Professional Drone Aerial Cinematography Services

<h3><span style="color: #b59757;">What Options Are Available For Drone Aerial Cinematography In Cincinnati?</span></h3>

Perfect Perspectives is Cincinnati’s oldest, most respected Professional Drone Aerial Cinematography Services Company. A quick Google search for drone aerial cinema companies in the Queen City will show many results but after visiting these other websites it becomes quickly apparent they have no film or TV experience. We officially opened for business supplying high quality aerial filming in 2005. Our Lead Pilot, Wendell Adkins flew in his first motion picture in the Cincinnati area way back in 1997 (The Mighty). Lead camera operator Leisa Adkins has 14 years of filming experience. Because of this Hollywood grade background, we are frequently recommended by other filmmakers and camera rental departments all across the Midwest.

[caption id="attachment_1628" align="alignnone" width="300"]<img src="https://perfectperspectivesaerial.com/wp-content/uploads/Reprisal-Movie-2018-300x214.jpg" alt="Reprisal (2018) Drone Aerial Filming by Perfect Perspectives" width="300" height="214" class="size-medium wp-image-1628" /> Reprisal (2018) Drone Aerial Filming[/caption]

<h3><span style="color: #b59757;">What Gear Do You Offer For Drone Aerial Cinematography In Cincinnati?</span></h3>

Perfect Perspectives offers a fleet of 12 cutting edge drone designs for professional drone aerial cinematography services. There are a few reasons for maintaining so many different drones. First, it is our policy to NEVER show up for a filming session without a fully redundant back-up system. In the demanding drone aerial cinematography business, technical issues that delay production are not acceptable. The second reason is not all productions have the same requirements for image resolution and shot design. At the upper end of image quality we fly our own RED Dragon cinema camera or the ARRI Mini on one of our several heavy lift rigs. These can be fitted with cinema glass, mattbox, and FIZ units. Many other productions are better suited for our Inspire 2 rigs with either X7 or X5S cameras with RAW or ProRes recording. The Inspire 2 is often the choice when maneuverability, flight time and range are needed.

[caption id="attachment_1331" align="alignnone" width="300"]<img src="https://perfectperspectivesaerial.com/wp-content/uploads/IMG_20150816_213220-300x300.jpg" alt="Columbus Aerial Video Jason Day Documentary" width="300" height="300" class="size-medium wp-image-1331" /> Columbus Aerial Video Jason Day Documentary[/caption]

<h3><span style="color: #b59757;">What is the difference in cost between a drone flying RED or ARRI Mini for aerial cinematography versus the Inspire 2 X7 for example?</span></h3>

We offer half and full-day rates for aerial filming. In general the rates for the RED/ARRI heavy lift rigs are roughly twice that of the Inspire 2 X7.

[caption id="attachment_945" align="alignnone" width="300"]<img src="https://perfectperspectivesaerial.com/wp-content/uploads/Arri-Mini-300x300.jpg" alt="Arri Alexa Mini Movi M15 Freefly Systems Alta" width="300" height="300" class="size-medium wp-image-945" /> Arri Alexa Mini Movi M15 Freefly Systems Alta[/caption]

<h3><span style="color: #b59757;">What specific experience do you have in drone aerial cinematography?</span></h3>

We have become the go-to source for aerial filming in the Midwest. We are a preferred vendor of drone services for TV Networks such as ABC, CBS, NBC, ESPN, FOX, BBC, Japan Television, History Channel, Military Channel, Travel Channel and Discovery. We have also flown in over a dozen Hollywood Feature Films but don't just take our word for it. Look here - <a href="https://www.imdb.com/name/nm1986317/">Wendell Adkins - IMDB</a>

<h3><span style="color: #b59757;">What skills separate your company from the large number of others recently offering drone filming services?</span></h3>

Because our Lead Pilot is a former World Champion RC helicopter Pilot with nearly 40 years flying unmanned aircraft, our team is able to routinely pull off technically challenging shots safely. We have a perfect on-set safety record for the past 14 years that proves this point.

Drones Prove Versatile Tools For Aerial Cinematography/Video Production

Once drone technology entered the scene, it came with endless predictions and hype regarding it’s potential for virtually every conceivable purpose one could imagine. As you probably know, much of this drone hype has not panned out as “game changing” as advertised.

There is one area where drones have had an enormous impact however – Aerial Cinematography. This was foretold several decades ago when a little company from Belgium called Flying Cam started flying film cameras on custom built radio controlled helicopters. Getting low altitude shots from a manned helicopter is both expensive and often risky. Drones provided a welcome alternative. Slowly Flying Cam’s dynamic, close-range aerial shots began making their way into the biggest Hollywood films and due to their pioneering efforts, they enjoyed a bit of a monopoly for quite some time.

Today this has all changed. Later this summer there will be over 100,000 FAA certified commercial drone pilots in the U.S. Drones really are making a difference in many business sectors, but none more prevalent than in aerial cinematography and video production. There are several reasons why drones are showing up more and more on movie and even video production sets, even those with modest budgets.

Drones Are A Time Saver

If you have ever been on a movie or large video production set you know that much of the time spent is in set up. Camera kits need built, set’s need dressing, costume/make-up/props all need time to get sorted out. The beauty of drones in this setting is they can be unpacked and in the air in just minutes which is huge.

Drones Can Replace Other Tools

Drones are being used to replace everything from jibs, cranes, man-lifts, dollies and sliders. Avoiding the rental costs and set up time for a large Technocrane is a huge savings for a production. There is one caveat here however, an excellent drone/camera operator team is needed to safely replicate the super smooth shots they need to replace with these other production tools. This is particularly true when flying inside a large building where the drone can’t obtain a good GPS lock. This is where the experience of seasoned drone crew is well worth the extra day rate. Quite often as a time saver, we even use our drones with follow-focus for a quick and dirty hand-held shot in place of pulling out our MOVI stabilizer which adds value on set.

Recently Perfect Perspectives was hire to fly a small drone equipped with a custom built grappling hook underneath for a local casino TV commercial. Later day and night exterior drone shots where also captured. This is one of many examples of how the versatility of drones adds value to video productions.

If you pay attention you will notice that drone shots are making there way into all forms of multimedia these days and we predict this trend will only continue to grow as more and more creative uses are found in cinematography, video production and advertising.

To learn more please visit - 

http://perfectperspectivesaerial.com/services/aerial-cinematography/

The Naked Truth Behind The FAA "Part 107" License

With the recent arrival of the FAA's new Part 107 Small Unmanned Aircraft regulations late last month, it has become quite common to see drone operators proudly announcing that they are one of the first to pass the knowledge exam and will soon be open for business. (The applicant must pass a TSA background check before actually being granted the license). But what does this really mean to the average individual or business person?

To be honest it's very similar to someone saying they passed the knowledge test for a chauffeur's license, but not an actual driving test. Yes that's correct. There is NO practical exam associated with Part 107. When I obtained my Private Pilots License, I had to pass a knowledge test, an oral exam and a check ride with an FAA examiner. On top of all that, my instructor had to sign off my log book to indicate I was actually qualified and ready to even go on that check ride.

So what passing the 107 knowledge test really means is some test questions were memorized and a passing score on the 107 exam was obtained - and nothing more. This is in no way intended to downplay the importance of compliance with the new FAA commercial drone regulations. This step is vitally important to educate potential commercial drone operators on the safety aspects of flying drones in the national airspace. Many of these new drone pilots have been violating FAA safety policies they never knew existed until studying for this exam.

Even more important for the FAA is by passing the exam, commercial drone operators will no longer be able to plead ignorance when they are caught being careless or reckless. This also greatly simplifies FAA enforcement efforts when it comes to levying fines and revoking operators licenses, as they can now actually cite specific regulations violated.

So going back to our example of the aspiring limo driver who just passed the chauffeur's exam, what you would NOT know about this person is -

- How much actual driving experience they had?
- How many accidents they have had?
- Do they possess good decision making skills?
- Do they have drug or alcohol dependence?
- What kind of maintenance history does their limo have?
- Is their limo the best one for the job?
- Do they have any references or insurance?
- Have they ever driven for anyone important?

Obviously all of these same questions and many more should be asked before hiring anyone to perform drone services for you or your company. Check out the operators previous work and website. How many flight hours do they have? What kind of insurance do they carry? Only the most experienced operators are able to obtain policy limits of $5M to $10M or more. Do they have a Worker's Comp policy?

The most experienced professionals in the drone service industry started down the path to excellence many, many years ago - long before the potential of using drones commercially was even on the FAA's radar screens. These professionals obtained full size pilot's licenses and developed very comprehensive operating manuals for things like closed-set motion picture/television filming and inspections of industrial facilities.

As I have mentioned previously, a large portion of the work that our company gets is the direct result of another less experienced company not performing as expected and/or having an accident. Because drones have become easier and easier to operate, many people think that little actual flying skill is required to use them for work. It then comes as a rude awakening when they discover that flying indoors, around electrical equipment, power lines, inside boilers and near buildings can require the pilot to quickly and unexpectedly assume full manual control to avoid an accident. But this is the kind of information you need, before you actually need it - otherwise commonly known as "experience".

Key Considerations When Selecting A Drone Filming Company

Currently in the U.S. there are over three thousand FAA Section 333 approved drone service providers and many, many more rogue (unauthorized) operators. As word spreads throughout various industries that a legal (although cumbersome) option exists for limited commercial drone use, more and more companies are insisting on only using Section 333 authorized companies for their drone aerial filming needs. Here are a few reasons why:

In general, well established businesses don't want to risk getting into scrapes with the Federal Government or having to deal with the negative publicity that often results when things go south. The media continues to sensationalize anything negative associated with drone use, no matter how trivial it might actually be. Larger companies also don't want to risk having an entire production shut down unexpectedly by the FAA. Using only an FAA authorized provider is also preferred for liability reasons.

A down side of using a Section 333 provider is more planning is required, which can result in significant delays in a production schedule in some cases. A perfect example of this is the requirement to obtain a written letter of agreement from airport management when flying within controlled airspace. As a matter of fact, at this point in time it is just about impossible to get such approval flying near any of the 12 largest Class B airports in the country. This might sound like an infrequent issue until you look at an aviation sectional chart or Airmap.io (a great resource). Every moderately populated part of the country is densely littered with airports and heliports.

In our part of the country, over 50% of our business inquiries want to shoot within 5 miles of an airport. The main reason for this is many desirable filming locations (and subjects) are situated within population centers, and consequently, near airports. At times we have had airports provide written approval in less than 24 hours. In other instances, like in Frankfort Kentucky for example, a drone shoot had to be canceled because the approval was going to take over a month to obtain, once the airport's board and legal departments got involved.

There is also another compelling reason to only use an FAA authorized drone company. There is considerable time and expense associated in becoming authorized. Companies willing to put forth this effort are almost always committed professionals. Consider that less than 1% of the U.S. population are certificated pilots. To become a pilot requires intelligence, dedication, good decision making skills and hard work. These same exact qualities are what most people want in a company they are going to do business with.

With these thoughts in mind, here is a list of the top 10 things clients want from a professional drone aerial cinematography company, based on our 11 years in this business:

10. Drone pilots who can get technically difficult shots without putting the cast/crew at undue risk.

9. A company that brings at least 2 of everything and is also good at improvisation.

8. A company that's flexible and doesn't slip in extra charges for minor gear changes.

7. Drone Pilots who have the flying skills/gear to get epic, attention grabbing shots, above and beyond the same basic moves the everyone else is doing, even in less than perfect conditions.

6. A crew that are not only drone experts but camera/video production experts as well.

5. The ability to move from location to location and deploy in only a few minutes.

4. A company that is adept at dealing with the public and law enforcement concerns.

3. A company that is equipped with latest cutting edge drone/camera technology that is currently evolving very rapidly.

2. A company that can meet the current Section 333 exemption rules and still get viable results.

1. A company that doesn't oversell it's capabilities.

                  Freefly Systems Alta flying Red Dragon 6K UHD camera
                             

Why FAA's Commercial vs Recreational Drone Policies Don't Fly

At a recent press conference held January 7th, 2015 at the CES Show in Las Vegas, FAA UAS Integration Manager Jim Williams was asked why the FAA views commercial drone use differently compared to recreational use in regards to NAS safety.

2015 CES Drone Press Conference

The response from Mr. Williams was "It's fairly established in past history, that people who are being paid to do a job are more likely to take risks in order to accomplish that than they are if they are just doing it for pleasure and that's the reason the rules are different for those two activities". 

The looks on the faces in the crowd must have been filled with utter dismay as all of the comments immediately following this statement vehemently disagreed with the FAA's position (as we do also) and here is why:

First of all there is no valid basis or data to support such a comment and position specifically for drones. Only within the last few months has commercial drone use been permitted by the FAA through exemptions and subsequently under FAA/NTSB scrutiny in regards to safety reporting. Further, if all known careless and reckless flights performed by unauthorized commercial operators in recent years was tallied, and this figure was then compared to the number of careless/reckless recreational flights.......well, we all know how lop-sided that comparison would be. In 10 years of flying camera drones, not once has anyone ever asked us to take photos or video from 5000' AGL.

People only do things they need or want to through some form of motivation. 

The typical motivation for a careless recreational drone pilot is to simply see if they can do something. Natural curiosity if you will. At more extreme levels, this is sometimes also known as thrill-seeking. How high can this drone fly? What does my city look like from 5000' high? How far away can I fly this drone? How close to something can I fly my drone if FPV? What do fireworks look like from my drone? What do my city's Xmas lights look like from my drone at night? These are all good examples of motivations for a careless drone hobbyist. It is also human nature to want to share such daring exploits with others and the more YouTube views the better!

This is in very stark contrast to the motivations of a commercial drone pilot and company. Their prioritized motivations are more along the lines of -

Making a profit
Keeping costs down
Staying ahead of the competition
Building a client base
Maintaining a good reputation

While there can be business motivations to get attention-grabbing, high-risk shots for marketing purposes, in general putting very expensive equipment at high risk is usually a very poor business model. Frequently broken equipment is not good for a productive bottom line. A perfect example of a more preferred risk management approach is the frequent use of disclaimer's that reads "professional driver on closed course" in automobile advertising.

Looking at the list of motivations for a commercial drone operation, putting equipment, persons and company reputations at excessive risk is directly counter to every single item listed above in a very big way. Insurance is also a consideration. Aviation liability insurance is expensive and hard to keep for those prone to frequent claims. Careless hobbyists aren't covered by insurance when not following the safety code of a "community based organization" such as the AMA.

So in conclusion, since the FAA's commercial vs recreational regulatory policies are not based on data, logic, trends or observations, the question that begs to be asked is...what are they "really" based on, truth be known?

Aerial Video Platform Comparison

At this point in time, almost all cinema quality remotely piloted aircraft are based on VTOL (vertical take off/landing) aircraft designs. The two most common are single main rotor and multirotor configurations. Both types have inherent strengths and weaknesses.

Safety

It is believed by some that multirotor designs are the safer of the two options when it comes to flying around talent. The thinking being that the lesser of two evils is to be injured by 8 high rpm steak knives versus 2 medium rpm swords. This is a debate that has no real purpose. Both designs must be treated with the same respect when flown near people and property. To carry an equivalent weight camera package, both would have similar total weight and so would carry the same kinetic energy upon impact. If the risk advantage goes to the multirotor, due to less rotating mass, then the advantage goes to the single rotor platform in the event of a drive power failure due to this designs ability to still be guided during autorotation. Once again, such comparisons are pointless and safety must come from - the experience of the operator, the maintenance practices for the equipment, and well thought out risk mitigation planning for every shot.

The rig in the video below weighs approximately 20 lbs. and lost control with considerable force.

Vibration and Stability

A very common question is - which design provides smoother, steadier images? First let's discuss vibration. Further, lets define vibration as movement at fixed or semi periodic intervals (aka frequencies). In general it is a much simpler task to balance motors and fixed pitch propellers than drive shafts, gears and variable pitch rotors. This, more than any other reason, is why there are so few companies that can provide ultra smooth video from a single rotor machine. It is a very difficult undertaking that very few have all the technical/mechanical skills (and patience) to master. Can a single rotor design be built and balanced to the same relative vibration levels as a multirotor? Absolutely! The vibration frequency ranges are very different but in the end, if both are designed, built and balanced to exacting tolerances, the final product can be, for all intents and purposes, identical.

Regarding stability, there are two different, yet connected components that drive overall stability - one is the aircraft itself, with the second being the camera mount. If both operate smooth and stable, beautifully clean images result. If either is unstable, the other must absorb or dampen the unwanted motion. A perfect example is the current development of direct drive camera gimbals. These devices have both the speed and resolution to hide a multitude of sins being emanated from the aircraft airframe. Obviously, the smoother the airframe the better for camera and component life.

Within the next 12-24 months, it is reasonable to expect that a camera gimbal will be available that will provide near Cineflex quality for 10 -15 lb. cameras at a cost that is manageable for both top tier operators and insurance providers. This technology is already available for smaller cameras.

Flight Performance

In calm conditions, the flight performance is similar between the two arrangements. With electronic stability augmentation to assist the pilot, both have similar capabilities. In windy conditions however, the single rotor design wins hands down. This is due to the fact that a collective pitch rotor system is far more powerful and responsive to attitude changes when compared to multiple fixed pitch rotors. Think of this as driving a six speed performance sedan compared to a compact car with only third gear available. On top of this, the rotating mass of the larger rotors provides considerably more aerodynamic and gyroscopic stability than multirotors do. In general it is better to have an airframe/camera that never suffered from unwanted movement than one that did and had to have said movement removed through a correction in position.

Another significant difference is flying or descending at high speeds (above 55 mph) such as vehicle chase scenes. This is, once again, due to the advantages offered by a collective pitch rotor system used in single rotor designs over fixed pitch propellers on multicopters. A single rotor helicopter can descend at extremely high rates while still maintaining full control and camera stability.  This is made possible because the helicopter is being flown rapidly downward using collective pitch with power verses simply falling through its own downwash which usually results in unstable/unusable footage.

The next area, and this one is perhaps the most significant one, is pilot orientation. This factor alone is perhaps the biggest single reason that single rotor designs continue to dominate close range aerial filming in big budget feature films. It is not a major problem to clearly differentiate the nose from the tail at significant distances with a single rotor; Not so with symmetrical shaped airframes. To get around this limitation, multirotor designs rely on flight control systems with complex flight algorithms and GPS return to home features. The problem here is currently these systems are frequently subject to malfunction, and this is the last thing one would want when carrying $50K + of camera kit/glass. Flying first person view (FPV) and navigation lighting are workarounds for the orientation issue however, at present, all indications are that FPV mode of flight will be prohibited or very heavily regulated in the future and will only be permitted in unpopulated areas. First and foremost is to only use a pilot with years of the right kind of experience and one that can fly well without reliance on autopilots .

One area where the multicopter does have a very significant advantage is yaw axis stability. A single rotor helicopter must have a perfectly tuned anti-torque system that immediately and accurately corrects for even the slightest change in applied motor torque. It must also be fast and accurate enough to correct for wind gusts at every possible angle. Since multirotors control of the yaw axis is by varying motor torque through an opposing number of motors, this is a much less of an issue for this design. For a single rotor design, much of this limitation can be reduced by having the camera gimbal automatically correct for sudden movements in the yaw axis using stabilization devices.

A multirotor is also significantly less risky to launch and retrieve by hand than a single rotor helicopter. This can open up numerous opportunities to obtain shots in very tight spaces and difficult terrain.

As is often said "there is a perfect tool for every job" and this certainly applies to aerial cinematography. 

Cost

For most, making movies is a business endeavor, and so cost will always be a prime consideration. Currently the cost to build a rig capable of effectively carrying a Red Epic using a multiotor is roughly twice the cost of a single rotor design. You don't need to be a CPA to know that a lower initial investment, and the associated lower insurance costs, can result in a lower day rate being charged to the producer. This gap will likely narrow in the future, but for now, this is the current state.

Planning Ahead For a Successful Outcome

The list of things that can go wrong on an aerial shoot are almost endless. The secret is to properly prepare the things you can control - and have contingencies for those you cannot. 

First and foremost is to select a qualified, experienced, professional aerial service. Here are a few suggested qualifying inquiries:

1. Ask for relevant references for work of similar type using equivalent cameras and glass.

2. Clearly understand what type of insurance they provide. A world-class company will have no problem providing adequate third-party liability insurance. If the company asks you to split or cover the cost of their equipment, should an incident occur, this is a warning sign that you may not be working with competent professionals.

3. Ask to see raw, unstabilized footage of the types of shots you require, using the exact camera and glass you plan to shoot on.

4. Ask about their fleet. Remotely piloted camera rigs are complex machines made up of a myriad of electromechanical devices. If they only have one platform, this would be cause for concern. It is not practical to have every possible spare component on hand, much less the time needed to install and test. Even worse, should even an minor incident occur, your plans for aerials could quickly evaporate.

5. Don't fall for the "camera bait and switch". Many aerial video websites will indicate that they "can fly" the Red Epic for example. But when pressed to task they will quickly attempt to sway the prospective client to a DSLR. You don't have to settle for less. If all there shots are short and close, and you require a longer, continuous shot, this may be a warning sign that they do not have the confidence or experience to pull off long range shots with a cinema camera. See item 1 above and keep looking.

6. Ask for a copy of the pilots resume and professional flight experience. Statements like "3 years flying experience" is not much assurance. Sport flying at the local model club and flying on a movie set are worlds apart and very different skill sets. What really matters is actual flight hours shooting aerials. If the only platforms they have experience with are octocopters, then their experience is likely limited, as these platforms have only recently become viable tools for filming.

It is also important to gain an understanding of the equipment's limitations:

1. For the camera stabilization to function properly, the camera must be perfectly balanced on

every axis. If the aerial service has not flown the exact kit previously, time will be required in

advance to make all the necessary adjustments. Often even a filter change can upset the whole

apple cart. The most capable operators will have the capability to cover a wide array of cameras

and glass.

2. What is the flight time of the aerial rig? If electric powered, are enough batteries available to 

fly/recharge on a continuous basis?

3. If the shooting location is prone to wind, ask for raw footage examples shot in windy conditions. 

Also, the larger the rig, the better it's ability to hold position in the wind.

4. Ask about the range of motion for the camera gimbal. For example, almost all multicopters

suffer from very limited tilt range. With a wide lens, the frame tubes will come into camera frame,

even at a level tilt position. This can be a real problem for a variety of shots.

Last but not least, try to get a feel for the companies commitment to safety. Ask for a copy of

their safety manual. Ask them to outline their emergency procedures in the event something might go wrong. And do the entire industry a big favor and don't ask for shots requiring 

overflight of large crowds. The entire flight path should be considered an exclusion zone as

far as the general public is concerned.

Flying Helicams For The Big Screen

One does not need to be particularly prescient to see that the marriage of remotely piloted helicams and digital cinema cameras will continue to evolve and provide exciting, never before seen vantages for the motion picture industry. As interest continues to grow in this arena, the reliability, capability and associated technology will grow at an ever increasing pace. However, the primary reason for expanding use of this tech in film-making is far less complex - quite simply it is cost. It is an order of magnitude less expensive to capture a unique live action shot using a helicam for a day or two of location shooting than paying the wages of several VFX/CGI artists for several weeks. Another reason is the ability to capture tight, dynamic camera movements that give the audience the feel of floating like a bird or flying in a dream.

Close-range, live-action aerial imaging and VFX/CGI are not necessarily competing interests however. One of the best, most dynamic uses of helicams is to capture the background layer of the world from above that later is accentuated through the addition of composited elements added in post production (back plates). Having this real-life template as a starting point, with all it's perfect nuances of texture, shadow, color and motion is priceless in selling the reality of a fantasy or action sequence that incorporates VFX to an audience whose expectations increase daily.

One of the primary obstacles in using helicams in feature films has been the limitation in payload capacity of the unmanned aircraft. Until now, the use of this technology has been primarily limited to flying modified 35mm film cameras with 200 ft. loads. Only recently have digital cinema cameras achieved the weight and form factor to permit efficacy on a remotely piloted helicopter. The most exciting recent development in this area is the RED Epic camera. At around 10 lbs. with battery and a prime cinema lens, this 5K camera is a god-send for helicam imaging for the big screen. While DSLR cameras like the Canon 5D MK 2 are small and seeing increasing use for television programming, the image quality lags miles behind that of the 5K Epic at present for use on the silver screen.

Below is an example of a large industrial size helicam used to carry the RED Epic camera by Perfect Perspectives Aerial Imaging for motion picture filming. As mentioned previously, the primary benefit of this type of platform is it's power and duration. Both of these benefits have proven priceless when multiple takes are required (as they always are) and shot set up is complex. Time is money on a movie set and not having to stop flying for 30 minutes at a time is a very efficient and economical way to operate a helicam. The rig shown below was flown with a Cooke 25mm S4/i prime lens for filming of aerial shots used in Josh Radnor's new hit film "Liberal Arts".

For more info, please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com