skeptic36 Posted November 2, 2013 Share Posted November 2, 2013 I watched it on the project last night. Apparently it is a church. That's nothin, you should see my church, it's much longer and thicker than that.......... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Is this true? Actually I may have it a bit mixed up, I was working from memory of something that happened a long while ago, and after I went commercial it didn't matter to me anymore. I was thinking it had to do with 'Vertical Photography' which is a defined term but on reflection I think it has to do with making money by taking photos from your recreational aircraft. The background to the story was that in the 1980s there was a regular publication which contained photos showing shifting sandbars and how they affected boating and fishing spots. The mag was paying a pretty penny for the photos to be provided by a commercial aerial surveying organisation. Some ultralight folks saw an opportunity to pay for their flying and offered to take the pics for the magazine for a much lesser fee than they were paying at the time. At the time there was also a bit of a property boom and real estate agents were just starting to use aerial photos of properties in their advertising. A few people, of which I was one, thought it would be a great chance to 'justify' our flying around and use the opportunity to take some photos and get paid for them by the real estate agents. The commercial operators quickly cottoned on to what we were planning (I guess the real-estate agents told them because I don't think any of us actually got as far as taking and selling photos - I only got half my camera mount built) and they suggested that Dept of Aviation have a chat to us. At that stage of ultralighting most of us knew the DoA chaps pretty well because they were calling on us quite regularly (!) and I duly received a friendly visit during which it was explained to me that although I thought I was just planning to sell photos I couldn't do so because actually I would be selling photos gained as a result of conducting aerial work, and to do that I needed to be commercial and operate under an AOC. So that put an end to that grand scheme. Soon after that I did go commercial and used to do a lot of real estate photography from helicopters. It didn't pay much though so we tended to save it for when we didn't have anything better to do. There was something special about rules or regs for Vertical photography though but the details of that slips my mind at present, perhaps someone else has come across it? On the subject of camera mounts we did devise some really neat mounts for helicopter use where vibration isolation is an absolute necessity. For professional film making we had the budget for gyro-stabilised Continental Mounts that attached to the airframe but they cost at least a couple of thousand to rent for a week so and they had to be fitted and removed by a LAME according to the Ops Manual and the Flight Manual had to be amended for the CG and operational data additions etc etc. For less critical work we made our own and they weren't allowed to be mechanically connected to the airframe, so we made mounts that hung from handles or similar. The Rolls-Royce of them was a mass-balanced 'chooks head' mount but the simplest of all was just pair of bungee cords from above and below the camera which hooked onto handles or whatever was available in the right place. The bungee took out all the vibration but still allowed you to point the camera in any direction easily. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
facthunter Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Drones will take over that job . Nev Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark11 Posted November 3, 2013 Author Share Posted November 3, 2013 Well, despite having a good camera (5D)... And having done a photography course... I still take very few good photos on the ground ... So I doubt they will be anything to rave about, let alone try to sell The trike with the camera mounts was modified and certified by airborne. The bungee cord arrangement would have worked well in a chopper I reckon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
503 Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 [quote="Head in the clouds, post: 395968, member: 7450" I was thinking it had to do with 'Vertical Photography' which is a defined term but on reflection I think it has to do with making money by taking photos from your recreational aircraft. Thanks as I've given a farmer pics of he farm as thanks for letting me fly from there ,and now a year later there on a big for sale sign at the end of the road with some of them as advertising (and they look great). Although what would stop a passenger from selling pics they took?? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zibi Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 The Rolls-Royce of them was a mass-balanced 'chooks head' mount but the simplest of all was just pair of bungee cords from above and below the camera which hooked onto handles or whatever was available in the right place. The bungee took out all the vibration but still allowed you to point the camera in any direction easily. Something like this?: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRKu785g0O0 2 5 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark11 Posted November 3, 2013 Author Share Posted November 3, 2013 Something like this?:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRKu785g0O0 That is a brilliant video!! I'm gonna get a chook now Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Head in the clouds Posted November 3, 2013 Share Posted November 3, 2013 Although what would stop a passenger from selling pics they took?? It's a fine line isn't it? I would think that if you took the pax flying so that they could take pictures which they intended to sell then it would be illegal but if you were both on a pleasure flight and happened upon a situation where they saw a photo opportunity and snapped a pic then found it was worth something, that would be a different matter. Of course if the pax happened upon a profitable moment every time they went flying, or even frequently, then it might reasonably be suggested that the flights were being conducted to look for opportunities to profit ... The real problem is not so much a matter of whether you get caught but whether you get sued when something goes wrong because if there was any suggestion that the flight was being conducted for profit (or potential profit) and that suggestion could be substantiated by showing a history of having done similar things, then there would be no passenger or PL insurance, and that could cost you everything as well as jail time. And, as has been seen regularly, it's not uncommon for a friend to turn on you if they happen to get injured as a result of being taken flying. Something like this?:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VRKu785g0O0 Brilliant video! And yes, the chooks head mount is very much like that. It was invented by a news cameraman during the worst of the troubles in Northern Ireland, around the mid 1970s IIRC. He was disappointed at always missing the best news shots because of having to run away from (or just as often towards) desperate situations and he couldn't film while running. He used to accompany British troop patrols into Belfast and the like. He built a double parallelogram device which was spring compensated to balance the weight of the camera. The device was attached to a sturdy harness a bit like a parachute harness. It meant he could run flat out and the camera remained quite still, just like the chooks head in the video. Also he could swivel the camera around so that he could film backwards over his shoulder while running away. It gave him the added advantage of having his hands free. He ended up winning multiple awards for excellence in film journalism. Later versions of the mount use mass balancing instead of springs because they are even steadier but the inventor probably didn't need the extra weight penalty. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil Perry Posted November 5, 2013 Share Posted November 5, 2013 Love the "chookvid" We don't have ( as far as I can ascertain ) any rules with regard to "Vertical Photography" here in the UK,. . . . however, we DO have rules pertaining to "AERIAL WORK" Basically we can't use a Microlight / LSA, or even a private G.A aircraft to take photographs destined for commercial profit,. . . . as this is A.W. and you need to hold a commercial pilot licence to do anything in an aeroplane which creates any kind of pecuniary interest ( earns Bucks or quids ) be it joy flights, banner towing, or even something as benign as aerial photography. Sometimes rules are there for very good reasons, . . . others, well,. . . . . .the politicians have to be seen to do SOMETHING ? ? ? ? ? ? ? Regrettably, just like a lot of other industries and pastimes, there are usually many regulations AGAINST ANYTHING which is moderately interesting, useful, or fun, however safe it may appear to be. This has always been a personal problem of mine from an early age. . . . . . . everything I like is apparently Immoral, Illegal, Inadvisable, Downright dangerous or fattening. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
spacesailor Posted November 5, 2013 Share Posted November 5, 2013 But if you take out the pilot & use radio-control to fly the plane (drone) you can then watch the shxx hit the fan! spacesailor Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planedriver Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 I watched it on the project last night. Apparently it is a church. So where were you Dazza? Did'nt see you in the line-up mate. Possibly near the G string? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planedriver Posted November 7, 2013 Share Posted November 7, 2013 Love the "chookvid"This has always been a personal problem of mine from an early age. . . . . . . everything I like is apparently Immoral, Illegal, Inadvisable, Downright dangerous or fattening. You're terrible Phil. Bye the way mate, did you and I go to the same school in Wimbledon? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bexrbetter Posted November 10, 2013 Share Posted November 10, 2013 Interesting roof Must be a fraud, obviously isn't in the Nothern Hemisphere. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark11 Posted November 14, 2013 Author Share Posted November 14, 2013 How about this rainbow cloud on Facebook 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
planedriver Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Looks pretty Mark. I wonder whether it's caused by a polarising filter in front of the lens, because i've seen rainbow effects when looking out of aircraft windows while wearing my polarised sunny's? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ultralights Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 polarising lens on a camera does that through aircraft windows, i have ruined many a good photo by forgetting the polariser was on the front of the camera. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
PA. Posted November 14, 2013 Share Posted November 14, 2013 Funny, I thought it looked like Sydney Harbour during Mardi Gras. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark11 Posted November 14, 2013 Author Share Posted November 14, 2013 Looks pretty Mark. I wonder whether it's caused by a polarising filter in front of the lens, because i've seen rainbow effects when looking out of aircraft windows while wearing my polarised sunny's? Doesn't look like it to me - reflection off the water below Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mark11 Posted January 14, 2014 Author Share Posted January 14, 2014 Flying high on Sunday 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Yenn Posted January 19, 2014 Share Posted January 19, 2014 Vertical photography was illegal without permission from the authorities when I started flying many years ago, but I disregarded the rule and lately have never seen any reference to it. It may have gone, will have to look for the curent regs. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now