Flying, filming, and privacy.

[CraigCam]

Craig, I assume you weren't wearing the shirt you got... LOL



Anyone using a drone to spy on Kim Kardashian, would have the perfectly valid excuse that a wide angle camera
was required to get all of her in the frame.

That shirt was on actually but under my other jacket. It's my flying uniform. I love it. It gets lots of comments when I'm out in public. It must have sent a vibe down the hill during that sunset. Nearest neighbor is 1/4 mile away which is why I was surprised my host got an email about the drone to his VRBO site.

 

[ArnhemAnt]

I love it. It gets lots of comments when I'm out in public.

Any chance of sharing a pic of the shirt??
You have me guessing.

In regards to your initial post, I'm just glad I currently live in an area that is pretty well devoid of people. It's unfortunate in some ways that UAV's have become so popular. With the advancements in technology, any 'idiot' can go into a store (or order online) and be 'flying' in no time, without any real knowledge or background in the safety and regulations. Then you have the mis-informed general public that have absolutely no idea about UAV's and immediately assume the worst. The fact that they are referred to as 'drones' doesn't help our cause either.
These are the main reasons you have been put in the situation you have described.
Unfortunately, I feel things have advanced far too quickly for us to turn the tables.

 

[Airtography]

Here's the problem in California; Law section

The way the law is written if you fly pretty much anywhere that has private property within sight of your aircraft some neighboring yo-yo has the potential to generate a lot of grief for pretty much any reason if they saw your aircraft while in flight. The way the law is written there's probable cause for further action if the aircraft has any type of recording device on it. In fact, the law has a clause that pretty much states you could be found in violation of you recorded nothing at all. Law enforcement and government is of course exempt from this law. As things now stand, if you point a camera at pretty much anything that's not owned by your there could be a violation of California's paparazzi law or CA Civil Code 1708.8. Should someone be violated under this law it's highly probable it would be found in conflict with federal airspace regulations and controls but who needs to be paying attorney fees to establish precedent? Brendan Schulman doesn't do pro bono work for drone operators any more...

Best advice I have would be to notify the neighbors, especially those in the higher end side of the tracks, and obtain permission. A forward thinking individual would obtain a photographers release for property and persons in the process to back stop people that change their mind after you take off. If nothing else, and although it may not be legal, put your phone on voice memos and forget to turn it off during conversations. If you're shooting real estate stuff releases and notifications are virtually mandatory prior to every shoot. The people that own the property being shot own the rights to the display of their property so you want things very clear with them, along with approval of the neighbors. If some real estate agent does something wrong in the promotion and sale of the property and a real estate attorney gets dragged in for something you had nothing to do with later you'll have a written record of what you did and an owner's release to protect you from any bad sale after effects. You also want to retain copyrights for your work in order to use it for business advertising later. This stuff is plainly stated in photographers release forms, which you can obtain for free as Word templates via your favorite search engine.

Yea, it's all a pain in the a$$, but that's California in general over the past 15 years or so.

Quite interesting law there in California. So -- when are they going to press charges and stop Google Earth from taking pictures of your beautiful state?

 

[Texy]

Haters back off!

I can feel the tension out there sometimes. And there's the other side of the coin too. Last week I popped up out of the back yard to catch the sunset and a crowd of children formed outside on the street. They had no idea where the pilot was as they shouted in wonder at the drone hovering perfectly still for so long. Some of them left to get other kids to come look. The whole time I was right on the other side of the fence listening and smiling to myself as they made up fantastical stories about why a drone would be parked 100' above their neighborhood. Later I wondered what they told their parents and school friends and if their stories seemed credible.

 

[PatR]

Quite interesting law there in California. So -- when are they going to press charges and stop Google Earth from taking pictures of your beautiful state?

Great point, and one almost nobody considers. Our government at almost every level uses aerial imagery, performed from aircraft and satellite, to review our property to assess if illegal crops are being grown or determine if people have built new structures or performed building repairs without obtaining permits. The big pot grows that are continuously discovered are not found by people walking the ground, but through multi-spectral imaging using aircraft.

Law enforcement at federal and local levels use a device called Sting Ray to spoof our cell phones into connecting to what is essentially a fake cellular repeater to extract personal data from our phones. They can pull everything from a phone and the device is non selective. They connect to everything the device has in range. This is not only a blatant invasion of privacy but also a violation of our rights against illegal search and seizure.

Those with the ability can use such knowledge to have respectful conversations with people that are insecure about the use of drones. People are fearful of things they don't understand and the media, with a lot of help from our government, have generated a bad perception of our activities. Those of us good at it have a responsibility to relate the positives involved with our activities to all they can when we encounter poorly informed anti drone people. Those of us well prepared will often be able to turn a negative person into a positive one with effective communication. Avoid confrontational conversation and use facts and logic to sway them. Demonstrations of equipment are also effective to let our opponents see we can't obtain the kind if imagery they fear the most.

A lot of us do this commercially so we have to be good salespeople and develop the skills necessary to overcome objections. We also desperately need to form an organization that can represent us with the public.

 

[CraigCam]

Great point, and one almost nobody considers. Our government at almost every level uses aerial imagery, performed from aircraft and satellite, to review our property to assess if illegal crops are being grown or determine if people have built new structures or performed building repairs without obtaining permits. The big pot grows that are continuously discovered are not found by people walking the ground, but through multi-spectral imaging using aircraft.

Law enforcement at federal and local levels use a device called Sting Ray to spoof our cell phones into connecting to what is essentially a fake cellular repeater to extract personal data from our phones. They can pull everything from a phone and the device is non selective. They connect to everything the device has in range. This is not only a blatant invasion of privacy but also a violation of our rights against illegal search and seizure.

Those with the ability can use such knowledge to have respectful conversations with people that are insecure about the use if drones. People are fearful of things they don't understand and the media, with a lot of help from our government, have generated a bad perception of our activities. Those of us good at it have a responsibility to relate the positives involved with our activities to all they can when we encounter poorly informed anti drone people. Those of us well prepared will often be able to turn a negative person into a positive one with effective communication. Avoid confrontational conversation and use facts and logic to sway them. Demonstrations of equipment are also effective to let our opponents see we can't obtain the kind if imagery they fear the most.

A lot of us do this commercially so we have to be good salespeople and develop the skills necessary to overcome objections. We also desperately need to form an organization that can represent us to the public.

I've go to believe Intel is working it. I could see industrial work with proper permits continue while recreational gets pushed back.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

That shirt was on actually but under my other jacket. It's my flying uniform. I love it. It gets lots of comments when I'm out in public. It must have sent a vibe down the hill during that sunset. Nearest neighbor is 1/4 mile away which is why I was surprised my host got an email about the drone to his VRBO site.

It's become mine as well... the best reaction was from a cashier at a MickeyDs near a flying site...
she was taking it all too seriously, as she nervously gave me my order...

Pat and ArnhemAnt... see link below...

Custom T-Shirts Designer - Create Now | 40% OFF & Free Shipping

Be sure to check the back as well...

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

You already touched on the most crucial point Pat... whatever laws are created, certain groups will be exempt from it.
And it's their use of what's out there that justify the public's fears. This technology is used by our own "protectors"
(in the guise of law enforcement or governmental agencies) far more than any private individuals.

As silly the premise was, the scenario behind "The Running Man" is just around the corner.

 

[PatR]

Not intending to get political but some of the laws enacted after 9/11 (Patriot Act with later executive order additions) were in some ways worse for this country than the attacks themselves. Paraphrasing a bit, those willing to give up some of their freedom for a little additional safety and security deserve neither.

I want to know more about what's on CraigCam's shirt.

 

[Eagle's Eye Video]

ABSOLUTELY! Anyone who does not think that the true purpose of 9/11 was to cause a paradigm shift is delusional.
That is why the towers were targeted, by making the attack directly on the US financial center. Neither politics
nor religion was the true focus... it was all about creating a power shift.

 

[CraigCam]

It's almost impossible to not get political when it comes to UAS and privacy expectations vs recreation and filming.

 

[ArnhemAnt]

ArnhemAnt... see link below...

Custom T-Shirts Designer - Create Now | 40% OFF & Free Shipping

Be sure to check the back as well...

Thanks. I think I'll have to place an order for one of those.

 

[CraigCam]

Thanks. I think I'll have to place an order for one of those.

I'd buy some more!!

 

[ArnhemAnt]

I'd buy some more!!

I just tried to place an order and discovered they don't ship to Australia!!!!!

 

[CraigCam]

I could post some to you.

 

[ArnhemAnt]

I could post some to you.

PM sent.

 

[gwhuntoon]

I'm kind of in the beg for forgiveness mode. I plan my shots so I can get them in 1 take with 1 battery. I fly like, get in/get out. I figure by the time some busy body shows up to complain, I already have my shots and am gone having totally wasted their time. In fact, for some fun, you can move a block or two away and do it again just to drive them nuts and wear them out. I get what I want, they don't, good times.

 

[CraigCam]

I'm kind of in the beg for forgiveness mode. I plan my shots so I can get them in 1 take with 1 battery. I fly like, get in/get out. I figure by the time some busy body shows up to complain, I already have my shots and am gone having totally wasted their time. In fact, for some fun, you can move a block or two away and do it again just to drive them nuts and wear them out. I get what I want, they don't, good times.

I like that. I've done similar. I also look for places to launch where I'm hidden somewhat as I hate getting me or my gear in my video unless it's intentional which is rare. The park where I practice and work out new features is pretty chill fortunately and most of the morning regulars know me and know I'm not spying on them. I also won't fly over anyone intentionally and always try to cross pedestrian paths at right angles and never fly directly over roads or parking lots. That's part of my planning.

My two Typhoons are both painted brightly and carry strobe lights on the back of the gimbal so they are very visible when I'm there. I've had a few folks give me the hairy eyeball while I was patiently observing my CCC tests at my cactus garden in the park. Some I chat with and some ignore me. Maybe it's because this park is on the edge of development and very open. One mile away is the most beautiful national park that I cant shoot full of the most amazing saguaro stands. The park boundaries pretty much are the eastern edge of Tucson along the Rincon mountain and Tanque Verde valley foothills. If I'm willing to drive about an hour off road on forest service roads I can get to the backside of those mountains and there is no one around but almost everywhere could be private ranch land. My approach is if a horse, hunter, dirt bike rider, or ATV can access the area then so can I.

I spend a lot of time scouting potential scenic shots and will go back multiple times till I'm happy with how it looked. The best light is fleeting so I'm a one battery pilot all the time. Timing is everything and patience is very important if you want great shots. Having a desert park near my house has really helped me get how best to frame our diverse landscape here. I'm going to petition our governor to declare Arizona open to video and drones as that would make sense given out strong independent thinking here. This Cali trip demonstrates that we need to be like NM and embrace this field and work to be part of the growth and not the restriction.

 

[PatR]

Craig,

I like the way you think. It's also encouraging to see so many understand that the best lighting holds for but a very brief period of time and that planning the shoot means everything. Like some others, most of my shoots are a one battery affair working around the best lighting and pre-planned angles and views. Anything requiring more than two batteries is either fooling around or very, very large.

 

[FlushVision]

I'm kind of in the beg for forgiveness mode. I plan my shots so I can get them in 1 take with 1 battery. I fly like, get in/get out. I figure by the time some busy body shows up to complain, I already have my shots and am gone having totally wasted their time. In fact, for some fun, you can move a block or two away and do it again just to drive them nuts and wear them out. I get what I want, they don't, good times.

Similar to me. I always do a pre-site assessment of a new area that I've not flown before using Google Earth and Altitude Angel to firstly assess whether it's legally feasible and if it's actually worth doing. If there is something worth shooting then I do a flight plan deciding on the best take-off point and do a rough 'story board'. Then, but not always if it isn't a commercial job, I may do a site visit to do a site & risk assessment before the day I'm intending to fly. At that point I'll decide which aircraft to use, be it a Phantom or the TH.

Because of all that I usually have a very good idea of what I want from the flight and can usually get all that I want on one flight battery. That said, though, I usually take two batteries and use the second battery to get what I call 'puffing out' footage: footage that isn't essential but handy to have should I have a need for it. Sometimes I may move to a second location a few hundred yards away to get my 'puffing out' footage.

I will only take more than two batteries out with me for complicated shoots that may demand multiple batteries, or if I have more than one planned locations on the same day.