aerial photography

[chapsrlz]

as i explained in my previous post ill be buying a phantom to shoot architecture/buildings. i''ve seen a lot of videos and the camera quality seems to be just what i need however im a little concerned about the camera quality when shooting photos.

anyone have some samples or links (flickr, picasa) where i can see high def / raw pictures?

thanks again.

 

[Mori55]

What else are you going to use ? Gopro sucks for stills , yes you'll have fisheye .Must be tons of pics around

 

[chapsrlz]

there's (lightroom, photoshop) tomcorrect the fisheye effect.

my ideal would be a larger drone where i could mount a dslr, but thats out my league formthe moment. imwant to keep it simple, the drone with the default camera for video/photo. those photos wont be used for priniting, just for web publishing.

thanks mori.

 

[ResevorDG]

I use it for architecture.

Here are two galleries of my work.
http://www.jasonyoun.com/aerial
http://www.jasonyoun.com/homes

 

[4wd]

The stills from the P2V+ are relatively much more impressive than the video IMO.
I wouldn't get too hung up on using RAW, it makes it very slow even though theoretically better.

 

[Mal_PV2_Ireland]

The stills from the P2V+ are relatively much more impressive than the video IMO.
I wouldn't get too hung up on using RAW, it makes it very slow even though theoretically better.

If you are going to print your pics I'd say raw is a must, when using for just showing online jpegs are fine.

 

[ResevorDG]

The stills from the P2V+ are relatively much more impressive than the video IMO.
I wouldn't get too hung up on using RAW, it makes it very slow even though theoretically better.

If you want to do lots of editing or have a large dynamic range to edit in, then RAW is better. But you are absolutely correct for speed. Time between JPG is about 2 seconds. Time between RAW is more like 6 or 7.

 

[srandall25]

RAW has yielded very good results with me when using Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop CS6. The last of the non-subcription based Adobe products... It works very well...

 

[ResevorDG]

RAW has yielded very good results with me when using Adobe Lightroom and Photoshop CS6. The last of the non-subcription based Adobe products... It works very well...

+1

 

[tch1972]

You can view my aerial gallery at www.photosoarus.com

 

[ResevorDG]

You can view my aerial gallery at http://www.photosoarus.com

Nice work.

 

[tch1972]

Likewise Jason!

 

[chapsrlz]

You can view my aerial gallery at http://www.photosoarus.com

nice gallery, im assuming all were taken with phantom 2v+
thanks for sharing!

 

[Jeremyconk]

The stills from the P2V+ are relatively much more impressive than the video IMO.
I wouldn't get too hung up on using RAW, it makes it very slow even though theoretically better.

If you are going to print your pics I'd say raw is a must, when using for just showing online jpegs are fine.

+1

RAW files are what changed my mind from a GoPro to the FS2000
It's the only thing in the sky that can take RAW stills from the factory...

 

[ResevorDG]

The stills from the P2V+ are relatively much more impressive than the video IMO.
I wouldn't get too hung up on using RAW, it makes it very slow even though theoretically better.

If you are going to print your pics I'd say raw is a must, when using for just showing online jpegs are fine.

+1

RAW files are what changed my mind from a GoPro to the FS2000
It's the only thing in the sky that can take RAW stills from the factory...

Same here. If not for RAW I would have gone with the GoPro. It's more upgradeable etc. But if you want to do any real editing you need RAW, the info just is not in the file to really work with a jpg.

If you don't ever do much editing beyond white balance, crop and a bit of exposure, jpg is just fine.