Just doing some Dronie shots next to water towers, steam stacks, and skyscrapers. It makes your dronie shots more EPIC, but just make sure you know if your drone can clear it before you fly.

Bigger the risk, bigger the reward (or loss)

Some cool shots there thanks for the share

Nice work

A CW Posted at 2018-5-28 03:12
Bigger the risk, bigger the reward (or loss)

Just don't be afraid to bail and fly again if it looks too close. I think I flew the shot downtown about 5 times before I got it right.

Good advice mate!   

Really a great video.
Did you test fly passed the towers first before the Dronies or just judge the distance  and go for it?

A CW Posted at 2018-5-28 03:12
Bigger the risk, bigger the reward (or loss)

Just how big the reward can a DJI drone get? I see a lot of ways to risk your investment and possible expense of property damage compared to a paltry but heavily criticized monetary gain brought in by a drone?

B1houdini Posted at 2018-5-28 15:53
Really a great video.
Did you test fly passed the towers first before the Dronies or just judge the distance  and go for it?

Yes, although the towers were much easier to tell if I was anywhere near them. Quite obvious from where I was standing that I would either miss or hit them. But the buildings were much tougher. I would just fly up and back on my test run, then stop and turn the drone around to see how close I was to the building. If I was too close then I would just not fly backwards as fast the next time. Changing to a steaper angle of ascension made me miss the roofs by quite a large distance.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-5-28 16:02
Just how big the reward can a DJI drone get? I see a lot of ways to risk your investment and possible expense of property damage compared to a paltry but heavily criticized monetary gain brought in by a drone?

The only risk involved in these videos was the same risk for anyone who flies a drone. I planned the shot carefully and did test runs to make sure I had a safe enough distance from the towers and buildings. If I said "near miss" it was only for click bait.
I wouldn't risk running my drone into a building becuase then you'd probably face harsh consequences from the city and building owners. But I would risk my drone for a shot (as long as it didn't endanger any people or property). Just not my new Mavic Air. If I am attempting a shot that MAY cause a crash, then I use my Spark, which I am more comfortable with and willing to sacrifice for an amazing picture or video. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Jump to 2:55. This shot harms no people or property. The worst that could happen is my Spark falls in the creek. I'm willing to take that risk. Just my opinion though. I'm sure everyone has a differnet comfort and tollerance level they are willing to live with.  

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-5-28 16:02
Just how big the reward can a DJI drone get? I see a lot of ways to risk your investment and possible expense of property damage compared to a paltry but heavily criticized monetary gain brought in by a drone?

Depends on what you want to capture - flying 200' above a tree line is not as interesting as through the tree line but the risk of clipping the trees is obviously greater. Some people are commercial aerial photographers and can demand thousands for an image. It depends entirely on how far the individual is willing to risk their property to capture exactly what they set out to achieve albeit for their own satisfaction or for a client. Some people will fly a WiFi drone 10,000 feet away from them and break the law in doing so just to prove a point on this forum... Also the individuals wealth will lighten the risk. Losing a grand is not a big deal to some people who own a pair of shoes worth more than their drone. ;)

A CW Posted at 2018-5-28 22:29
Depends on what you want to capture - flying 200' above a tree line is not as interesting as through the tree line but the risk of clipping the trees is obviously greater. Some people are commercial aerial photographers and can demand thousands for an image. It depends entirely on how far the individual is willing to risk their property to capture exactly what they set out to achieve albeit for their own satisfaction or for a client. Some people will fly a WiFi drone 10,000 feet away from them and break the law in doing so just to prove a point on this forum... Also the individuals wealth will lighten the risk. Losing a grand is not a big deal to some people who own a pair of shoes worth more than their drone. ;)

I rarely ever see videos or photos on this forum where the pilot has displayed daring odds to capture those amazing images. If you are risking your drone where you know there's good chance of crashing to catch a shot, then it's considered nothing more than being reckless with your drone. The same with driving your car and almost causing an accident making the reckless decision because you are late for a dinner reservation?

You can always capture that shot without having to risk your drone. Flying 10,000 feet for a range test where there's no obstacles except wide open land is not the same as flying next to objects that can come into impact with a drone. A range test is putting the risk that the drone is unable to fly itself when all DJI drones practically autonomously fly themselves. This risk factor is extremely diminished based on how the drone is designed, if complications present then the blame is less on the pilot and more on the drone.

Make no mistake about it, human error is human error and when flying a drone there are more degrees to that extent, and yes that reckless attitude can be attributable to one disregarding a pair of expensive shoes.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-5-29 07:02
I rarely ever see videos or photos on this forum where the pilot has displayed daring odds to capture those amazing images. If you are risking your drone where you know there's good chance of crashing to catch a shot, then it's considered nothing more than being reckless with your drone. The same with driving your car and almost causing an accident making the reckless decision because you are late for a dinner reservation?

You can always capture that shot without having to risk your drone. Flying 10,000 feet for a range test where there's no obstacles except wide open land is not the same as flying next to objects that can come into impact with a drone. A range test is putting the risk that the drone is unable to fly itself when all DJI drones practically autonomously fly themselves. This risk factor is extremely diminished based on how the drone is designed, if complications present then the blame is less on the pilot and more on the drone.

Then I suggest you look a little harder. Risk is in the eye of the individual - what you consider to be a risk others may consider everyday flying and visa versa - I thought flying my P3P 400' above the ground was one hell of risk when I started flying back in 2016 - now I tend to cruise at that altitude on every flight and not think twice about it. Risk directly correlates with experience and that expertise will combat risk and deflate the perception of it. Flying 10,000 feet away places the drone at risk of flyaways and is beyond VLOS - how do you know that a glider may not be losing altitude 2 miles away and is aiming directly for your drone which you can no longer see - that's a risk and bloody big one which is why it is deemed illegal by the air navigation order set by the CAA in my country yet many fly beyond VLOS and not think twice about it - always justifying it by the quality of the tech in hand.
And no, there are some shots which are impossible to achieve without an element of risk. I took a still image of a sunset recently through an oak tree to create a more dynmic feel to the capture. I had to fly right up to the oak in 30MPH winds and could see leaves being hit by the drone. I could have easily just took the image above the tree but it would not have had the same effect, so I took an increased risk and it paid off. Some people fly these drones to see how far away they can go before they lose signal, others will take risks placing their drone in positions to capture images and footage that can pass for art. Again, it all comes down to experience and what you want out of the drone.
So I stand by my original point - the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward (and potential loss) - fact!

A CW Posted at 2018-5-29 07:29
Then I suggest you look a little harder. Risk is in the eye of the individual - what you consider to be a risk others may consider everyday flying and visa versa - I thought flying my P3P 400' above the ground was one hell of risk when I started flying back in 2016 - now I tend to cruise at that altitude on every flight and not think twice about it. Risk directly correlates with experience and that expertise will combat risk and deflate the perception of it. Flying 10,000 feet away places the drone at risk of flyaways and is beyond VLOS - how do you know that a glider may not be losing altitude 2 miles away and is aiming directly for your drone which you can no longer see - that's a risk and bloody big one which is why it is deemed illegal by the air navigation order set by the CAA in my country yet many fly beyond VLOS and not think twice about it - always justifying it by the quality of the tech in hand.
And no, there are some shots which are impossible to achieve without an element of risk. I took a still image of a sunset recently through an oak tree to create a more dynmic feel to the capture. I had to fly right up to the oak in 30MPH winds and could see leaves being hit by the drone. I could have easily just took the image above the tree but it would not have had the same effect, so I took an increased risk and it paid off. Some people fly these drones to see how far away they can go before they lose signal, others will take risks placing their drone in positions to capture images and footage that can pass for art. Again, it all comes down to experience and what you want out of the drone.
So I stand by my original point - the bigger the risk, the bigger the reward (and potential loss) - fact!

In terms of DJI drones, we need to quantify and qualify how the bigger the risk the bigger the reward corresponds to your drone crashing. If the market is going to reward one photo over another primarily because it's higher risk to pull off the shot than that's an entirely different topic of discussion. This topic is purely subjective and there's no anecdotal information to back up someone's opinion. Because you say your photo was achieved due to the higher risk you took to capture that image is your opinion. There is no evidence your shot is better or worse if your vantage point had changed.

I appreciate your input on this topic but unfortunately currently there does not exist some auction based system that precisely rewards one photo or video versus another. All I'm saying is from reading all the posts in this Forum, most of the crashes people experience happens when flying around environments where there's significant obstacles around the drone. Meaning during and up until the crash the risk was possibly expected. Case in point, nobody expects an accident when flying hundreds of feet above the ground, but when they happen at that moment everyone is surprised? Obviously we can deduce from this Forum that flying too close to obstacles has more crash risk.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-5-29 08:55
In terms of DJI drones, we need to quantify and qualify how the bigger the risk the bigger the reward corresponds to your drone crashing. If the market is going to reward one photo over another primarily because it's higher risk to pull off the shot than that's an entirely different topic of discussion. This topic is purely subjective and there's no anecdotal information to back up someone's opinion. Because you say your photo was achieved due to the higher risk you took to capture that image is your opinion. There is no evidence your shot is better or worse if your vantage point had changed.

I appreciate your input on this topic but unfortunately currently there does not exist some auction based system that precisely rewards one photo or video versus another. All I'm saying is from reading all the posts in this Forum, most of the crashes people experience happens when flying around environments where there's significant obstacles around the drone. Meaning during and up until the crash the risk was possibly expected. Case in point, nobody expects an accident when flying hundreds of feet above the ground, but when they happen at that moment everyone is surprised? Obviously we can deduce from this Forum that flying too close to obstacles has more crash risk.

Again, I just want to emphasize the risk of flying out of VLOS with DJI drones. The maneuverability someone has with flying a drone, with both VLOS and FPV, we agree are greater than just flying VLOS or FPV.

I believe my flying ability is greatly improved from having a functional FPV. When flying only VLOS and the drone is several hundred feet away, I sometimes find it difficult to judge orientation of the drone and rely mostly on FPV. If there are other objects flying around and you lose FPV needing to rely on your navigation using VLOS, in my opinion DJI drones in RTH mode are better at avoiding a glider than I or someone flying manually without FPV.

davidmartingraf Posted at 2018-5-29 08:55
In terms of DJI drones, we need to quantify and qualify how the bigger the risk the bigger the reward corresponds to your drone crashing. If the market is going to reward one photo over another primarily because it's higher risk to pull off the shot than that's an entirely different topic of discussion. This topic is purely subjective and there's no anecdotal information to back up someone's opinion. Because you say your photo was achieved due to the higher risk you took to capture that image is your opinion. There is no evidence your shot is better or worse if your vantage point had changed.

I appreciate your input on this topic but unfortunately currently there does not exist some auction based system that precisely rewards one photo or video versus another. All I'm saying is from reading all the posts in this Forum, most of the crashes people experience happens when flying around environments where there's significant obstacles around the drone. Meaning during and up until the crash the risk was possibly expected. Case in point, nobody expects an accident when flying hundreds of feet above the ground, but when they happen at that moment everyone is surprised? Obviously we can deduce from this Forum that flying too close to obstacles has more crash risk.

It's common sense David - surely you grasp the concept of risk when flying a drone and how increasing risk to capture an improved image works? That is where the true skill of flying comes from. Anyone can press a button but not everyone can do what Bing Err has shown in this thread or capture the stills I take without pushing their skill set in taking a greater risk. I do not consider placing my drone in a position that I feel will present a more beautiful capture yet increases the chances of crashing my drone to be reckless. And sorry, but if I told a judge that it's OK for me to break aviation law because I have RTH he/she will probably increase my fine for being arrogant LOL. Anyway, I think I've clearly made my point now. Take care.

Bing Err Posted at 2018-5-28 16:39
The only risk involved in these videos was the same risk for anyone who flies a drone. I planned the shot carefully and did test runs to make sure I had a safe enough distance from the towers and buildings. If I said "near miss" it was only for click bait.
I wouldn't risk running my drone into a building becuase then you'd probably face harsh consequences from the city and building owners. But I would risk my drone for a shot (as long as it didn't endanger any people or property). Just not my new Mavic Air. If I am attempting a shot that MAY cause a crash, then I use my Spark, which I am more comfortable with and willing to sacrifice for an amazing picture or video. Here's an example of what I'm talking about. Jump to 2:55. This shot harms no people or property. The worst that could happen is my Spark falls in the creek. I'm willing to take that risk. Just my opinion though. I'm sure everyone has a differnet comfort and tollerance level they are willing to live with.  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qbnmWcKUqpg

Exactly my point! Calculated risks are not reckless.