The following are some common questions clients have asked regarding Red Epic and Red Scarlet Helicam flight operations:
Q "Do you supply the camera kit or do we?"
A "Whichever you prefer. We have our own with a wide array of glass and required accessories."
Q "Will our cost be reduced if we supply the camera?"
A "Yes. We will deduct the cost of the camera rental from the quoted day rate."
Q "What are our options for glass? Can we use cine primes?"
A "Absolutely! We designed our systems specifically to meet the needs and wants of the filmmaker. We have flown a wide assortment of cine glass from 18mm up to 100mm including Leica, Zeiss, Cooke and Red Pro primes."
Q "How long can you remain airborne while filming?"
A "We carry enough fuel on our gas powered rigs to fly for 50 minutes non-stop but always land with a half tank for safety reasons. Our electric rigs can fly for 12 minutes on one set of batteries."
Q "Can we direct in real time during flight?"
A "Actually we prefer that you do. It is not possible to fully visualize the perfect shot until you see the aerial perspective. Real time direction provides the best result, both creatively and for maximum efficiency."
Q "What equipment is provided for direction?"
A "We provide a ground viewing station with either wireless uncompressed HD or SD transmission."
Q "What is the maximum windspeed you can fly under?"
A "We have flown successfully in winds up to 25 mph using our amazing Freefly Movi MR."
Q "What do you use to power the camera?"
A "We use either Red bricks, Redvolts or Li-Po batteries."
Q "How many flights have you made with Red cameras? Have you ever crashed while filming?"
A "At the time of this writing we have logged over 150 successful flights with the Epic or Scarlet cameras. We have never had an incident during the last year and a half flying Red cameras or the previous six years prior flying other cameras."
Q "What are the specs on your camera gimbals?"
A "We have two different camera mount designs, both with 3 axis brushless gimbal stabilization. The first type mounts to the nose of the aircraft and has travel ranges of 70 degrees roll, 110 degrees tilt and 180 degrees pan. The second type mounts under the aircraft and has 70 degrees roll, 110 degrees tilt and 360 degrees pan"
Q "How did you get involved in this line of work?"
A "For 22 years I was a factory sponsored professional RC helicopter pilot flying at the highest international level (FAI-F3C). In 1993 I was a member of the World Championship winning U.S. Team. I retired from competition in 2002 to consult for General Dynamics and later, Northrop Grumman. In 2005, I formed Perfect Perspectives Aerial Imaging, LLC to support the film industry."
Q "What was the first feature film you flew an RC helicopter in?"
A "The Mighty in 1998 starring Sharon Stone, James Gandolfini and Jillian Anderson."
Q "Do you have an hourly rate?"
A "No, due to the amount of prep involved to mobilize our systems, we only offer a full day rate."
Q "Do you offer a discount for multiple days of shooting?"
A "Yes, depending on the number of additional days, the multi day rate can be as much as 50% less than the single day rate"
Q "Can you provide references for film and television work?"
A "Certainly"
Q "Can you fly at night?"
A "Yes, we have lighting systems that allow operations similar to those in daylight. The site must be thoroughly scouted for obstructions beforehand however."
Q "How long is your location set up time?"
A "The first pre-flight/safety check usually takes 15-20 minutes. With subsequent location changes, we can typically be in the air in less than 10 minutes."
Q "Do you have IMDB credits?"
A "Yes, search under Wendell Adkins - Aerial Photography."
Q "How many remotely piloted cinema aircraft do you have?"
A "Currently we have six. There are three different configurations, each optimized for a specific type of shooting and we have a back up for each of these."
Q "I see multicopters rigs cropping up everywhere. Why do you prefer gas/electric powered single rotor helicopters?"
A "Flying very expensive cinema cameras and glass is very difficult, even for someone highly skilled. One small mistake can spell disaster. The beauty of our rigs lies in their simple reliability. Everything about them is time and battle tested. We have logged thousands of flights over the last 10 years flying heavy payloads with these aircraft. Multicopters are new and unproven technology at this point in time. Even experts are crashing them when their complex flight control systems decide to freeze, lock up or malfunction. Most are operating within an inch of their lives carrying heavy cameras like the Epic and Scarlet for more than just a few minutes. We have no problem flying an Epic with a Cine prime lens for 15 minutes, all with 200% reserve payload capacity. Use of the Movi allows the use of longer lenses. This means we can still get tight shots while remaining a safe distance from talent and crew."
For more info, please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Showing posts with label helicopter aerial video. Show all posts
Showing posts with label helicopter aerial video. Show all posts
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Thursday, June 14, 2012
Flying The Red Epic - One Year After
My mother used to tell me when I was a child that time passes faster as you get older. This made no sense to me at the time but is all too crystal clear to me now! It certainly doesn't seem like a year has passed since we arrived on location at scenic Kenyon College to begin filming Josh Radnor's latest feature film "Liberal Arts". We were excited to meet Josh and the crew and just as excited to get our first go at putting the Epic in the air.
Having flown the more substantial Red One years earlier, there was little concern about the rig's ability to comfortably carry the 12 lb. load. The real question was - how well would this new camera play with the airframe? There are engineering tools such as modal analysis and calibrated shaker tables that can be used to determine if the natural vibration frequencies generated by the airframe might prove problematic for the camera, however in this instance, the time needed for such testing was a luxury not afforded. Any such concerns were quickly assuaged when word came back that the test footage looked "awesome".
The rest of the day was spent blissfully moving from location to location, flying over country roads, cornfields and the occasional church steeple. The combination of 5K camera and industrial helicam worked flawlessly and has ever since.
By the way, make it a point to catch this film when it is released this fall. It was the only film at Sundance (that I recall) receiving a standing ovation, and rightfully so.
That is how flying the Red Epic began and 12 months and dozens of projects later, we continue to refine our systems and techniques. We have since added a fully kitted Red Scarlet X to our stable of high rez pixel makers earning their keep.
Often we are asked if we are ever concerned flying such expensive cameras. The answer would most certainly be yes if not for the following: We have 10 years experience flying the airframes we currently use with 10 lb. payloads. As chief pilot, I have over 30 years experience flying remotely piloted helicopters, much of which was spent as a world class competition pilot and UAV pilot for two of the world's largest defense contractors. Over the last ten years and countless flights, we continue to have a perfect safety record. This is not due to incredible good fortune, but rather a testament to proven flying, testing and maintenance procedures.
Another question that we are often asked is - why do you use a single rotor helicopter versus a octocopter or mulicopter to carry these cameras? The short answer is, what we currently fly is a known quantity that has yielded proven results for 10 years. To further elaborate, our large helicams have longer flight duration, better visibility, higher top speed with payload and proven reliability.
During the last 10 years we have never been forced to land due to an engine failure for example. For this system to provide smooth footage, the engine must be perfectly tuned every single flight. The side benefit of this requirement is, the engine will make a different sound if not perfectly tuned. Think of this as a continuous audible warning device. As long as the sound being made is of perfect tune, all systems are go.
With an all electric\electronic power system, power system status must be downlinked to the ground. If the camera operator is continuously watching this readout, odds are they are not framing the perfect shot. We are currently evaluating using multicopters as another tool in our hanger.
Will we strap on a $50k digital cinema camera? Not right away. We clearly understand that to fully prove a flight systems reliability takes years and thousands of flights. Anyone who thinks otherwise had better have mighty deep pockets!
For more info, please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Having flown the more substantial Red One years earlier, there was little concern about the rig's ability to comfortably carry the 12 lb. load. The real question was - how well would this new camera play with the airframe? There are engineering tools such as modal analysis and calibrated shaker tables that can be used to determine if the natural vibration frequencies generated by the airframe might prove problematic for the camera, however in this instance, the time needed for such testing was a luxury not afforded. Any such concerns were quickly assuaged when word came back that the test footage looked "awesome".
The rest of the day was spent blissfully moving from location to location, flying over country roads, cornfields and the occasional church steeple. The combination of 5K camera and industrial helicam worked flawlessly and has ever since.
By the way, make it a point to catch this film when it is released this fall. It was the only film at Sundance (that I recall) receiving a standing ovation, and rightfully so.
That is how flying the Red Epic began and 12 months and dozens of projects later, we continue to refine our systems and techniques. We have since added a fully kitted Red Scarlet X to our stable of high rez pixel makers earning their keep.
Often we are asked if we are ever concerned flying such expensive cameras. The answer would most certainly be yes if not for the following: We have 10 years experience flying the airframes we currently use with 10 lb. payloads. As chief pilot, I have over 30 years experience flying remotely piloted helicopters, much of which was spent as a world class competition pilot and UAV pilot for two of the world's largest defense contractors. Over the last ten years and countless flights, we continue to have a perfect safety record. This is not due to incredible good fortune, but rather a testament to proven flying, testing and maintenance procedures.
Another question that we are often asked is - why do you use a single rotor helicopter versus a octocopter or mulicopter to carry these cameras? The short answer is, what we currently fly is a known quantity that has yielded proven results for 10 years. To further elaborate, our large helicams have longer flight duration, better visibility, higher top speed with payload and proven reliability.
During the last 10 years we have never been forced to land due to an engine failure for example. For this system to provide smooth footage, the engine must be perfectly tuned every single flight. The side benefit of this requirement is, the engine will make a different sound if not perfectly tuned. Think of this as a continuous audible warning device. As long as the sound being made is of perfect tune, all systems are go.
With an all electric\electronic power system, power system status must be downlinked to the ground. If the camera operator is continuously watching this readout, odds are they are not framing the perfect shot. We are currently evaluating using multicopters as another tool in our hanger.
Will we strap on a $50k digital cinema camera? Not right away. We clearly understand that to fully prove a flight systems reliability takes years and thousands of flights. Anyone who thinks otherwise had better have mighty deep pockets!
For more info, please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Saturday, January 15, 2011
Camera Vibration or "Don't shake it like a polaroid picture"
A very valid concern of filming by helicam is - how smooth can/will the resulting images be? While a blog is obviously not the best venue for an in-depth technical discussion, one cannot properly address this particular issue without at least briefly touching on some of the technical aspects. Vibration is commonly described as the periodic displacement (movement) of a body (camera in this case) from a position of rest. The vibration frequency (period) is defined as the number of cycles (times body moves from rest to each extreme and back to rest) and is often expressed in cycles per second (CPS). Amplitude is defined as the distance that is traveled during each vibration cycle. Velocity is another term used to measure and analyze vibration but we will leave that another discussion.
All helicopters, both large and small, generate a wide range or spectrum of vibration frequencies as a result of all the various rotating parts. To complicate matters further, unwanted camera movements can result that don't fit the standard definition of vibration as they occur randomly due to abrupt movements of the helicopter airframe and/or aerodynamic forces and wind buffeting for example. The latter type of movement can usually be reduced or virtually eliminated by a well designed mechanically or electronically stabilized camera mount or gimbal. At high forward speeds, the aerodynamics of both the camera, mount and helicam airframe all come into play also. Okay, enough of the technical stuff already!
The challenge for the helicam builder is to design and build an airframe where all the rotating components are as perfectly aligned and balanced as humanly possible. The problem here is that most of the commonly produced components do not have nearly the exacting tolerances required to achieve rotational nirvana. So to accomplish this lofty goal, a combination of precise measurements, material selection, structural design, damping and vigorous static and dynamic balancing is required. Even further, once achieved, the final design must be robust enough to hold the tight tolerances required and keep operating smoothly after numerous flying sessions. Considering this, it is easy to understand why a helicam builder/pilot might want to avoid extremely high risk situations and would likely possess a particular brand of hatred for heavy-handed baggage handlers!
Each helicopter airframe produces its own unique range of vibration frequencies, displacements and amplitudes. If you built two identical airframes, side by side, the resulting vibration signatures produced by each would be similar, yet not identical. Complicating matters further, not all camera types respond to vibrations the same. 35mm film cameras are far more forgiving in this regard than video cameras for example. Conversely, SD cameras are more forgiving to vibration than HD cameras. This is due to many factors such as sensor type, image stabilization along with camera size, weight and construction. Another example is CMOS sensors do not respond well to high frequency vibrations as CCD types and can often display the unsightly "jello" effect as a result. Multicopters are particularly prone to rolling shutter artifacts generated by the numerous high rpm electric motors and their inherent tendency to produce either non-synchronus or sub-synchronous vibration due to the interaction between the large number of nearby rotating motors and propellers . This does not mean that they are unsuitable, it merely means a higher level of tuning is required by the designer/builder to make them work. It should become quickly apparent that not all cameras would perform equally well on all types and sizes of helicopters. Our particular experience has shown that the smaller the helicopter, the more high frequency vibrations will be produced. This presents a very real challenge if a CMOS based camera is being used.
Gimbal stabilization can be accomplished by means of electronic gyros, mechanical gyros, inertial management units or by some combination. These can provide either active or passive stabilization, or some combination of both. If the camera movement is not to fast or severe, most unwanted, low amplitude camera movements can be removed in post using stabilization software. Some popular examples are Smoothcam in Final Cut Pro, Warp Stabilizer in Adobe Premiere Pro and Mercalli. For advance stabilization there are also motion trackers such as Syntheyes and the Foundry plug-in for After Effects. Use of post stabilization comes at the expense of some loss of resolution and image cropping but if used in small amounts it can be very effective. This is another huge advantage of using ultra high definition cameras like the Red Epic for aerial filming as there is so much resolution head room. Currently this type of stabilization does still have difficulty removing high frequency vibrations, especially using wide angle lenses. This problem can be somewhat corrected however by removing lens distortion in software.
The most exciting advancement in the area of camera stabilization is direct drive gimbals. Advances with this technology are currently moving at near light speed. Very soon you will be able to shoot close range aerials, full size aerials and ground level steady cam type shots, all with the same mount.
The bottom line is however, the less vibration the helicopter produces - and the camera sensor sees, the better! This is why Perfect Perspectives uses only the most advanced vibration monitoring/dynamic balancing equipment available to ensure smooth footage. This is not referring to the vibration app on the iphone or vibration logs off of flybarless controllers here, but rather industrial grade, precision FFT vibration spectrum analyzers, multichannel accelerometers and laser alignment instrumentation.
For more info please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
All helicopters, both large and small, generate a wide range or spectrum of vibration frequencies as a result of all the various rotating parts. To complicate matters further, unwanted camera movements can result that don't fit the standard definition of vibration as they occur randomly due to abrupt movements of the helicopter airframe and/or aerodynamic forces and wind buffeting for example. The latter type of movement can usually be reduced or virtually eliminated by a well designed mechanically or electronically stabilized camera mount or gimbal. At high forward speeds, the aerodynamics of both the camera, mount and helicam airframe all come into play also. Okay, enough of the technical stuff already!
The challenge for the helicam builder is to design and build an airframe where all the rotating components are as perfectly aligned and balanced as humanly possible. The problem here is that most of the commonly produced components do not have nearly the exacting tolerances required to achieve rotational nirvana. So to accomplish this lofty goal, a combination of precise measurements, material selection, structural design, damping and vigorous static and dynamic balancing is required. Even further, once achieved, the final design must be robust enough to hold the tight tolerances required and keep operating smoothly after numerous flying sessions. Considering this, it is easy to understand why a helicam builder/pilot might want to avoid extremely high risk situations and would likely possess a particular brand of hatred for heavy-handed baggage handlers!
Each helicopter airframe produces its own unique range of vibration frequencies, displacements and amplitudes. If you built two identical airframes, side by side, the resulting vibration signatures produced by each would be similar, yet not identical. Complicating matters further, not all camera types respond to vibrations the same. 35mm film cameras are far more forgiving in this regard than video cameras for example. Conversely, SD cameras are more forgiving to vibration than HD cameras. This is due to many factors such as sensor type, image stabilization along with camera size, weight and construction. Another example is CMOS sensors do not respond well to high frequency vibrations as CCD types and can often display the unsightly "jello" effect as a result. Multicopters are particularly prone to rolling shutter artifacts generated by the numerous high rpm electric motors and their inherent tendency to produce either non-synchronus or sub-synchronous vibration due to the interaction between the large number of nearby rotating motors and propellers . This does not mean that they are unsuitable, it merely means a higher level of tuning is required by the designer/builder to make them work. It should become quickly apparent that not all cameras would perform equally well on all types and sizes of helicopters. Our particular experience has shown that the smaller the helicopter, the more high frequency vibrations will be produced. This presents a very real challenge if a CMOS based camera is being used.
Gimbal stabilization can be accomplished by means of electronic gyros, mechanical gyros, inertial management units or by some combination. These can provide either active or passive stabilization, or some combination of both. If the camera movement is not to fast or severe, most unwanted, low amplitude camera movements can be removed in post using stabilization software. Some popular examples are Smoothcam in Final Cut Pro, Warp Stabilizer in Adobe Premiere Pro and Mercalli. For advance stabilization there are also motion trackers such as Syntheyes and the Foundry plug-in for After Effects. Use of post stabilization comes at the expense of some loss of resolution and image cropping but if used in small amounts it can be very effective. This is another huge advantage of using ultra high definition cameras like the Red Epic for aerial filming as there is so much resolution head room. Currently this type of stabilization does still have difficulty removing high frequency vibrations, especially using wide angle lenses. This problem can be somewhat corrected however by removing lens distortion in software.
The most exciting advancement in the area of camera stabilization is direct drive gimbals. Advances with this technology are currently moving at near light speed. Very soon you will be able to shoot close range aerials, full size aerials and ground level steady cam type shots, all with the same mount.
The bottom line is however, the less vibration the helicopter produces - and the camera sensor sees, the better! This is why Perfect Perspectives uses only the most advanced vibration monitoring/dynamic balancing equipment available to ensure smooth footage. This is not referring to the vibration app on the iphone or vibration logs off of flybarless controllers here, but rather industrial grade, precision FFT vibration spectrum analyzers, multichannel accelerometers and laser alignment instrumentation.
For more info please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Saturday, January 8, 2011
Creative Potential of Remotely Piloted Helicams
Great film-making is about those infrequent, elusive moments when technical aspects (cameras, lighting, sound, editing) merge with creative aspects (compelling storytelling, great acting, engaging settings) to synergistically create something that is universally respected and admired as art. While strapping a camera to an RC helicopter with the expectation of graceful, flying imagery is certainly a technical challenge, that is not the focus of this discussion. The specific topic here is - how can this technology be used to its fullest creative potential?
A very powerful and effective use of aerials is in the creation of a "sense of place" or, in other words, an establishing shot that clearly and dramatically indicates the opening setting or, as the story progresses, a change to another location/setting. Some good examples of this would include skimming just above a glimmering ocean or lake, steadily gaining altitude to slowly reveal a tropical island or isolated lake house or some other prominent feature. This is an extremely effective means of sending the viewers mind racing with anticipation about what might follow in this new environment. Once setting is established, closer range aerials are also very effective in capturing unique and dynamic views of the characters movement and interaction within this new setting. For example, a parallel shot of a jeep driving down a curvy, cliff side road viewed from the POV of a following vehicle that suddenly veers of the cliff at a curve but then magically flies beside the insert car, out and over the gorge below. Another example is a tight overhead following shot of a convertible that slowly climbs and trails behind to reveal its steady progression down a narrow tree lined parkway.
Jib, crane and dolly shots can all be thought of as the lowest altitude "aerial shots" and are very effective also, however, in very remote areas they are often not feasible. A skilled helicam pilot can mimic many of the same movements as these camera tools while at the same time having the added benefit of increasing the range of use significantly. Use of a helicam in these situations is simply a matter of transport, either by off-road vehicle, watercraft or backpacking on foot. Once on location, a small clearing is all that is required for take off/landing. The helicopter can usually be in the air to start shooting in less than 15 minutes, making it a very productive time and money saving tool for film-making.
Effective use of close range aerials allows the film-maker to fully immerse the viewer in the world being created. In the past the use of this technology was limited only to big budget feature films but smaller, lighter cameras and more reliable aircraft designs are changing much of that. For a few thousand dollars, smaller budget productions can now incorporate these stunning camera views, adding a new level of quality to the production and captivating the audience in the process.
For more info please visit http://perfectperspectivesaerial.com
A very powerful and effective use of aerials is in the creation of a "sense of place" or, in other words, an establishing shot that clearly and dramatically indicates the opening setting or, as the story progresses, a change to another location/setting. Some good examples of this would include skimming just above a glimmering ocean or lake, steadily gaining altitude to slowly reveal a tropical island or isolated lake house or some other prominent feature. This is an extremely effective means of sending the viewers mind racing with anticipation about what might follow in this new environment. Once setting is established, closer range aerials are also very effective in capturing unique and dynamic views of the characters movement and interaction within this new setting. For example, a parallel shot of a jeep driving down a curvy, cliff side road viewed from the POV of a following vehicle that suddenly veers of the cliff at a curve but then magically flies beside the insert car, out and over the gorge below. Another example is a tight overhead following shot of a convertible that slowly climbs and trails behind to reveal its steady progression down a narrow tree lined parkway.
Jib, crane and dolly shots can all be thought of as the lowest altitude "aerial shots" and are very effective also, however, in very remote areas they are often not feasible. A skilled helicam pilot can mimic many of the same movements as these camera tools while at the same time having the added benefit of increasing the range of use significantly. Use of a helicam in these situations is simply a matter of transport, either by off-road vehicle, watercraft or backpacking on foot. Once on location, a small clearing is all that is required for take off/landing. The helicopter can usually be in the air to start shooting in less than 15 minutes, making it a very productive time and money saving tool for film-making.
Effective use of close range aerials allows the film-maker to fully immerse the viewer in the world being created. In the past the use of this technology was limited only to big budget feature films but smaller, lighter cameras and more reliable aircraft designs are changing much of that. For a few thousand dollars, smaller budget productions can now incorporate these stunning camera views, adding a new level of quality to the production and captivating the audience in the process.
For more info please visit http://perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Friday, December 31, 2010
Film from full sized or remotely piloted helicopter?
It should be made clear that, at present, a remotely piloted Helicam is not a direct replacement for a full-sized helicopter with a camera mount. While there can be some overlap in the operational ranges for either, to try and use one entirely in the domain of the other is neither safe nor wise. For maximum benefit the user should apply each towards its own inherent strengths. If you need a long continuous shot over a tree covered landscape, filming from full size is the best option. If you need a shot flying under a bridge or chasing a car through an abandoned building - then this is the sweet spot for a Helicam.
If budget permits however, it can be quite spectacular to blend both technologies together, combining wide, high altitude panoramic views with tighter shots like those from a birds POV.
Regarding comparative costs, hiring a Helicam with an experienced, professional crew is usually 30% to 50% less than say renting a Jet Ranger with a Tyler mount for a days shooting. I should also qualify what I consider a "professional crew" in this equation. This would be a company that carries insurance, has more than one aircraft available, has numerous examples of smooth, steady, vibration free footage and has captured this footage in a wide variety of settings and weather conditions over a period of several years.
As mentioned previously, the typical range of a Helicam is about 1200 feet in the horizontal plane due to the need for the pilot to have continuous "line of sight" connection to the helicopter. This range can be increased dramatically however by using a variety of vehicles such as boats, ATV's, golf carts, cars, trucks, snowmobiles, etc. to fly from.
Perhaps the greatest advantage of remotely piloted camera platforms is their ability to obtain movements and angles that are uncommon and grab the viewers undivided attention. The most significant advancements being made with these systems is in the area of camera stabilization. Systems are now available that can hold a level horizon at +/- .5 degrees or less with small lightweight cameras. Similar systems for cinema quality cameras is not far behind.
For more info please visit: http://perfectperspectivesaerial.com
If budget permits however, it can be quite spectacular to blend both technologies together, combining wide, high altitude panoramic views with tighter shots like those from a birds POV.
Regarding comparative costs, hiring a Helicam with an experienced, professional crew is usually 30% to 50% less than say renting a Jet Ranger with a Tyler mount for a days shooting. I should also qualify what I consider a "professional crew" in this equation. This would be a company that carries insurance, has more than one aircraft available, has numerous examples of smooth, steady, vibration free footage and has captured this footage in a wide variety of settings and weather conditions over a period of several years.
As mentioned previously, the typical range of a Helicam is about 1200 feet in the horizontal plane due to the need for the pilot to have continuous "line of sight" connection to the helicopter. This range can be increased dramatically however by using a variety of vehicles such as boats, ATV's, golf carts, cars, trucks, snowmobiles, etc. to fly from.
Perhaps the greatest advantage of remotely piloted camera platforms is their ability to obtain movements and angles that are uncommon and grab the viewers undivided attention. The most significant advancements being made with these systems is in the area of camera stabilization. Systems are now available that can hold a level horizon at +/- .5 degrees or less with small lightweight cameras. Similar systems for cinema quality cameras is not far behind.
For more info please visit: http://perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Sunday, December 26, 2010
RC Aerial Cinematography Basics?
For aerial cinematography, think of the RC Helicam as a hybrid dolly and jib with an insane range of motion. Since the helicopter is not connected to the ground, it can move the camera freely to any point in 3 dimensional space, providing some often spectacular angles, dynamic movements and unique views. These aircraft are most often flown in what is commonly known as "line of sight" or LOS. For a larger, brightly colored helicopter, this range can be as much as 1200 feet in the horizontal plane and 400 feet vertically when operated by a well experienced pilot. Why is the vertical distance less than the horizontal you might ask? Well this is primarily due to the policies of the FAA in the United States. It is in everyone's best interest if these unmanned aircraft do not try to occupy the same airspace, at the same time, as full size manned aircraft.
From a creative perspective, the potential of such a device quickly becomes apparent. Taking only about 15 minutes to set up or tear down, you can quickly appreciate the versatilty of such a platform, particularly in remote filming locations. The next question is usually one of image quality. Capturing photographs from a helicam is not a overly complex task for a competent pilot, but capturing smooth, stable film or video is an entirely different matter and requires the skill set of a true ninja/guru/master in several different arenas. This quickly explains why there is truly only a handful of companies that can consistently and reliably provide such a service using cinema quality cameras like the Red Epic. For these elite few, it is possible to provide very high quality imagery that is worthy of the big screen. As technology advances, sophisticated electronics and software will make cinema quality aerials within the reach of the less skilled, and at a price that many can afford.
There are a variety of helicopter types and sizes used for HD aerial video and film-making. They can be powered by internal combustion engines, turbine engines and electric motors. Our personal experience has shown that turbine powered models, while smooth, are overly complex and not practical for daily use "in the trenches". Electric powered models are both smooth and quiet but have limited flight duration. Around 10 minutes flight time is typical for one set of lithium based batteries. Since aerial shots are typically short, this is usually not an issue and only a few moments are required to change batteries. Internal combustion powered models may be either methanol or gasoline powered. Once again, our personal experience has been that opposed twin cylinder engines are much smoother than single cylinder types. We have been able to obtain smooth, vibration free video from such platforms that rivals our electric powered models. A side benefit of these platforms is the ability to be continuously available for up to one hour. These platforms are also larger than current electric powered aircraft and so, are more stable, particularly in moderate winds. This is not just our opinion, it is the law. More specifically Newton's law. For HD video, the practical benefit of gas power is being able to do multiple takes, loitering in the sky if needed to reset the shot. Over the course of a day of filming this can be a huge time savings. For 35mm filming this is less important as the cameras can only carry film loads of up to 200 feet. Recent advances in direct drive gimbals we very likely bring renewed interest in gas powered rigs, as it will become much easier to get footage that requires no post stabilization from a rig with a small amount of vibration.
For more info please visit: http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
From a creative perspective, the potential of such a device quickly becomes apparent. Taking only about 15 minutes to set up or tear down, you can quickly appreciate the versatilty of such a platform, particularly in remote filming locations. The next question is usually one of image quality. Capturing photographs from a helicam is not a overly complex task for a competent pilot, but capturing smooth, stable film or video is an entirely different matter and requires the skill set of a true ninja/guru/master in several different arenas. This quickly explains why there is truly only a handful of companies that can consistently and reliably provide such a service using cinema quality cameras like the Red Epic. For these elite few, it is possible to provide very high quality imagery that is worthy of the big screen. As technology advances, sophisticated electronics and software will make cinema quality aerials within the reach of the less skilled, and at a price that many can afford.
There are a variety of helicopter types and sizes used for HD aerial video and film-making. They can be powered by internal combustion engines, turbine engines and electric motors. Our personal experience has shown that turbine powered models, while smooth, are overly complex and not practical for daily use "in the trenches". Electric powered models are both smooth and quiet but have limited flight duration. Around 10 minutes flight time is typical for one set of lithium based batteries. Since aerial shots are typically short, this is usually not an issue and only a few moments are required to change batteries. Internal combustion powered models may be either methanol or gasoline powered. Once again, our personal experience has been that opposed twin cylinder engines are much smoother than single cylinder types. We have been able to obtain smooth, vibration free video from such platforms that rivals our electric powered models. A side benefit of these platforms is the ability to be continuously available for up to one hour. These platforms are also larger than current electric powered aircraft and so, are more stable, particularly in moderate winds. This is not just our opinion, it is the law. More specifically Newton's law. For HD video, the practical benefit of gas power is being able to do multiple takes, loitering in the sky if needed to reset the shot. Over the course of a day of filming this can be a huge time savings. For 35mm filming this is less important as the cameras can only carry film loads of up to 200 feet. Recent advances in direct drive gimbals we very likely bring renewed interest in gas powered rigs, as it will become much easier to get footage that requires no post stabilization from a rig with a small amount of vibration.
For more info please visit: http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)