A recent requirement to start correlating CGO3+ EXIF photo data with Google Earth imagery revealed a new reason to allow a little extra time between when the H indicates it is ready to fly to when you actually lift off. After reviewing quite a few photos and comparing them with the GPS location provided in the EXIF data it became apparent that something was not right with the GPS location data for some of them. Some of the GPS coordinates placed the H miles away from the location the photo was actually shot, while other photos provided GPS data that depicted the location with reasonable accuracy. What the heck?
Some Google searches provided several articles related to EXIF data and GPS positional accuracy and it appears that GPS accuracy presented in EXIF data is relative to how much time a camera has been permitted to remain on prior to shooting pictures. Oh my, where have we read of this before
As with other devices using GPS, positional accuracy increases over time. Looking again though the groups of photos I remembered some of the locations where the H was given very little time to warm up between "ready to fly" and T/O before capturing images, and locations where several minutes was provided between "ready to fly" and lift off. Reviewing the GPS data from those photo shoots again in Google Earth showed the first photos in a series from locations where the H was provided some "warm up" time before flight were always location accurate while the first photos in a series where the H was not provided any warm up time were consistently showing locations quite a bit distant from the shoot location. Like many miles distant. The GPS position data for the spreads that were location inaccurate improved in accuracy as the number sequence increased in the photo spreads, or over time while the H was airborne, which established a direct relationship between time and position accuracy.
This may not be of much importance for most but if you must have accurate GPS position references for a paying client, understanding we need to allow the system time to develop position resolution could be the difference between getting paid for your work or watching the customer depart to find a new photographer. If you shoot for insurance companies, construction companies, or other businesses that require the location the GPS data you provide on the images might be a critical part of the deliverables package. What you give them will be a heck of a lot more accurate if you permit your H a little extra time to generate good position resolution before springing into the air.
Side note; Yuneec uses a "unique" GPS position format that is a bit of a P.I.T.A. to reconfigure to hours-minutes-seconds formatting recognized by Google Earth or Garmin. The conversion process is made easier with an EXIF converter program that can be downloaded. I'm currently using EXIF Pilot. Not the best or perfect but it works and is free. There are others.
As always, have fun doing what ya do.
Some Google searches provided several articles related to EXIF data and GPS positional accuracy and it appears that GPS accuracy presented in EXIF data is relative to how much time a camera has been permitted to remain on prior to shooting pictures. Oh my, where have we read of this before
As with other devices using GPS, positional accuracy increases over time. Looking again though the groups of photos I remembered some of the locations where the H was given very little time to warm up between "ready to fly" and T/O before capturing images, and locations where several minutes was provided between "ready to fly" and lift off. Reviewing the GPS data from those photo shoots again in Google Earth showed the first photos in a series from locations where the H was provided some "warm up" time before flight were always location accurate while the first photos in a series where the H was not provided any warm up time were consistently showing locations quite a bit distant from the shoot location. Like many miles distant. The GPS position data for the spreads that were location inaccurate improved in accuracy as the number sequence increased in the photo spreads, or over time while the H was airborne, which established a direct relationship between time and position accuracy.This may not be of much importance for most but if you must have accurate GPS position references for a paying client, understanding we need to allow the system time to develop position resolution could be the difference between getting paid for your work or watching the customer depart to find a new photographer. If you shoot for insurance companies, construction companies, or other businesses that require the location the GPS data you provide on the images might be a critical part of the deliverables package. What you give them will be a heck of a lot more accurate if you permit your H a little extra time to generate good position resolution before springing into the air.
Side note; Yuneec uses a "unique" GPS position format that is a bit of a P.I.T.A. to reconfigure to hours-minutes-seconds formatting recognized by Google Earth or Garmin. The conversion process is made easier with an EXIF converter program that can be downloaded. I'm currently using EXIF Pilot. Not the best or perfect but it works and is free. There are others.
As always, have fun doing what ya do.
Last edited:
