these things flying overhead. I did a short test flight in my neighborhood and within a few hours my neighborhood Facebook page was on fire with people freaking out about the drone flying overhead taking pictures of them. I’ve had several discussions with people about this subject and they all seem to feel it’s an invasion of privacy. When I point out that cameras are around them all the time taking stills and video they seem to draw a distinction between a stranger holding a cell phone taking pictures of them and someone flying a drone overhead doing the same. The public definitely has a negative opinion about drones but I think it’s misplaced, after all these aren’t military or police aircraft trying to spy on them but that’s what they think.

Link to comment
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
 Share

×
×
  • Create New...