Have any of you tried aerial photography for extra bucks?

[MikeFairbanks]

I met a guy on aplanding.com who says he goes up for an hour once per month and takes photos of about eight to ten properties, and charges 75 bucks for the first photo, followed by 25 for each additional. He puts them on a CD and gives them to the realtor who requested the job.

He pays about 300 bucks for the plane, and a pilot flies him around for about an hour while he gets the shots.

I was thinking of doing the same, and found a place here that will fly me for 165 dollars per hour (pretty darn good) including fuel.

They told me that I we have to stay 1000 feet above the city where I live. But there are some high-end properties here and some realtors who are interested (I used to do it with a kite and a P&S, but it's definitely difficult to nail that consistently).

I have the 100-400 L series lens. I wonder if it could handle that kind of photography from a thousand feet. Light isn't a big issue because I'd only fly at the right times. Just wondering if the whole thing is feasable with my setup: Rebel XS and a 100-400L.

Thanks for any insight.

[PhotosGuy]

Question on aerial shots. (http://photography-on-the.net/forum/showthread.php?t=662490)

[shaggymatt]

Saw some aerials done yesterday by an RC Helicopter. My buddy did the ground building shots. IMO, the aerials were actually shot too high. But if you're into RC, that would be a far cheaper option than doing plane rentals.

Once you get over the initial investments, your cost would be very minimal.

[Billo78]

What would you offer that they can't get for free on google maps?

[rd757]

What would you offer that they can't get for free on google maps?

Satellite vs. Air-to-ground photography are very different. Check out Bing.com's "aerial" and "birds-eye" for examples. Satellite pictures then to be outdated anyway.

I'm a pilot in the southeast Michigan area if anyone is interested in going up.

[MikeFairbanks]

The Google maps have poor resolution. You can't zoom in very well without getting a blurry photograph. Plus, they are vertical photographs that don't really show depth of field very well. Furthermore, they don't highlight new homes or developments. And the color stinks.

I've researched RC for two years and have tried it left and right.

A. RC helicopters are nearly impossible to fly (like balancing a standing pencil on your hand while sitting in a moving car. It takes years (and a lot of money) to get a large enough rc helicopter to lift a camera. Blimps work better, but helium is expensive and blimps are susceptible to wind. Kites are eratic and I don't want to put expensive equipment on one. I've researched it up and down, left and right. Full-scale is the most accurate, reliable way to photograph.

I was just wondering if any of you have tried it and if you were successful.

My plan is to go up at the end of October or November to learn.

Thanks, Rd757, but I live in Atlanta.

[DDCSD]

I know a few people that fly around here and have considered doing this myself. The on problem here is that one of the major realtors that lists most of the higher-end homes in the area is also a pilot and does this for his own.

Just remember to turn of your IS. ;)

[turbo212003]

What would you offer that they can't get for free on google maps?

Believe it or not, the earth isn't flat.....

[DennisW1]

Saw some aerials done yesterday by an RC Helicopter. My buddy did the ground building shots. IMO, the aerials were actually shot too high. But if you're into RC, that would be a far cheaper option than doing plane rentals.

Once you get over the initial investments, your cost would be very minimal.


Have you ever checked out prices on high end RC Heli's? Not to mention they are absolutely the most difficult things that exist to fly.

It's a great idea if you're already an RC Heli pilot but if not you're gonna go thru a wad of money in broken Heli's and camera gear before you even get one usable image.

[Zephyrize]

Here's an example of business dealing exclusively with aerial shots.

It's videography, but it's show how RC can be cost/quality effective; it could easily be applied to still imagery

http://www.vimeo.com/5573309
http://www.ascentimagery.com/A__S__C__E__N__T___I__M__A__G__E__R__Y.html

of course, it takes flying skills..

[PubUltraStar]

I do Kite Aerial Photography, and Pole Aerial Photography for extra bucks, and as a hobby. Probably more so as a hobby, but I've also had paying gigs. Weddings, Business, Real Estate... It's not as cool a helicopters, planes, and rockets, but it works great for me.

I would love to get into RC Helicoptor or plane Aerial Photography, but think that you need an license for some of the frequencies if you include photography into the mix. Kite Aerial Photography was a cheap and fun way to get a new perspective. If there is no wind, I have used Pole Aerial Photography as an alternative. Good Luck!

KAP Flickr Group (http://www.flickr.com/groups/kiteaerialphotography/)
m2 Photography Aerial Gallery (http://photography.m2creativedesign.com/Aerial)
KAP Forums (http://steel.ced.berkeley.edu/cris/kap/discuss/)

How to make a PAP Rig (http://www.wonderhowto.com/how-to/video/how-to-build-a-pole-mounted-aerial-photography-and-video-rig-272160/)

[MikeFairbanks]

Currently it's illegal to use an RC helicopter to take professional shots. You can do it all you want as an amateur, but not professionally.

It's also extremely hazardous. To lift a dslr you need a helicopter that weighs at least five to ten pounds, and imagine that thing dropping from the sky.

Bergenrc makes camera-specific helicopters (rc) and last I checked their cheapest model was 4500 bucks.

And if you even set it down slightly sideways, the rotors hit the ground and the whole assembly explodes into a thousand pieces. Then you have to pay a lot to fix it, even if you do it yourself.


Believe it or not, the safest and cheapest way to do aerial photography is full scale. You also get the best results that way.

I was just trying to get advice from small timers who make a few extra bucks a month. I teach, and don't plan to quit.

[PhotosGuy]

Currently it's illegal to use an RC helicopter to take professional shots. You can do it all you want as an amateur, but not professionally. Where? Can you cite a source?

[ssim]

I do alot of aerial work. It is something that can be hard to break into due to the price of all of the inputs into the job. Customers are going to want a comfort level that the person they are hiring is actually going to get the job done and they would not have wasted alot of cash on something they are not happy with. It can be quite rewarding and I charge a premium over what I would normally charge for a commercial shoot.

I did all of the work for some smaller airlines in my neck of the woods a few years ago but they got swallowed up by larger airlines so that work has dried up. There is nothing more fun than seeing another aircraft pull up beside you at a few thousand feet.

Right now I have a contract with a couple of commercial real estate developers. It is rather ho hum work as they will give me either an actual address or long/lat coordinates and I am simply shooting the ground and then I have to do some work in Photoshop to outline the area in question. The bonus in some of this work is that while I am up there I take the opportunity to shoot a number of other businesses facilities and have been quite successful at selling them images on sales calls after the fact.


This was one of the most fun shoots I had ever had. Two Dash 8's flying in tight formation. These were done on film and are therefore scans to digital. The amount of prints that I sold to the company and the employees was very rewarding. Images from this shoot was included in just about every piece of printed material that they had during that period.
http://www.pbase.com/ssim/image/23882881/medium.jpg

http://www.pbase.com/ssim/image/23658283/medium.jpg

This is what most of what I do these days looks like. Certainly not as exciting but just as rewarding.
http://www.pbase.com/ssim/image/102434901/medium.jpg

I always use the same pilot so that I have a comfort level that I am actually going to get back on the ground, in one piece. I never shoot through windows and will normally take the door off the aircraft if the weather permits.

This is the kind of job that requires a photographer to sometimes offer a discounted rate in order to prove themselves to the customer for the first job. Once you have established yourself as someone that can deliver high quality results you don't have to even consider this. Getting that first customer in this area is tough but if you can make a name for yourself you can find yourself quite busy. Some of the new technologies such as RC and kite photography are cutting into this somewhat but it is still business that I find worth chasing. Aerial work makes up a significant portion of my commercial work.

[ToddR]

I'm still back on the post where you said you've attached a point & shoot camera to a kite. :shock:

[MikeFairbanks]

The FAA is telling us no on the RC helicopters and planes (for business). It's all still up in the air (pun intended). I did a search on the FARs but can't find it yet.

Anywho, here are some photos I took with my kite. I used to use a lightweight point and shoot, but then learned that a heavier point and shoot provides more stability. Anything between 8 ounces and a pound is a pleasure to work with.

My kite is a 7-foot tall Chinese fighting kite called a Rokaku. It came from Premier Kites and was about a hundred bucks.

The mount for the camera is home-made from Home Depot parts.

Just talking about it gets me motivated to get back out there and do it some more.

Kite Aerial Photography for profit is perfectly legal. Legal ceiling: 500 feet.

1 My church

http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt98/MichaelFairbanks/Finishedchurch.jpg

2. Tybee Island, Georgia

http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt98/MichaelFairbanks/TybeeIslandPictouchedup.jpg

3. My culdesac

http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt98/MichaelFairbanks/TheCuldesac2.jpg

4. My neighborhood

http://i601.photobucket.com/albums/tt98/MichaelFairbanks/PeachtreeCity1aa.jpg


These were all done a little under a year ago. I've learned a lot more about processing since then.


I'd say my choice of best camera for this kind of work is the G-series of point and shoots, because you can shoot raw (very much needed for this work).

And you have to shoot in TV mode. Set a VERY fast shutter speed, tape the button down and hope for the best.

[TroyRaymond]

Hadn't realized you had such a high post count here Mike, really gettin' er... I'll apologize first for the long post, I thought a proper explanation of each was in order.

The FAA guidelines are currently only recommendation, although they say it is illegal, there are no actual laws or punishments set for it. It is directed at Flying RC for compensation, but they'll have to figure out what to do with all the sponsored pilots doing their demos too. Currently restrictions are expected in 2011 including several weight limits. The lightest will require lesser certification while heavier platforms including rotorywing will require much higher certification.

Full scale for compensation requires a commercial rating. Ultra lights cannot be used because they are classified experimental.

I spent a year on a simulator practicing before flying the actual thing, it will save you thousands. After 3 years of flying heli's and spending many thousands of dollars I went back to a small heli, RC plane, kite and mast. According to FAA the kite or balloon tethered to the ground are the only legal platforms.

A Trex 450 helicopter swinging blades a diameter of about 28" will lift about 24oz., more than enough for my A640, but not with the wide angle lens. Under 4lbs fully loaded.

http://troyraymond.smugmug.com/photos/476217991_ZrcRu-M.jpg

A small computer stabilizer helps keep them stable, the larger the heli, the more wind it can handle and the smoother it will fly.

A slightly larger 500 size heli. Rotor span 4'.

http://troyraymond.smugmug.com/photos/482833643_oS3gg-M.jpg

http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/481785011_SgPCU-M.jpg

A larger yet heli in a demo video not yet released, please do not spread it around, my inbox will overflow. Rotor span 5'. SLR and HD video version.
http://vimeo.com/6763908

Only one size larger heli before you get into turbines. They're all very expensive.

On to kites. I have 3 different kites used depending on wind conditions and can easily lift over 5 lbs with only a 7mph wind. I've been prototyping a new stabilizing system will nearly hold perfectly still using the kite line itself to stabilize. No photos yet, although I do have a photo of my first prototype shooter that can be used with a kite or flipped over for use on a mast. This version is for shooting panoramic photos in portrait. The new version is more simple and lighter.

http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/470109740_BvWFM-L.jpg

Or... the dedicated mast gimbal that has auto leveling.

http://photos.smugmug.com/photos/469496027_eQqBj-M.jpg

I've almost finished a new prototype that will allow by remote pan/tilt, landscape/portrait, zoom and focus of SLR cameras up to about 8lbs. Testing with a 70-200 "L". No photos.

I'll have a plane finished this coming week that can easily carry an SLR for nearly an hour.

All different tools for the bag, much like you use different lenses.

As far as the safest way, it all depends on your experience and ability. I frame the shots via a downlink to either video glasses or lcd screen from directly through the camera. Never leaving the ground I would consider the safest. With a plane, kite or mast, after the initial purchase, each shoot will cost you only pennies.

Low altitude makes the photo's more personal, less roof. These photo (http://www.envisioncreativeimaging.com/Photography/Aerial-Photography-1/3971237_SYb6T#256410684_7egnC)s were taken remotely.

Pano shot from a mast (http://troyraymond.smugmug.com/photos/258353057_uF6Y2-O-3.jpg) showing the location of a home next to a school.

Winter mast in action while I sit in the warm van operating it.

http://troyraymond.smugmug.com/photos/478081476_aYY9n-M.jpg

Real Estate follows the economy, but it also depends on your location. Commercial is the best target. If you live in a wealthy part of the country you can do well. Where I'm located no one will spend any money, so I turned to building the platforms. When the economy changes it may be different, but I won't count on it.

Troy

[Jon Foster]

Satellite vs. Air-to-ground photography are very different. Check out Bing.com's "aerial" and "birds-eye" for examples. Satellite pictures then to be outdated anyway.

I'm a pilot in the southeast Michigan area if anyone is interested in going up.

Where are you located?

Jon.

[dovaka]

ive done stuff like this for a realtor friend of mine but i used a robinson r22 helicopter which was much easier but more expensive
heres a old pic before i knew much of anything about photography
http://www.evergreenrealty.com/properties/images/Finishedpicture.jpg

[Cosha]

i fly FPV first person view (im sure most of heard a little about it) Like UAV's And AP aerial Photography

Maybe some of you are on RCgroups?

Im guessing the law still states you cant sell pictures taken from remotoe controlled aircraft / Helicopters and the alike?

Id say try it from a full scale - even if you only do it once - im a total aviation geek, and i would do anything to combine photography and some altitude :D

[jrm27]

I would absolutely love to. I've gone up in a friend's Cessna in Alaska and had a blast taking shots of the area. I would love to do it where I live.

[rd757]

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2561/4025786239_fb045e2478_o.jpg

Some resort on the Grand Traverse Bay that I was able to snap as I was passing it on my way into to Traverse City from Pellston, MI.

RD

[sidg]

For those of you who do this a rather personal question.
How do you avoid air sickness?
Probably 8 yrs. ago I went up with a friend and was taking pictures with one of the early Sony digitals that took the 3.5 disks. Well after looking at the video screen on the back of the camera trying to get the pictures we wanted while the ground moved at a different speed behind the camera for 40 min. I was sicker than a dog before we landed.
I would love to go back up now with good gear but neither I nor the pilot want to repeat that last experience.

[dovaka]

For those of you who do this a rather personal question.
How do you avoid air sickness?
Probably 8 yrs. ago I went up with a friend and was taking pictures with one of the early Sony digitals that took the 3.5 disks. Well after looking at the video screen on the back of the camera trying to get the pictures we wanted while the ground moved at a different speed behind the camera for 40 min. I was sicker than a dog before we landed.
I would love to go back up now with good gear but neither I nor the pilot want to repeat that last experience.

ive still got a sony mavica somewhere in my house
i my self never get air sick but its really a person to person thing. it also greatly depends on what your flying in and whos flying.

[-AP-]

Hadn't realized you had such a high post count here Mike, really gettin' er... I'll apologize first for the long post, I thought a proper explanation of each was in order.

The FAA guidelines are currently only recommendation, although they say it is illegal, there are no actual laws or punishments set for it. It is directed at Flying RC for compensation, but they'll have to figure out what to do with all the sponsored pilots doing their demos too. Currently restrictions are expected in 2011 including several weight limits. The lightest will require lesser certification while heavier platforms including rotorywing will require much higher certification.

Full scale for compensation requires a commercial rating. Ultra lights cannot be used because they are classified experimental.

I spent a year on a simulator practicing before flying the actual thing, it will save you thousands. After 3 years of flying heli's and spending many thousands of dollars I went back to a small heli, RC plane, kite and mast. According to FAA the kite or balloon tethered to the ground are the only legal platforms.


Great looking mounts Troy... Yeah, Mike, whats with the post count here ? ? LOL....

Kenny. AKA (Rip-N-Burn)

[T2000]

"Where? Can you cite a source?"

I don't know if this is current FAA policy. If you really need to know, I would suggest you call the FAA directly.

http://cryptome.org/faa021307.htm

" The current FAA policy for UAS operations is that no person may
operate a UAS in the National Airspace System without specific
authority. For UAS operating as public aircraft the authority is the
COA, for UAS operating as civil aircraft the authority is special
airworthiness certificates, and for model aircraft the authority is AC
91-57.
The FAA recognizes that people and companies other than modelers
might be flying UAS with the mistaken understanding that they are
legally operating under the authority of AC 91-57. AC 91-57 only
applies to modelers, and thus specifically excludes its use by persons
or companies for business purposes."

[thumper 8]

A local guy used to use a small tethered blimp for aerial photography - the results that I saw were very,very good. I am not sure how high the blimp went, but it wasn't too high... maybe 200' to 300' max. I haven't seem him around for a couple of years - I know he has busy at times. I spoke to him once and he seemed to be disillusioned that more folks weren't using his unique (to our area anyway) services.

[FlyingPhotog]

"Where? Can you cite a source?"

I don't know if this is current FAA policy. If you really need to know, I would suggest you call the FAA directly.

http://cryptome.org/faa021307.htm

" The current FAA policy for UAS operations is that no person may
operate a UAS in the National Airspace System without specific
authority. For UAS operating as public aircraft the authority is the
COA, for UAS operating as civil aircraft the authority is special
airworthiness certificates, and for model aircraft the authority is AC
91-57.
The FAA recognizes that people and companies other than modelers
might be flying UAS with the mistaken understanding that they are
legally operating under the authority of AC 91-57. AC 91-57 only
applies to modelers, and thus specifically excludes its use by persons
or companies for business purposes."

I believe this is correct. Currently, the only entity that can fly UAVs outside of MOAs (Military Operating Areas) is the Military and even they need TFRs (Temporary Flight Restrictions) to do so. They were flying Predators along the US/Mexico border for a while last year (until they lost one in SW Arizona) and while doing so, the entire border was a TFR.

Several law enforcement agencies (local and county) have tried to implement UAV programs and have been "shot down" by the FAA for trying to do so.

Class E airspace can begin as low as 700' AGL in places so the FAA takes airspace intrusions very seriously.

[T2000]

Yes I would say the FAA is serious about airspace incursions. Sometimes going so far as to state they can shoot you down. Here is a TFR currently in effect over Nantucket Island until Monday. I think the "VIP" is Biden.

http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_9_1743.html

Though I don't think there's a big backlog of pilots that want to fly VFR into Nantucket in November.

[FlyingPhotog]

Yes I would say the FAA is serious about airspace incursions. Sometimes going so far as to state they can shoot you down. Here is a TFR currently in effect over Nantucket Island until Monday. I think the "VIP" is Biden.

http://tfr.faa.gov/save_pages/detail_9_1743.html

Though I don't think there's a big backlog of pilots that want to fly VFR into Nantucket in November.

Probably is...

The TFRs for the POTUS are a 30 Mile radius and this one is only three.

[T2000]

Well you're good to go VFR if you want; it doesn't by itself preclude a VFR flight. I would check the weather before you go. Have a safe flight.