From the BlogSubscribe Now

01/24/24 Sunset over Walton Heights and Pinnacle Valley

Posted on January 24, 2024 //
A wintertime sunset from Walton Heights in Little Rock featuring Pinnacle Mountain.
Wintertime sunset from Walton Heights in Little Rock overlooking Pinnacle Valley

There are times that the best view of a particular subject is from the air. With the use of a drone, I was able to capture this sunset in several separate images, then combine them into one single image. The dynamic range of the files is limited, so I chose to use exposure bracketing of 5 shots per image, then combining several of the single files to create one image.

The problem with a drone is that you have to be very careful when shooting into the sun as it’s very easy to totally blow out your highlights. This image was taken with a DJI Mavic 2 Pro, which has a 20MP sensor, but the sensor is nowhere near the same quality as a 35mm camera with 20MP or 24mp.

The other problem that can occur is drift, during the series of images. Even in a quick 5 shot bracket the drone can slightly drift and thus the file will not line up perfectly. If this occurs, then it’s best to use load the needed files into Photoshop, as layers, and then use the “align layers” feature. This will usually allow for a close enough alignment so you can proceed with the work.

Using a drone often gives a much better perspective overall and I always try to have a drone with me in the woods.

Filed Under: Arkansas Landscape Shooting Information, Drones // Tagged: , , , , , , ,

No Drones allowed in Arkansas State Parks, without a permit–Written 06/14/18

Posted on June 16, 2018 //

Drones Arkansas State Parks

Permit form for Drone Flight, Arkansas State Parks

 

If you are planning to fly a drone in an Arkansas State Park, you will need to contact the office of the Director of Arkansas State Parks, in Little Rock.  As the the beginning of 2018, it is now necessary to have a permit to fly in any of the Arkansas State Parks.  The permit can be obtained by contacting the Directors office in Little Rock, and they will email you a copy to fill out.

I was flying on Petit Jean, from Stout’s Point back in late March, a spot I had made many flights from previously.  I like this spot as you can get up with no clearance issues and quickly get out away from the mountain.  There is a small airport on top of Petit Jean, and you will get the standard warning about such fields.  My flights were always out away from the mountain and around to the face of Stouts point.

On this particular afternoon, I had just taken off and a park ranger stopped and asked me if I was flying a drone.  I replied yes, and he told me that “No Drones are allowed in Arkansas State Parks, without a permit”.  I was a bit taken a back by this since I regularly checked the Arkansas State Parks website for such rules, and there never has been anything posted.  I told the ranger this, and he just shrugged his shoulders, and stated, he did not have any control over what and when something is added to the main website.  But he was quite clear about no flying in the Petit Jean State Park.

The next day I contacted the Office of the Director of Arkansas State Parks, and was told that what the ranger had stated was correct even though it’s not posted anywhere.  Strange but true.  Not sure how long it would take to edit the website to fix this, but probably not too long.  I was sent the above form and told that it had to be filled out and returned for approval.  I also called Mt Nebo, Mt Magazine and Pinnacle Mountain State Parks, and was told the same thing, no flying.

A few thoughts:

The permit is very straight forward, but very restrictive.  Note also you need to have proof of liability insurance.   They are not looking for something like “Verify”, but a actual policy, and they want to see the policy number.  Notice also, they have asked to have the dates, and times of the flights listed.   This is Arkansas, where the weather can change in minutes so to list the actual time of flight is very limiting, as odds are at that time frame or day, you will have weather issues, or wind or both.  No point in traveling a couple of hours with a permit only to arrive and have a windy or rainy afternoon.  It would be much better if the permit allowed for a full day of flights, and also allowed for a range of dates, like 5 days.  An example would be:

I would like to fly during the time of May 5th through the 10th.  My flights will be limited to launching from 8:00 am to no later than 10:00 am and I will be making 3 total flights.  I will also only be flying from spots where I can stay away from congestion so my drone will not disturb anyone else.

 

Phantom 4 Drone in flight

Phantom 4 drone up in the Arkansas sky against the moon

This would allow a lot more flexibility.

It’s most unfortunate that Arkansas has chosen this no fly policy.  There are plenty of spots where a flight can be conducted where no one else is at any risk.  Stout’s point is a great example as you can launch from the far side away from the parking area, and fly out and away from the mountain.  You can also stay at a altitude as to not endanger any aircraft planning to land on Petit Jean’s airport.

Consider also Cossatot State Park.  Very remote, and on a weekday, you are lucky to see anyone else in the area.  Most drone flights are less than 30 minutes, so the odds of disturbing anyone else are slim to none.

Now if you go and fly over Cedar Falls on Petit Jean, sure you are going to be noticed and be a risk to others, especially if you happen to loose control of your drone.  It’s already apparently happened a few times on Petit Jean, where a drone has crashed near folks viewing the falls.

Oh, and notice, the current Arkansas Drone Law (lets hope it stays this vague), only is concerning flying over installations that might be at risk, like power stations (Arkansas Nuclear One) or industry.  Two acts:

Act 1019 – Surveillance of Critical Infrastructure

Unlawful to photograph, record, or conduct surveillance on anything defined as “critical infrastructure”, defined as: an electrical power generation or delivery system; A petroleum refinery; A chemical or rubber manufacturing facility; or A petroleum or chemical storage facility.

Act 293 – Voyeurism

Unlawful to use a drone for voyeurism.

Note, I don’t believe it is lawful to use a camera in general for voyeurism.  Sad that this had to be put into an additional law.

Here is a formal link:

http://statedronelaw.com/state/Arkansas/

I believe you will get a pass the first time you are stopped, but there are fines in place for flying, and it’s possible to have your equipment confiscated.

In conclusion, I have been a resident of Arkansas since 1969, and love the outdoors.  It saddens me that Arkansas has taken such a strict policy, with what appears to be a lack of understanding of actual drone flights.  The fact that it’s required to list by date and hour the times you wish to fly, instead of giving you a larger block of dates and times is unfortunate and makes picking a good date very difficult.  For example, thought out April, I can’t remember a day when there was not an issue with either wind or rain or both.  I understand why the Director of Arkansas State Parks, is concerned.  Drones, especially the DJI Phantom or Inspire are both loud and large and thus can create a situation where other people enjoying the state park would want to complain.  Many people flying drones, consumer grade have no clue as to what to do when something goes wrong, and so it’s possible that a drone could come down in a area where a large number of people are standing.  This would be a risk of injury and thus liability.  But please note, that in all the parks, I previously mentioned it’s possible to fly a drone in remote parts of the park and or during times of low visitation and not cause any issues at all.  It’s just that many folks will choose not to do this.

People in this state will continue to fly without permits which is also unfortunate, but it’s kind of the way things seem to be going now.   But note, if you do fly in an Arkansas State Park, without a permit, you are flying without permission of the Director, and thus you will be looking over your shoulder the whole time you are in the air and that is not a good condition for flying, as you need to pay 100% attention to your aircraft.

Written and copy write protected for www.photosofarkansas.com by Paul Caldwell.  Please contact the author for a reprint.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Arkansas Outdoors, Drones, Photographic Equipment // Tagged: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

02/18/16 Drones and comparisons to modern DSLR or Medium Format cameras

Posted on February 20, 2016 //

Modern Drone for Video photography

Modern Drone for Video photography

I held off on this as I have always tried to look at the positives and post the same way, but I feel that this post has too many negative implications, especially when attempting to compare the 12MP output from any current drone to a still from a Medium format back or modern DSLR.

There was a recent post on Luminous Landscape, where a photographer was bemoaning the fact that his son’s 12MP drone camera would allow for a better image from a 4K still than a IQ180 80MP raw file.

First and foremost, I was personally shocked to see a photographer compare the results from “ANY” current drone to the results from any Phase One back, be it a P25 to IQ180. If you are happy with the 12Mp shot from a drone camera then there seems to me to be a total lack of need for an IQ180, perspective abilities taken into account or not. The vast majority of cameras in use today are gopro and I know that they can take 4K, the OP implied the shot was not from a gopro. Still I would like to see two shots, a still from the 4K drone and a still from the 80MP 180. No to mention the drone is only going to shoot a jpg more than likely and the Phase file will a raw with a ton of room in it for work in post. I work worked with several very highly rated (rated in both flight and photography) drone shooters and I have seen the stills, no more needs to be said. Sure you can now mount a 100MP Phase Back on a drone, and shoot stills. I hope you have great amount of insurance as it’s not a matter if it will crash, but when.

But what concerned me more is the thought that any 12MP image taken at 4K, would be the same quality as 80MP still from a IQ180, if the files look that close there is something wrong with the IQ180. The 12mp sensor on the drone more than likely is not even the size of a micro 4/3’s sensor. Even if it is the quality at 4K still should not be close to the details the 80MP sensor captured.

No doubt also, Drones are here to stay, they are used in every video production team in the world as yes they do offer a great ability to have a different perspective, i.e. from the sky. You see drone work on Discovery Channel, History Channel, Natural Geo Channel, Espn, you can list it out forever. And the footage taken is excellent. In fact to me it’s getting a bit old school. But I can bet that the stills are still 12MP or less and the quality of these cameras is not any better than what’s in a iPhone. In fact it might be less. The sensor is tiny. Look at any of the videos that feature drones, most times if not all, they are pans, moving, and moving fast also. Try to and stop them and look at the trees, or finer details, folks, they are not there, and won’t be for a long time. The tech is not there with the vast majority of Drone cameras yet. (unless you strap on a DSLR or digital back). But even when they hover the stills are not that good for a critical print, sure they are fine for the web.

Sadly, in the US, drones have taken on a bad name. I was into drones long before they became “in”, and was flying with first person view before that was common also. It’s great, and the features it offers are excellent. But instead of using this technology in the correct format, no someone has to be the first person to loop Delicate Arch, or fly down to the base of the Grand Canyon, or film the local college football game or fly over the White house, or use the drone around the local airport. All stupid, that stupid it what sticks. All it takes is one serious crash and then all bets are off unless it’s being flown in a closed environment. Drones are loud, and the larger they get the louder they get. Using one in pubic where other people are near by should be taken with full regard to how the other people want to hear the constant high pitch sound of a 6 or 4 engine drone hovering overhead. Most times, this is not done. Where as I don’t know of any still camera that makes enough noise, even a MF XF that you would be bothering someone who is standing 10 feet or even 5 feet away.

I am sorry if I sound critical, but this post just bothers me, as I can think of plenty of photographers that would give an arm or limb to use the IQ180, and to feel that such technology is dated or not able to achieve the results from a 12MP drone, I just will have to say I don’t agree with that. Sure they are not going to get it up to the sky and take a perspective that the drone achieved, but for sure a still from the IQ180 will make a vastly large final print than the output from a 4K still. It is just not that good, at least from all the examples I have seen. If so please post a 360ppi example from your IQ180 and an uprezed image from the 4K drone at 360ppi, or pick 300ppi. Those are the most common required outputs. I really don’t think that the 4K still will hold up. If all that is required is posting on the web, sure the 4K still will work all day long, but the IQ180 was not designed with web sized output as the main focus.

Please don’t attempt to compare output from a device mainly designed for moving photography (video) to that of a device designed around high quality still photography (Phase One IQ180).  I have worked with every software tool there is and it’s not like it works on CSI TV, you just can’t make a 12MP image especially if captured as a 72MP jpg, in the sRGB color space in 8 bit.  You will not get a good print medium or large from 12MP output.  That same drone is not even shooting raw.  12MP native is around a 11 x 14 sized print at 300ppi and to get to 24 x 36 at 300ppi, you are going to need to interpolate up over 300 times.  The loss in details is going to defeat the image and you image will look terrible when printed.  Will it look OK on the web, sure, the web is a totally different animal and no matter what some say, it’s still mainly designed to run at 640 x 480 at 72dpi, even with the modern Apple Retina screens approaching 2560 x 1440dpi.  But the web is a great equalizer, and by the time you down res the 80Mp image to the size of the 12MP, it really will not have any advantage.  So sure if all you are going to do is post stuff on Facebook, or Instagram or god forbit Twitter, then use 12MP and go for it.  But please don’t begin to tell folks that you can get the same quality print from 12MP and 80MP, for you can’t.

 

 

Filed Under: GoPro Video, Photographic Equipment // Tagged: , , , , , , , , ,