Aerial Photography - Technical Question

[navigator72]

Hee hee hee

I was flying with a photographer a few years back and he was holding camera out the window and accidently hit the lens release button a lost his $800 lens out the window and into the ocean.

 

[propsarebest]

I got this bitchin little bracket that I made just for shooting out of the windoows of a cessna. Open the window and it clips onto the window sill. I have a ball head on it and it works pretty good. only problem tho is vibration. If you use a slow shutter speed and a long focal legnth, the vibrations come thru onto the film. I have found that a 300MM lens works just great for lots of pics.

 

[Vector4fun]

Hey, I've got some questions of my own. Understand that my knowledge of photography is much less than Avbug's pinhead folks.

(That was a joke 'bug)

I've worked a lot of photo flights, and my only problem is that lots of times these guys want to be right at a particular altitude, and the altitude will change for each location. Site #1 is 1900'. Site #2 is 2300'. Site #3 at 1700'. etc.

Well look, 10 miles east or west of the field, I couldn't care less, don't hit the towers, watch out for the banner tow. But then they want to do this right on the finals, or right off the departure ends. (apparently commercial property near airports is a VERY popular subject). Now, we can't adjust the glideslope up/down to miss your mission, there's this little thing about stabilized approaches and such, and departure come off climbing to 4000'.

So my question is; What is the problem doing the whole mission at 4500' and just doing some darkroom or computer magic to enlarge the section you want? Just don't understand the problems I suppose.

Personally, I think you guys are all nuts. Group together, buy a Twin Commander, Photograph the whole **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** town four times a year from 10,000', spend the rest of the year in the darkroom drinking some beer and stichin' some negatives together, charge the client like you flew two hours. What's the problem???

 

[A Squared]

Hey, I've got some questions of my own. Understand that my knowledge of photography is much less than Avbug's pinhead folks.

(That was a joke 'bug)

I've worked a lot of photo flights, and my only problem is that lots of times these guys want to be right at a particular altitude, and the altitude will change for each location. Site #1 is 1900'. Site #2 is 2300'. Site #3 at 1700'. etc.

Well look, 10 miles east or west of the field, I couldn't care less, don't hit the towers, watch out for the banner tow. But then they want to do this right on the finals, or right off the departure ends. (apparently commercial property near airports is a VERY popular subject). Now, we can't adjust the glideslope up/down to miss your mission, there's this little thing about stabilized approaches and such, and departure come off climbing to 4000'.

So my question is; What is the problem doing the whole mission at 4500' and just doing some darkroom or computer magic to enlarge the section you want? Just don't understand the problems I suppose.

Personally, I think you guys are all nuts. Group together, buy a Twin Commander, Photograph the whole **CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED****CENSORED** town four times a year from 10,000', spend the rest of the year in the darkroom drinking some beer and stichin' some negatives together, charge the client like you flew two hours. What's the problem???

Don, I can't speak about real estate photography, other than to point out that lens resolution and film grain puts a limit on how much you can enlarge from a negative, so it is generally better to start with your subject occupying the entire frame of a picture than to enlarge a small portion of a photo.

I can however comment on mapping photography. Mapping photography is not enlarged, in part because enlarging destroys the precise, calibrated geometry of the photograph. The mapping is done from contact prints made directly from the negatives. The negatives must be the correct scale for the scale of mapping being made, so the altitude becomes critical. THe USGS is one of the larger contractors of aerial photography in the US, and as I recall the requirments for thier photography contractors was within +600'/-400' of the specified height (20,000 ft AGL) ....and yes, they can tell how far you are off, and yes, they will reject the photography if it doesn't meet spec. This is why your friends over at Center occasionally encounter some guy requesting odd altitudes in the flight levels

 

[Jmajoris]

Hi mcochran,

One of the things that you should address is aircraft/liability insurance. If you are a renter, there is not a policy that covers this. If you are an owner, there is. Checking with your broker is a good idea...

Alttiudes are based on the area that you wish to cover. Smaller sites can be shot at 1000'agl, and larger sites will need to be shot higher. A 45 degree angle on an oblique is most pleasing to the eye, so you can plan your altitude based on that.

Operationally, you should set minimums for yourself and stick to them. ie no flying below 1000'AGL, no slower than 80 knots, etc.

For Vector4fun, the issue with doing the whole job at 4500' is quality. Shooting through 4500'+ of atmosphere with a longer lens makes a huge difference in the quality of the image. Remember that on a 45 degree angle that distance is much further. I wish it were that easy.....

I've been involved with various types of photography for about the past 10 years, and I would like to try my hand at some aerial photography. What are the rules of thumb when it comes to altitudes, airspeeds, best times of day, etc?

I would guess a reasonably slow airspeed would be best, but what altitudes are ideal? I've got a 20mm, a 75-135mm, and a 200mm lens with a 2X extender. I would also assume that early morning and late evening would be the best times to shoot so as to make use of the soft, even light (i.e. no harsh shadows) present at those times of day.

One legal question - can a commercial certificated pilot (i.e. me) take off, shoot some pictures, land, and then sell those pictures for a profit w/out breaking any FAR's? I've done a search and haven't found anything conclusive on the subject. I figured I might want to make use of my AOPA dues and bounce the question off them too.

Thanks in advance.

 

[mcochran]

I appreciate everyone's responses.

Can anyone help me with pricing? The C177RG I'd be renting would cost ~$80/hr, and then I've also got to consider the camera equipment and my time.

Do these aerial photography places charge a flat fee for the actual taking of the pictures and the prints, or do they charge you for the flight and then charge you again for the prints?

 

[uwochris]

We charge for flight time, pilot time, and for the prints.

The flight time (and your time!) must definetly be considered. For instance, last week I took some photos of a company that was literally less than 1 nm from the runway which I took off from. I have done other flights which are over 1 hour away for me. It wouldn't make sense to charge just for the picture, as the cost to operate the aircraft depends on your air-time.

If a customer from a far-away place requests you to take a picture for him, then try to rent a plane from a school that is closest to the photo-area.