Aerial Photography and Safety

R

rt4388

Pre-takeoff checklist
Joined
Jul 10, 2015
Messages
192
Display Name
Display name:
rt4388
Never mind guys--found the answer after playing around on the site a little more. Anybody out here have any experience with aerial photography? I'd like to start to dive into taking some nifty pictures so that I can share the joy of aviation with friends, family, and anyone interested. But I'm not quite sure how safe it is. Obviously, when I'm up in the air by myself, it probably wouldn't be a good idea to be looking through my DSLR when I should be flying the plane, right? I typically fly by myself so I'm hoping this wouldn't compromise safety too much. Would it be a horrible idea to let the guy in the right seat fly (straight and level, of course) while I glance back and forth between the camera and the attitude of the plane? I'm currently a low time pilot so I don't want to get in over my head on this. Never mind guys--found the answer after playing around on the site a little more.
 
Last edited:
If the right seater is a pilot, that works fine. A better choice would be to put the photographer in the right seat. If the right seater is not a pilot, that's going to make you hurl at best, and it's really not a very good idea.

A few hints: Most people get queasy looking through a viewfinder. It's just about the worst thing you can do for that. "Live view" is a little better, but not much.

Fly a high wing. A 172/182 works, but it's best to remove the window stop and open it CAREFULLY to avoid hinge or window damage. Do not shoot through the window if you want your picture to look decent.

Getting the *#$@% strut and gear out of the picture means shooting behind the airplane. If you want a professional looking photo, having airplane parts in it is a no-no. It requires a lot of coordination with the pilot to get the attitude just right, but at least the wing makes a real nice sun shade.

Use a high fixed shutter speed (I use 1000) and adjust sensitivity and aperture to remove aircraft motion and vibration.

Some people do fly single pilot, usually with an autopilot, but you can't possibly be looking for traffic when photographing, and some shots require maneuvers you can't do that way (e.g., a nadir shot is best done in a steep turn).

Do NOT use anything that can fall off the camera. It may do just that.
 
I guess I don't follow the rules! I take air-to-air pictures while I'm flying and I don't have anyone else in the plane with me. I use a good zoom lens and keep a good distance between the planes. I'm ready at any time to push the right rudder and pull up if I need to get away from the other plane, but I've never had to do this. I only take photos of my friends who I've flown with a long time and they know what I expect. They're keeping their distance from me, knowing I'm looking at them. I scan for traffic, take a few photos, scan for traffic again, etc. Been doing this for years.

Oh, and we fly slow planes!

18602797419_f103b46eaf_o.jpg


16125926578_8b59ddfa8c_o.jpg


14644966661_82fb14c901_o.jpg


14115773032_24878eb0e1_o.jpg
 
MAKG1 said:
Getting the *#$@% strut and gear out of the picture means shooting behind the airplane.
Click to expand...
Alternatively, find a Cardinal RG or 210.

A lot of Cardinals out there already have photo window mods installed.
 
MAKG1 said:
If the right seater is a pilot, that works fine. A better choice would be to put the photographer in the right seat. If the right seater is not a pilot, that's going to make you hurl at best, and it's really not a very good idea.

A few hints: Most people get queasy looking through a viewfinder. It's just about the worst thing you can do for that. "Live view" is a little better, but not much.

Fly a high wing. A 172/182 works, but it's best to remove the window stop and open it CAREFULLY to avoid hinge or window damage. Do not shoot through the window if you want your picture to look decent.

Getting the *#$@% strut and gear out of the picture means shooting behind the airplane. If you want a professional looking photo, having airplane parts in it is a no-no. It requires a lot of coordination with the pilot to get the attitude just right, but at least the wing makes a real nice sun shade.

Use a high fixed shutter speed (I use 1000) and adjust sensitivity and aperture to remove aircraft motion and vibration.

Some people do fly single pilot, usually with an autopilot, but you can't possibly be looking for traffic when photographing, and some shots require maneuvers you can't do that way (e.g., a nadir shot is best done in a steep turn).

Do NOT use anything that can fall off the camera. It may do just that.
Click to expand...

To add to that, be real careful holding a small camera or phone to an open storm window, if so equipped. It's very easy for it to get sucked out.
 
Sac Arrow said:
To add to that, be real careful holding a small camera or phone to an open storm window, if so equipped. It's very easy for it to get sucked out.
Click to expand...
Neck straps work well, if equipped.

If using a newer camera, set the aperture F8 or F11 to give good depth of field, set the shutter speed fast to account for camera movement, and let the camera adjust the ISO to expose the image correctly. This minimizes the time spent playing with camera settings instead of flying the plane. Also set the camera for burst shooting. This maximizes the chance of getting a good shot. I find back button focusing useful.

16132245403_a14d7b3119_b.jpg


16564627388_2f8aa99120_b.jpg
 
Fast shutter speed is good, but if it's too fast you'll end up with a very static dead-engine-looking frozen prop.
 
SteveCanyon said:
Fast shutter speed is good, but if it's too fast you'll end up with a very static dead-engine-looking frozen prop.
Click to expand...

Only if you fly a twin with engines on the wing.

Photos through plexiglass are snapshots, nothing more. GOOD photos do not have any airplane parts in them (and there are several examples in this thread).

I've shot photos in a 177RG, and I agree that the lack of a strut -- and retracted gear -- is great. But if modifying the aircraft is not an option, you can't take photos from a 177 without shooting through plexi. If you put a photo port in there, that's an entirely different story.
 
Last edited:
Capt. Geoffrey Thorpe said:
Your average 12 year old kid can handle flying in a semblance of a straight line after a few minutes of practice.
Click to expand...

In summer thermal turbulence at 1000 AGL?

Have you done any aerial photography? It doesn't work very well at high altitude unless you really don't care much about the ground. Long lenses SUCK in a moving airplane. If you go that route, make sure you eat bananas first.

And you don't want "some semblance of a straight line." You want a straight line. And enough smarts to know what to look for for safety. Good photos often require flying where obstructions can become a concern.
 
Last edited:
I don't use a fast shutter speed at all for air-to-air. You need a slow shutter speed to get a good prop blur. To get a full circle, you might be as slow as 80... this means you need a smooth day, good light, a steady hand, and a lens with image stabilization. Some guys even use a handheld gyro.

SteveCanyon said:
Fast shutter speed is good, but if it's too fast you'll end up with a very static dead-engine-looking frozen prop.
Click to expand...
 
Lowflynjack said:
I don't use a fast shutter speed at all for air-to-air. You need a slow shutter speed to get a good prop blur. To get a full circle, you might be as slow as 80... this means you need a smooth day, good light, a steady hand, and a lens with image stabilization. Some guys even use a handheld gyro.
Click to expand...

A handheld gyro is something I haven't seen. Do you have some examples?

I know how that could be put to good use if it isn't too expensive.
 
Cap'n Jack said:
Neck straps work well, if equipped.

If using a newer camera, set the aperture F8 or F11 to give good depth of field, set the shutter speed fast to account for camera movement, and let the camera adjust the ISO to expose the image correctly. This minimizes the time spent playing with camera settings instead of flying the plane. Also set the camera for burst shooting. This maximizes the chance of getting a good shot. I find back button focusing useful.
Click to expand...

Actually, depth of field isn't all the critical at the focus distances you're shooting at unless you're doing close-up air-to-air images. For optimal sharpness, one stop below wide-open is typically the yields the sharpest images for a particular lens. After F8 you can actually begin to degrade the image somewhat from an image sharpness standpoint.
 
LDJones said:
Actually, depth of field isn't all the critical at the focus distances you're shooting at unless you're doing close-up air-to-air images. For optimal sharpness, one stop below wide-open is typically the yields the sharpest images for a particular lens. After F8 you can actually begin to degrade the image somewhat from an image sharpness standpoint.
Click to expand...
That really depends on the lens, and what one is shooting, IMO.

I suppose you are talking diffraction? This gets discussed on the photography forums, something akin to LOP here. You'll note I didn't say F22 or something along those parameters, but limited it to F11.

The reason I choose those parameters is I'm supposed to be flying the plane, not the camera. The settings I choose allow me to hit the auto focus and if it doesn't quite focus quickly, I have some DOF available to "save the shot". At least that is my thinking.

A larger DOF also lets me take oblique photos that look good (first photo below, F10). A I feel a larger aperture doesn't work for me with the lens I use (second photo below, F7- it is a nice shot but some areas are out of focus. I don't think it is movement because the roof tiles look sharp).

As with flying, there are often several ways to get to a good result in photography.

15629497261_15b2b39a5f_b.jpg



15011412404_e3c2a80645_b.jpg
 
Last edited:
My window has a simple setup. I was able to remove the bolt in the latch, replace it with pin and now I can remove it during flight and open the window completely. It floats right below the wing. This allows me to shoot straight out instead of down!

I just printed this 24X36 and it's very sharp. He's pretty happy!
19280605613_acb1bee18a_b.jpg
 
19280617053_07852c400e_b.jpg


These guys flew their 140 to Oshkosh from Argentina!
19653018751_953d600582_b.jpg
 
N801BH said:
Cap'n Jack took the most outstanding picture of the Grand Prismatic geyser pool in Yellowstone a few years back...

Personally, I am amazed it didn't make the cover of National Geographic...

And, yeah,, him and his wife are great people too...

http://www.pilotsofamerica.com/forum/showthread.php?t=44331&highlight=Yellowstone
Click to expand...

Looks like fun! I was out in Jackson Hole in January 2014 and I'm dying to make it back--except this time I'll have my PPL and take some photos like these.
 
MAKG1 said:
In summer thermal turbulence at 1000 AGL?

Have you done any aerial photography? It doesn't work very well at high altitude unless you really don't care much about the ground. Long lenses SUCK in a moving airplane. If you go that route, make sure you eat bananas first.

And you don't want "some semblance of a straight line." You want a straight line. And enough smarts to know what to look for for safety. Good photos often require flying where obstructions can become a concern.
Click to expand...

My 9 year old nephew used to do a good job of it at 100' in Texas summer turbulence when I took him on pipeline runs.
 
Aperture priority, 1-2 stops down from wide open with ISO set high enough to where shutter speed gets no slower than than what is required to eliminate motion blur(if that is the goal). Taken from an R44 with the door removed:







 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top