There are many valuable lessons that one learns over the years; don't tug on Superman's cape, don't spit into the wind, don't pull the mask off that old Lone Ranger and you don't ever want to try and discourage anyone from doing something they are truly passionate about.
So what does the last lesson on the list have to do with aerial filming? As mentioned previously here, few things are more unforgiving of human error that flying. Human factors studies commissioned by the FAA estimate that up to 80% of full sized aircraft accidents can be traced back to human error. It is safe to say that for operating a complex RC aircraft, this estimate would be even higher. To say that the learning curve to become a safe, efficient and effective RC aerial cinematographer is steep is truly an understatement. Provided the person (or team) already has the required mental discipline to meet the challenge (many will not), humans learn best by doing and making mistakes, and in this area, mistakes are almost always very costly. Experience is something you don't realize you need until you need it. So what is the point here? If a person has a relentless, burning desire to become an RC aerial cinematographer, and has the raw core skills to do so, nothing anyone does or says will deter them.
Recent developments in multicopter flight control technology makes it easier to control an aerial filming platform compared to manually flying a more traditional single rotor rig. Many production companies think that in order to stay competitive, they need to add this skill set to their list of offerings. But there are many, many things to weigh in order to determine if this course makes sense from a business perspective. Below is a list of just a few key considerations -
1. Core Competencies, Time Management and Continuity of Skills
If you are a production company, you are already adept at multi-tasking. So what is the big deal about adding just one more task? At issue here is the fact that this particular task is not only very time consuming to master (read years), it is also very time consuming to maintain. This is due to the complex nature of the equipment and process for using it, as well as the fact that the technology is evolving at a very, very rapid rate currently. The time commitment is much more than most would ever think, and if not performed often, the skills needed will quickly deteriorate, leading to greater risk of accidents. So the question that needs to be answered is, do I really have the time to commit to this effort, or does it make more sense to focus on what I am already good at and simply hire an expert to do my aerial filming?
2. Insurance
Due to the exponential increase of incidents, obtaining insurance to perform RC aerial cinematography is becoming more difficult every day. It is possible to obtain a policy, but, upon close examination of the fine print and exclusions, it will become evident that the policy has almost endless avenues to deny a claim, and insurance companies are very adept at denying claims. Many companies may be in a position to absorb the repair costs for equipment damaged in a crash, but most would not be able to cover the liability of a personal injury case. There are only a couple of options for insurance that will truly cover third party liability in a meaningful manner and they are very selective when it comes to taking on new customers. An extensive review of equipment, qualifications and procedures is required in order to qualify for these policies.
3. Pending Regulatory Landscape
Currently there are no specific federal aviation regulations for performing RC aerial cinematography. The agencies policy for this activity is currently being contested in court. This is going to change. While the exact regulatory timeframe is currently not well defined, the event is as certain as death and taxes. Why is this an important consideration? For one thing, the investment made into expensive equipment could result in significant stranded costs should the regulations not permit use of some designs. Should the regulatory agency follow the lead of other, more expedient countries in this area, items such as airworthiness, licensing, safe operating procedures, emergency procedures, maintenance procedures, management of change procedures, flight logs, risk assessments, collision avoidance systems and more may become requirements. Government oversight and red tape have always been synonymous.
So in summary, the purpose of this information is neither to encourage or discourage a production company from pursuing their own aerial cinematography capability, but rather to provide some hopefully insightful considerations before jumping into the deep end.
Sunday, April 6, 2014
Wednesday, February 12, 2014
Single or Multirotor Rigs for Professional Aerial Cinematography
With the exponential increase in sightings of multirotor aerial rigs, one might think that they are the cat's pajamas for low altitude aerial cinematography; and in some cases, they are the perfect tool for the job. But one might also be led to think that they are far superior in every aspect of close range aerial cinematography. But to assume this would be a serious error.
The primary reason for their sudden increase in popularity centers around the fact that, to a great extent, the on-board flight control system does most of the actual flying, with the pilot left to provide occasional control inputs to guide the rig along the desired flight path. Without this flight control, these aircraft are quite unstable. This assistance with control allows many lesser skilled pilots to quickly get into the aerial filming game.
Another difference is, compared to the traditional single rotor platforms we are all so familiar with, the need for advanced mechanical skills is displaced by the need for knowledge in advanced electronics.
On the supply side of the equation, vendors selling "ready-to-fly" or RTF rigs, are making a killing on would-be aerial cinematographers at the moment, and so, are perfectly happy to lead the uninitiated into thinking this is a buy/charge/fly/film proposition. It is impossible to appreciate the various skills needed to build, maintain and operate an aerial rig proficiently until, in many cases, it's too late. Many of our recent clients have reluctantly admitted to us that they had purchased these rigs and promptly proceeded to confirm Newton's first law of motion with them. All one needs to do is ask around camera rental houses to hear horror stories of Red Epics plowing into the ground attached to a variety of "heavy lift" octocopters. There is a very good, and hopefully obvious reason, why senior commercial airline pilots are excellent, highly skilled pilots, even without using advanced auto flight systems.
When we first started out, 10 years ago on our adventure to provide cinema quality aerial filming from RC platforms, we thought that the most important thing we needed to learn was how to not let the vibration and unwanted movements of the helicopter disturb the cameras images. Granted this was a major challenge but we also learned there was so much more we needed to know. Things like dealing with changing wind intensity and direction, crew safety, not running into things (situational awareness), staying focused on the task under time pressure and multiple distractions. All of these skills did not come quickly or easily. Please keep in mind that these observations are coming from one of the world's most experienced, world-class professional RC pilots. Even with over two decades of top level flying experience, there was still an enormous amount to learn to be fully qualified to fly on a movie set.
It is often said that true learning follows the 70-20-10 rule, whereas 70% is learned by doing, 20% by observing others with experience and the last 10% by more formal training. This certainly applies to becoming a proficient aerial filming pilot.
Because of the rapid proliferation of multicopters, there continues to be a corresponding amount of misinformation surrounding them related to single rotor platforms.
1. "Multirotors are more stable than single rotor helicopters." False. A single rotor helicopter is far more aerodynamically stable. Using a very sophisticated flight controller, the multirotor is slightly more stable than a properly tuned single rotor platform - sans autopilot. This same flight control technology is also available for single rotor helicopters, which, if used, yields a platform that is far more stable in high winds, taking advantage of its inherent stability combined with flight control.
2. "Multirotors are more efficient than single rotor platforms." False. Using the same flying weight and camera payload, and using the same battery voltage and capacity, the single rotor helicopter provides more total thrust and endurance. Because approximately 15% of the single rotor helicopter's power output is used for torque compensation (driving the tail rotor) some mistakenly think this throws the advantage to the multi. Even with this portion of total power not going to overall lift, the single rotor will still outlift the multirotor by 20%-30% due to the larger aerodynamic economies of scale.
3. "Multirotors are more reliable than single rotor platforms." False. Multirotors are often presented as having more redundancy than a single rotor, due to having 6 or 8 propellers. The issue here is that each of these propellers have individual motors and speed controllers, each being a potential failure point. For example, each octocopter has 8 times more solder joints to potentially melt due to high resistance overheating compared to a single rotor. Some argue that should an octocopter lose one motor, control can still be maintained. While this is true, the problem is, that to carry a Red Epic size camera, the power systems are usually very near their operational limits, making recovery after losing a motor far less likely. A large single rotor platform can very easily carry a Red Epic in the most demanding climates without significantly taxing the power system. All of its mechanical components have evolved over decades of outright abuse to be very reliable. Another added bonus flying the single rotor heli is the ability to glide down safely by autorotation in the event of a main power failure.
4. "Multirotors can do anything a single rotor platform can." False. Our latest single rotor platform called "BRUTUS" can easily lift a 30 lb. camera payload and fly it for 15 minutes. It also has a top speed of over 80 mph carrying a Red Epic (twice the speed of any multicopter). It can smoothly descend at a rate 5 times faster than a multirotor and can also provide usable footage in up to 25 mph winds safely. Multirotors are generally preferred when flying close to talent. We are now getting smooth footage from the Movi at 100mm's so the heli can be flown at a safe distance from talent and still pull of tight shots.
5. "A heavy lift multicopter costs the same as an equivalent single rotor platform." False. At current pricing, an 800 size single rotor heli is approximately half the cost (both with GPS flight control) of a heavy lift multicopter with the same camera stabilizer/auxiliary components.
6. "Multirotors provide smoother footage compared to single rotor platforms." True. Or at least this is true for most. Having said that, a highly skilled builder can balance a single rotor to be just as smooth but this level of skill is uncommon. The recent development of brushless gimbals like the Freefly MOVI MR also levels the playing field between both platforms ability to provide stable footage. We have recently discovered that we are able to run much higher stiffness settings on our MOVI flown on our single rotor rigs compared to the multicopter which is another very significant advantage. This is primarily due to the difference in vibration frequencies and mass distribution between the two arrangements. We have also discovered that in fast forward flight (> 25 mph) the single rotor helicopter provides much smoother footage, due to the greater vertical distance between the rotor disc and the camera mount along with the fact that most single rotor rigs have main blade axle damping which helps to absorb aerodynamic disturbances like wind gusts. On multirotor rigs the propellers are rigidly mounted to the motor shaft which permits such disturbances to be directly transmitted to the airframe. Sychonization issues between multiple motors often results in unwanted vibrations that occur intermittently during flight. Using a single motor rotorcraft alleviates this problem.
These comments should not be taken as being negative towards multirotors. We have and use both types of copters wherever they fit best. In rough terrain, it is awesome to be able to hand-launch and retrieve a multirotor for example. There is an increasing number of clients who are specifically requesting multirotors under the impression that they are always the better choice and single rotor platforms are less capable "old technology" which is incorrect. In the hands of a top-notch, world-class pilot, both platforms can be very safe and can provide breathtaking, dynamic camera movements.
The primary reason for their sudden increase in popularity centers around the fact that, to a great extent, the on-board flight control system does most of the actual flying, with the pilot left to provide occasional control inputs to guide the rig along the desired flight path. Without this flight control, these aircraft are quite unstable. This assistance with control allows many lesser skilled pilots to quickly get into the aerial filming game.
Another difference is, compared to the traditional single rotor platforms we are all so familiar with, the need for advanced mechanical skills is displaced by the need for knowledge in advanced electronics.
On the supply side of the equation, vendors selling "ready-to-fly" or RTF rigs, are making a killing on would-be aerial cinematographers at the moment, and so, are perfectly happy to lead the uninitiated into thinking this is a buy/charge/fly/film proposition. It is impossible to appreciate the various skills needed to build, maintain and operate an aerial rig proficiently until, in many cases, it's too late. Many of our recent clients have reluctantly admitted to us that they had purchased these rigs and promptly proceeded to confirm Newton's first law of motion with them. All one needs to do is ask around camera rental houses to hear horror stories of Red Epics plowing into the ground attached to a variety of "heavy lift" octocopters. There is a very good, and hopefully obvious reason, why senior commercial airline pilots are excellent, highly skilled pilots, even without using advanced auto flight systems.
When we first started out, 10 years ago on our adventure to provide cinema quality aerial filming from RC platforms, we thought that the most important thing we needed to learn was how to not let the vibration and unwanted movements of the helicopter disturb the cameras images. Granted this was a major challenge but we also learned there was so much more we needed to know. Things like dealing with changing wind intensity and direction, crew safety, not running into things (situational awareness), staying focused on the task under time pressure and multiple distractions. All of these skills did not come quickly or easily. Please keep in mind that these observations are coming from one of the world's most experienced, world-class professional RC pilots. Even with over two decades of top level flying experience, there was still an enormous amount to learn to be fully qualified to fly on a movie set.
It is often said that true learning follows the 70-20-10 rule, whereas 70% is learned by doing, 20% by observing others with experience and the last 10% by more formal training. This certainly applies to becoming a proficient aerial filming pilot.
Because of the rapid proliferation of multicopters, there continues to be a corresponding amount of misinformation surrounding them related to single rotor platforms.
1. "Multirotors are more stable than single rotor helicopters." False. A single rotor helicopter is far more aerodynamically stable. Using a very sophisticated flight controller, the multirotor is slightly more stable than a properly tuned single rotor platform - sans autopilot. This same flight control technology is also available for single rotor helicopters, which, if used, yields a platform that is far more stable in high winds, taking advantage of its inherent stability combined with flight control.
2. "Multirotors are more efficient than single rotor platforms." False. Using the same flying weight and camera payload, and using the same battery voltage and capacity, the single rotor helicopter provides more total thrust and endurance. Because approximately 15% of the single rotor helicopter's power output is used for torque compensation (driving the tail rotor) some mistakenly think this throws the advantage to the multi. Even with this portion of total power not going to overall lift, the single rotor will still outlift the multirotor by 20%-30% due to the larger aerodynamic economies of scale.
3. "Multirotors are more reliable than single rotor platforms." False. Multirotors are often presented as having more redundancy than a single rotor, due to having 6 or 8 propellers. The issue here is that each of these propellers have individual motors and speed controllers, each being a potential failure point. For example, each octocopter has 8 times more solder joints to potentially melt due to high resistance overheating compared to a single rotor. Some argue that should an octocopter lose one motor, control can still be maintained. While this is true, the problem is, that to carry a Red Epic size camera, the power systems are usually very near their operational limits, making recovery after losing a motor far less likely. A large single rotor platform can very easily carry a Red Epic in the most demanding climates without significantly taxing the power system. All of its mechanical components have evolved over decades of outright abuse to be very reliable. Another added bonus flying the single rotor heli is the ability to glide down safely by autorotation in the event of a main power failure.
4. "Multirotors can do anything a single rotor platform can." False. Our latest single rotor platform called "BRUTUS" can easily lift a 30 lb. camera payload and fly it for 15 minutes. It also has a top speed of over 80 mph carrying a Red Epic (twice the speed of any multicopter). It can smoothly descend at a rate 5 times faster than a multirotor and can also provide usable footage in up to 25 mph winds safely. Multirotors are generally preferred when flying close to talent. We are now getting smooth footage from the Movi at 100mm's so the heli can be flown at a safe distance from talent and still pull of tight shots.
5. "A heavy lift multicopter costs the same as an equivalent single rotor platform." False. At current pricing, an 800 size single rotor heli is approximately half the cost (both with GPS flight control) of a heavy lift multicopter with the same camera stabilizer/auxiliary components.
6. "Multirotors provide smoother footage compared to single rotor platforms." True. Or at least this is true for most. Having said that, a highly skilled builder can balance a single rotor to be just as smooth but this level of skill is uncommon. The recent development of brushless gimbals like the Freefly MOVI MR also levels the playing field between both platforms ability to provide stable footage. We have recently discovered that we are able to run much higher stiffness settings on our MOVI flown on our single rotor rigs compared to the multicopter which is another very significant advantage. This is primarily due to the difference in vibration frequencies and mass distribution between the two arrangements. We have also discovered that in fast forward flight (> 25 mph) the single rotor helicopter provides much smoother footage, due to the greater vertical distance between the rotor disc and the camera mount along with the fact that most single rotor rigs have main blade axle damping which helps to absorb aerodynamic disturbances like wind gusts. On multirotor rigs the propellers are rigidly mounted to the motor shaft which permits such disturbances to be directly transmitted to the airframe. Sychonization issues between multiple motors often results in unwanted vibrations that occur intermittently during flight. Using a single motor rotorcraft alleviates this problem.
These comments should not be taken as being negative towards multirotors. We have and use both types of copters wherever they fit best. In rough terrain, it is awesome to be able to hand-launch and retrieve a multirotor for example. There is an increasing number of clients who are specifically requesting multirotors under the impression that they are always the better choice and single rotor platforms are less capable "old technology" which is incorrect. In the hands of a top-notch, world-class pilot, both platforms can be very safe and can provide breathtaking, dynamic camera movements.
Wednesday, December 25, 2013
Aerial Cinematography Demo Reel 2013
Below is the last aerial demo reel by Perfect Perspectives using servo driven camera stabilizaton. Recent advances in brushless gimbals provide a level of speed and accuracy that cannot be achieved using servos.
Perfect Perspectives has recently incorporated the amazing Freefly MOVI camera stabilizer to a true super heavy lift airframe with astounding results. This rig, known as "BRUTUS", offers performance capabilities few others can match, such as 15 minute flight times with 30 lb. payloads, useable footage in up to 25 mph winds with no post stabilization, 80+ mph top forward speed and full HD wireless monitoring with minimal latency. Why are these impressive specs important? Because when the density altitude conditions are far less than ideal, such as in very hot, humid or high altitude areas, this rig can still deliver dynamic, high performance shots without making excuses.
Perhaps most important is that this platform was designed from the beginning with the goal to be both reliable and inexpensive to operate relative to other designs capable of carrying ultra high definition digital cinema cameras. As a result, this rig can be provided at a day rate that is significantly less than the competition.
This one-of-a-kind rig can run much higher MOVI stiffness settings than an octocopter, allowing for higher speed, dynamic filming for vehicle tracking and action sports shots.
The MOVI stabilizer can quickly and easily be coverted from aerial to handheld use, providing for maximum versatility and on-set production value.
Perfect Perspectives has recently incorporated the amazing Freefly MOVI camera stabilizer to a true super heavy lift airframe with astounding results. This rig, known as "BRUTUS", offers performance capabilities few others can match, such as 15 minute flight times with 30 lb. payloads, useable footage in up to 25 mph winds with no post stabilization, 80+ mph top forward speed and full HD wireless monitoring with minimal latency. Why are these impressive specs important? Because when the density altitude conditions are far less than ideal, such as in very hot, humid or high altitude areas, this rig can still deliver dynamic, high performance shots without making excuses.
Perhaps most important is that this platform was designed from the beginning with the goal to be both reliable and inexpensive to operate relative to other designs capable of carrying ultra high definition digital cinema cameras. As a result, this rig can be provided at a day rate that is significantly less than the competition.
This one-of-a-kind rig can run much higher MOVI stiffness settings than an octocopter, allowing for higher speed, dynamic filming for vehicle tracking and action sports shots.
The MOVI stabilizer can quickly and easily be coverted from aerial to handheld use, providing for maximum versatility and on-set production value.
Friday, March 8, 2013
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.
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.
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.
Thursday, February 28, 2013
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.
Saturday, December 1, 2012
Red Epic and Scarlet Aerial Video
Above is Red Scarlet aerial footage of establishing shots showing various location changes for the feature film Scorned (February 4, 2014 release). Incorporation of these types of shots gives a film a sense of quality that is typically associated with bigger budget films, providing the audience with a higher level cinematic experience.
One of many significant advantages to flying the Red Epic camera is the option to use HDRx shooting. This allows the helicopter to fly through a wider range of exposures in one continuous flowing shot, opening up endless creative possibilities.
The rig used to capture this footage, unlike electric multicopters, can carry heavy cine primes for up to 30 minutes and is much more stable in windy conditions. It also has 10 years of proven reliability under its belt. Designs are available that mount the camera on either the front or below the airframe for optimum versatility.
Perfect Perspectives is very pleased to announce the addition of the Freefly MOVI camera stabilizer to the fleet. The days of post stabilized aerial footage have officially come to an end!
For more info, please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Tuesday, October 30, 2012
Flying The Red Epic - Frequently Asked Questions
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
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
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
Sunday, August 7, 2011
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".
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
Sunday, February 13, 2011
Environmental Considerations for Drone Cinematography
Close range aerials can be obtained in a wide variety of wind, weather and lighting conditions with the quality of the final footage being directly proportional to the severity of the conditions present. Obviously the best results will most often be achieved in near perfect conditions. The problem here is that we must work around mother natures schedule and not the reverse. Whether or not acceptable results can be obtained when the conditions are less than ideal is primarily dictated by the type and quality of platform employed, camera gimbal stabilization and the flying skills of the operator.
Wind
At present, most outdoor Helicam demo reel footage of acceptable quality will almost always have been shot with little or no wind present. For a single rotor platform, when significant winds are present, the best footage is usually obtained flying head on into the wind verses perpendicular to it for example. The winds direction is always an important consideration when planning each shot, for not only shot quality, but also approach planning in case an autorotation is required in the event of an emergency. Autorotation is the unique ability of a single rotor helicopter to maneuver and land without power. To consistently acquire usable footage in winds above 10 mph at this point in time, a large single rotor aircraft weighing at least 30 lbs. fully fitted with camera and other needed accouterments is required. In addition to needing this larger mass for overall stability, a well-tuned, gyro-stabilized camera gimbal is also required. The associated cost, complexity and skill required to fly and maintain these larger aircraft quickly narrows down the number of potential sources however.
Precipitation
If properly designed and installed components are used, it is not an issue to perform flight operations in light mist, rain and snow. Since the camera/platform is usually required at some point to engage in forward flight, precipitation typically becomes more of an issue of keeping moisture off the camera lens than creating an operational problem for the aircraft and/or operator.
Lighting
The quality of lighting (brightness) and overall visibility (lack of fog/haze) present has a direct bearing on the range or distance the helicopter can safely be flown from the pilot via "line of sight" during daylight operations. The position of the sun relative to the pilots viewpoint must also always be considered when laying out each shot. The aircraft must never be flown in a path that requires the pilot to look directly into the sun if possible. Shadows are another important consideration when shots are obtained from an aerial view. Things always look a bit different from above and shadows can quickly creep in a ruin an otherwise good take. In many cases there is ample time in a given day to film a large number of shots but the optimum window of opportunity for best lighting for each individual location is often very brief. Because of this, proper shot scheduling/planning for the lighting conditions is critical.
Flight operations during dusk, dawn and dark conditions are also possible using high intensity LED lighting systems on the aircraft. The range of operations using such lighting systems is very similar to that of daylight operations. The flight path must be carefully scoped out during the day in order to prevent collision with objects extending upward such as power lines and structures. Just as the suns position must be accounted for during daylight operations, the position of bright lights must also be taken into consideration during nighttime operations.
Dust and Dirt
A helicopter is a precision flying machine and so dust and dirt are its enemy. There are several techniques that are available to mitigate this type of issue however when the location requires operation in sandy, dirty or dusty environments. In such conditions, the rotor downwash from the helicopters blades will kick up large amounts of particulate, which, if not abated, which will find its way to the cameras lens, not to mention many of the close tolerance mechanical parts of the machine.
To summarize, it is possible to obtain close range aerial footage that will mesh with the look and feel of the particular scene in question, provided certain considerations and plans are made to account for the various environmental conditions at hand at the time of shooting.
For more info please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Wind
At present, most outdoor Helicam demo reel footage of acceptable quality will almost always have been shot with little or no wind present. For a single rotor platform, when significant winds are present, the best footage is usually obtained flying head on into the wind verses perpendicular to it for example. The winds direction is always an important consideration when planning each shot, for not only shot quality, but also approach planning in case an autorotation is required in the event of an emergency. Autorotation is the unique ability of a single rotor helicopter to maneuver and land without power. To consistently acquire usable footage in winds above 10 mph at this point in time, a large single rotor aircraft weighing at least 30 lbs. fully fitted with camera and other needed accouterments is required. In addition to needing this larger mass for overall stability, a well-tuned, gyro-stabilized camera gimbal is also required. The associated cost, complexity and skill required to fly and maintain these larger aircraft quickly narrows down the number of potential sources however.
Precipitation
If properly designed and installed components are used, it is not an issue to perform flight operations in light mist, rain and snow. Since the camera/platform is usually required at some point to engage in forward flight, precipitation typically becomes more of an issue of keeping moisture off the camera lens than creating an operational problem for the aircraft and/or operator.
Lighting
The quality of lighting (brightness) and overall visibility (lack of fog/haze) present has a direct bearing on the range or distance the helicopter can safely be flown from the pilot via "line of sight" during daylight operations. The position of the sun relative to the pilots viewpoint must also always be considered when laying out each shot. The aircraft must never be flown in a path that requires the pilot to look directly into the sun if possible. Shadows are another important consideration when shots are obtained from an aerial view. Things always look a bit different from above and shadows can quickly creep in a ruin an otherwise good take. In many cases there is ample time in a given day to film a large number of shots but the optimum window of opportunity for best lighting for each individual location is often very brief. Because of this, proper shot scheduling/planning for the lighting conditions is critical.
Flight operations during dusk, dawn and dark conditions are also possible using high intensity LED lighting systems on the aircraft. The range of operations using such lighting systems is very similar to that of daylight operations. The flight path must be carefully scoped out during the day in order to prevent collision with objects extending upward such as power lines and structures. Just as the suns position must be accounted for during daylight operations, the position of bright lights must also be taken into consideration during nighttime operations.
Dust and Dirt
A helicopter is a precision flying machine and so dust and dirt are its enemy. There are several techniques that are available to mitigate this type of issue however when the location requires operation in sandy, dirty or dusty environments. In such conditions, the rotor downwash from the helicopters blades will kick up large amounts of particulate, which, if not abated, which will find its way to the cameras lens, not to mention many of the close tolerance mechanical parts of the machine.
To summarize, it is possible to obtain close range aerial footage that will mesh with the look and feel of the particular scene in question, provided certain considerations and plans are made to account for the various environmental conditions at hand at the time of shooting.
For more info please visit http://www.perfectperspectivesaerial.com
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)