Quality stills on H

[OnTheRopes]

Not sure how many this is of interest to but I sell photo's through a stock agency. This agency are renowned for being extremely fussy about image quality, they do a check on every upload on images at 100%.
The slightest sign of soft or lacking definition, processing artifacts or over sharpening etc etc etc then they fail the image.
So, I wanted to put the H quality to the test so I submitted just a single image off the H so that I knew that this one would be checked, if it had failed I would have faced a 30 day 'punishment' before I could submit anymore. I was a bit worried as I wasn't fully confident in the image or the CG03+

Anyway I just got the email that it passed QC, I am over the moon about this as I now have confidence to start submitting aerial work.

 

[banned user]

Great images on your site...love the misty morning flight...

 

[Tuna]

Any tips? I'm strictly an amateur photographer, so getting the most out of a camera that's a few hundred feet away is something I'm still learning about.

 

[charliehorse]

That's good to hear Steve.
I did not expect the CGO3+ to be that good with the stock lens.
I know they are sticklers on noise.
Would be interested in seeing the one from the CGO3+ some time.
Nice portfolio.

 

[R44Flyer]

Not sure how many this is of interest to but I sell photo's through a stock agency. This agency are renowned for being extremely fussy about image quality, they do a check on every upload on images at 100%.
The slightest sign of soft or lacking definition, processing artifacts or over sharpening etc etc etc then they fail the image.
So, I wanted to put the H quality to the test so I submitted just a single image off the H so that I knew that this one would be checked, if it had failed I would have faced a 30 day 'punishment' before I could submit anymore. I was a bit worried as I wasn't fully confident in the image or the CG03+

Anyway I just got the email that it passed QC, I am over the moon about this as I now have confidence to start submitting aerial work.

Did you see the video about hacking the camera to replace with a better lens? Sounds like you nay not need it but def looks better. What do you think

 

[DroneClone]

Not sure how many this is of interest to but I sell photo's through a stock agency. This agency are renowned for being extremely fussy about image quality, they do a check on every upload on images at 100%.
The slightest sign of soft or lacking definition, processing artifacts or over sharpening etc etc etc then they fail the image.
So, I wanted to put the H quality to the test so I submitted just a single image off the H so that I knew that this one would be checked, if it had failed I would have faced a 30 day 'punishment' before I could submit anymore. I was a bit worried as I wasn't fully confident in the image or the CG03+

Anyway I just got the email that it passed QC, I am over the moon about this as I now have confidence to start submitting aerial work.

But was you photo shot in Auto Mode and was there any editing of the photo? Just curious, because you can adjust the photo before and after to have made it pass QC. Was it just "Stock" auto photo? Thanks!

 

[Sami Rautaneva]

Nice portfolio and beautiful photos from Finland!

 

[OnTheRopes]

But was you photo shot in Auto Mode and was there any editing of the photo? Just curious, because you can adjust the photo before and after to have made it pass QC. Was it just "Stock" auto photo? Thanks!

No point in shooting in auto mode DC because it may choose an unsuitable exposure (too slow a shutter speed or too high an iso) I always shoot in manual so I can control shutter speed to avoid camera shake.
The image has been through photoshop, it has to anyway to change to the required profile. However post processing can't hide camera shake or what they call "Soft or lacking definition" and it can make it worse by adding artifacts.
I did a small curves adjustment to brighten the image and added a little vibrance as I was shooting in RAW and it always needs this.

 

[OnTheRopes]

Nice portfolio and beautiful photos from Finland!

Thank you Sami, I assume you are from Finland. A lovely country, I have been twice so far, once to shot Golden Eagles in winter and once to photograph bears and wolves in the midnight sun. I hope to go back soon.

 

[OnTheRopes]

Great images on your site...love the misty morning flight...

Thank you

 

[OnTheRopes]

Did you see the video about hacking the camera to replace with a better lens? Sounds like you nay not need it but def looks better. What do you think

Yes I have read it with interest and any lens that has the potential to improve IQ has to be worth having. Now I know I can pass IQ I will hold back a short while though and see what others report or see if Yuneec do something

 

[OnTheRopes]

That's good to hear Steve.
I did not expect the CGO3+ to be that good with the stock lens.
I know they are sticklers on noise.
Would be interested in seeing the one from the CGO3+ some time.
Nice portfolio.

Thanks, I posted my first test shot here First shots this is a downsized version of the image that passed QC

 

[Dragonflyerthom]

Very artistic Steve. You have a good eye.

 

[OnTheRopes]

Any tips? I'm strictly an amateur photographer, so getting the most out of a camera that's a few hundred feet away is something I'm still learning about.

For the best results you will need some processing software that can handle RAW like photoshop or lightroom.

Shoot in RAW
Shoot in Manual Mode, image quality is a trade off between ISO and shutter speed, too low a shutter speed and you will have camera shake, too high an iso and you will get a noisy image. These cameras will not be too good at high ISO.
Unfortuntely CG03+ does not seem to send exposure values in Exif data so I cannot tell you what my shot was.

However, if you shoot in bright conditions you should be able to set ISO to 100 or maybe 200 but try and keep your shutter speed at 1/60 or faster preferably, if your subject is moving you will want your shutter speed much higher still, I think with this lens you may get away with 1/30 but not sure.

In low light you will need to up the ISO to keep shutter speed fast enough but it is then a trade off with quality.

You need to consider compositon before you bother taking the shot, you can have the best IQ but if the composition is uninteresting it is an uninteresting shot. Location is everything. Try and get something in the foreground like I have with this shot First shots just because you are high up and thinking about flying you still have to consider your composition carefully.
Perhaps find your location and spend the first visit flying and doing test shots to find the best compositions and dont worry about quality. Then go back when you tink the light may be good and you know the shots you are looking for.

If you are not selling your shots don't fret over IQ you can get away with a lot if they are only for posting on internet.

You need to set your exposure to keep some detail in the shadows without burning out the sky which is not easy on this camera. It is possible to use multiple exposures to do this if necessary if you have the experience, but don't worry about that for now. The CGO3+ does not have the best dynamic range so don't expect it to record what your eye can see. Lightroom or similar can help bring out that detail (within limits)

 

[OnTheRopes]

Very artistic Steve. You have a good eye.

Thank you

 

[charliehorse]

Thanks for that link. Looks sharp from front to back.
Great for an f2.8

 

[DroneClone]

No point in shooting in auto mode DC because it may choose an unsuitable exposure (too slow a shutter speed or too high an iso) I always shoot in manual so I can control shutter speed to avoid camera shake.
The image has been through photoshop, it has to anyway to change to the required profile. However post processing can't hide camera shake or what they call "Soft or lacking definition" and it can make it worse by adding artifacts.
I did a small curves adjustment to brighten the image and added a little vibrance as I was shooting in RAW and it always needs this.

Thanks! I agree for a still photo, how about for a video, do you recommend Auto or manual? Reason I ask is when I set a good setting for a video in manual, every time it moves it changes location/angle, and then the video is thrown off because it cannot self adjust to lighting etc. Thanks!

 

[OnTheRopes]

Thanks for that link. Looks sharp from front to back.
Great for an f2.8

Thank you

 

[OnTheRopes]

Thanks! I agree for a still photo, how about for a video, do you recommend Auto or manual? Reason I ask is when I set a good setting for a video in manual, every time it moves it changes location/angle, and then the video is thrown off because it cannot self adjust to lighting etc. Thanks!

I am no videographer, a complete novice in fact but yes it will keep changing exposure in auto so personally I would rarely use it. I think we will need to experiment a bit when filming, find a scene you want to take and set the exposure in manual, fly the scene and film it. If the scene varies too much in dynamic range it may need shooting in more than one clip and reset exposure.

 

[jwjohnson]

Unfortuntely CG03+ does not seem to send exposure values in Exif data so I cannot tell you what my shot was.

It's interesting that JPG's have the Exif exposure data as well as GPS coords. DNG's have nothing. I'm hoping Yuneec fixes this in a firmware update. I thought about trying to shoot simultaneous raw and jpg as I can do in my DSLR's and then copy EXIF from the jpg to the dng, but there doesn't appear to be a way for it to shoot both yet either.