How to accept payment for aerial photography in U.S

[Happyflyer]

$1000-$2000 holy crap. I can't complain about making 250 per house. My record is 4 in 4 hours. Like I said before I don't edit the videos. I can and I'm pretty good at it but then I would have to charge more and their is no way the real estate companions, at least around here would pay it. I shoot it, and put it the file(s) on a USB drive and hand it over, easy and no sweat.

That Hotel video WAS great. That person put a ton of work into it.
.
Being a person that has not ever been around a ton of money that was mine, I never would have guessed you can get paid that much for videos. $250 per house video that is unedited is really a shock to me. I would have to improve the equipment first because my P2V stock camera gives me nice shots "up in the air." But it in no way compares with some of these smooth videos I have watched.

 

[Wedeliver]

$1000-$2000 holy crap. I can't complain about making 250 per house. My record is 4 in 4 hours. Like I said before I don't edit the videos. I can and I'm pretty good at it but then I would have to charge more and their is no way the real estate companions, at least around here would pay it. I shoot it, and put it the file(s) on a USB drive and hand it over, easy and no sweat.

That Hotel video WAS great. That person put a ton of work into it.
.
Being a person that has not ever been around a ton of money that was mine, I never would have guessed you can get paid that much for videos. $250 per house video that is unedited is really a shock to me. I would have to improve the equipment first because my P2V stock camera gives me nice shots "up in the air." But it in no way compares with some of these smooth videos I have watched.

I agree the hotel vid was great, buttt.. I did not like some of the transistions. kinda jerky. also some of the shots were a bit short, not enough time for me to wrap my head about it. It is not at all easy to make a professional video and even the pro's need to work hard at it and they know all the tricks. You Mr Happyflyer sound like you have a great start. Perhaps try your hand at editing some of the work you have done, see if your finished product is better then the real estate office that you gave the raw to. I wish you luck.

 

[eroomomni]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

 

[poostik]

If the law is presently not to fly for a fee

when did this happen?
(this is a sincere question)

 

[tom3holer]

There is no law against accepting payment for aerial video/shots.

Tom

 

[chapsrlz]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

for what i read (in this forum and in many other sites), theres no law present that prohibits flying for commercial uses, the faa is only making observations to what can an cant be done when flying uav's. and what about the ones like me who dont live/fly in the us? :shock:
we are not breaking any rule and im pretty sure our comments are appropiate to this forum.

 

[ianwood]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

Allow me to quote... myself. From... this very thread:

The good news is that selling aerial footage is not illegal last I checked. The FAA is doing a great job of scaring people but they do not have regulations against it yet. They have proposed some. But even if they are approved, they can be challenged on the basis that those suggested regulations are entirely incongruous and unenforceable. The NTSB judge on the Pirker case has already made this clear and the appeal will fail.

 

[chapsrlz]

touche!

 

[evonbart2]

I wouldn't touch anything for less than $2k.

BTW, clever labeling on your charges doesn't make any difference. In fact, it could be construed as a form of fraud if you're using it as a means to deceive. If you offered, discussed, agreed, performed and delivered aerial footage in exchange for money or value in kind you have made a transaction on that service regardless of what it is bundled with or how it is labeled.

The good news is that selling aerial footage is not illegal last I checked. The FAA is doing a great job of scaring people but they do not have regulations against it yet. They have proposed some. But even if they are approved, they can be challenged on the basis that those suggested regulations are entirely incongruous and unenforceable. The NTSB judge on the Pirker case has already made this clear and the appeal will fail.

I am happy to publicly sell aerial video. I welcome a cease and desist letter from the the FAA to which I will reply with:

Dear FAA,

Thank you for your kind letter dated ______ __, 2014. I have read and considered your suggestions in full. After much thought, my offer is this:

Nothing. I will continue to charge for filming services with my remote controlled RC model aircraft observing current National Airspace restrictions and regulations and applying common sense measures to maximize safety. In turn, the FAA will not make any issue of it until they have proposed, revised and enacted reasonable and enforceable regulations for the commercial use of small RC model aircraft. I trust you will find this approach reasonable.


Kind Regards,

Ian Wood

Ian, that's pretty ballsy and I like it. It might be trouble tweaking the Fed, but I am supportive of your 'stand your ground' stance. It seems the real enforcement has taken place when it seems the pilots have been reckless and endangering people. This was a good discussion. I got curious myself about this and thought your reply was one of the most articulate and funniest.

Peace
-E

 

[poostik]

Allow me to quote... myself. From... this very thread:

We should have a beer sometime.

 

[chapsrlz]

Allow me to quote... myself. From... this very thread:

We should have a beer sometime.

beer?
im in!

 

[TodayTrader]

Anyone have experience filming at golf courses? I have proposed fly-overs of each hole at my local club and aerial shots of each hole and the entire course. I have any idea on pricing but curious what your thoughts are on how much this should go for? Private course in Virginia. Thanks.

I would propose 3 different options for them. 3 signature holes. 9 holes or 18 hole packages to choose from. Do they want shots of the clubhouse interiors?

Maybe start the 3 hole signature package at just under 1,000 for complete edited version

The logistics of shooting 18 holes on a popular course would be hard I bet. You may have to become a group and take 5 hours to get it done with an empty hole in front of you.

What were you thinking in terms of pricing yourself?

 

[evonbart2]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

Eroomommi, you say you're not trying to be contentious, but yet you have voluntarily come into a forum topic and commented on it to complain when clearly, everyone here knows the beauty of forums is, when you see a topic you're not interested in - you DON'T GO IN. PhantomPilots.com has all sorts of topics listed, but the main core is for people who own DJI Phantom Quadcopters. Everyone who owns a Phantom could use it for fee based aerial footage capture. It's a choice based on their interest of how they want to fly their quad. What you're saying is PhantomPilots.com should restrict talk about something the FAA has not even ruled properly on & the courts have disputed and dismissed. No thank you. I think everyone interested in this topic should just carry on and people like you should change the channel if they don't like what they are reading, hearing, seeing.

On the other hand. As for FAA regulation - I do respect their interest in wanting to keep the air and ground safe for everyone. I've flown my Phantoms hundreds of times now and I can tell you of some situations where unrestricted free-for-all of the air could be dangerous and deadly. I think across the board banning commercial use is absurd, but some training and licensing might be appropriate because drones can be flown in so many places where RC planes could not.

With that said, I think a benefit for everyone is if they put some form of licensing in place like regular airplane pilots have, training as well to educate drone pilots on sharing the airspace and even finding a way to get insurance coverage. This would allow commercial use and give all concerned more peace of mind that if a fail occurred and their was property damage or personal injury, it would be covered.

There was a great discussion about this on This Week in Law on the TWiT network and Tech News Today

This week in Law
http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-law/266 <-- Not available for viewing for another hour or so.

Tech News Today
http://twit.tv/show/tech-news-today/1047

I don't think it's right for someone to say stop discussing a topic because they are not interested in it or disagree with the content. It is perfectly legitimate to say it's idiotic for me to safely fly my camera as a 'hobbyist' in places where nobody objects to, BUT if I charge for the footage I take - I am violating the law. The FAA is diminishing it's credibility by letting this issue drag on without clarity for those of us who want to fly responsibly.

Thanks for all the feedback on this topic. It's really interesting and helpful.

 

[Tstanfordjr]

Bravo! Well said

 

[harvey]

So is it illegal or not? Trying to slide between the lines would make me nervous. If it does not bother others then go for it.
It is just a personal decision I guess. I am a licensed pilot through the FAA so I want no bad interaction with them.

 

[Happyflyer]

$1000-$2000 holy crap. I can't complain about making 250 per house. My record is 4 in 4 hours. Like I said before I don't edit the videos. I can and I'm pretty good at it but then I would have to charge more and their is no way the real estate companions, at least around here would pay it. I shoot it, and put it the file(s) on a USB drive and hand it over, easy and no sweat.

That Hotel video WAS great. That person put a ton of work into it.
.
Being a person that has not ever been around a ton of money that was mine, I never would have guessed you can get paid that much for videos. $250 per house video that is unedited is really a shock to me. I would have to improve the equipment first because my P2V stock camera gives me nice shots "up in the air." But it in no way compares with some of these smooth videos I have watched.

I agree the hotel vid was great, buttt.. I did not like some of the transistions. kinda jerky. also some of the shots were a bit short, not enough time for me to wrap my head about it. It is not at all easy to make a professional video and even the pro's need to work hard at it and they know all the tricks. You Mr Happyflyer sound like you have a great start. Perhaps try your hand at editing some of the work you have done, see if your finished product is better then the real estate office that you gave the raw to. I wish you luck.

That wasn't me, it was FASTF JR that sends raw video to real estate companies. I don't think any of them around here would ever consider pics from the air.

 

[britchris1]

Anyone have experience filming at golf courses? I have proposed fly-overs of each hole at my local club and aerial shots of each hole and the entire course. I have any idea on pricing but curious what your thoughts are on how much this should go for? Private course in Virginia. Thanks.

You should probably talk to these guys www.uppertee.com

 

[eroomomni]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

Eroomommi, you say you're not trying to be contentious, but yet you have voluntarily come into a forum topic and commented on it to complain when clearly, everyone here knows the beauty of forums is, when you see a topic you're not interested in - you DON'T GO IN. PhantomPilots.com has all sorts of topics listed, but the main core is for people who own DJI Phantom Quadcopters. Everyone who owns a Phantom could use it for fee based aerial footage capture. It's a choice based on their interest of how they want to fly their quad. What you're saying is PhantomPilots.com should restrict talk about something the FAA has not even ruled properly on & the courts have disputed and dismissed. No thank you. I think everyone interested in this topic should just carry on and people like you should change the channel if they don't like what they are reading, hearing, seeing.

On the other hand. As for FAA regulation - I do respect their interest in wanting to keep the air and ground safe for everyone. I've flown my Phantoms hundreds of times now and I can tell you of some situations where unrestricted free-for-all of the air could be dangerous and deadly. I think across the board banning commercial use is absurd, but some training and licensing might be appropriate because drones can be flown in so many places where RC planes could not.

With that said, I think a benefit for everyone is if they put some form of licensing in place like regular airplane pilots have, training as well to educate drone pilots on sharing the airspace and even finding a way to get insurance coverage. This would allow commercial use and give all concerned more peace of mind that if a fail occurred and their was property damage or personal injury, it would be covered.

There was a great discussion about this on This Week in Law on the TWiT network and Tech News Today

This week in Law
http://twit.tv/show/this-week-in-law/266 <-- Not available for viewing for another hour or so.

Tech News Today
http://twit.tv/show/tech-news-today/1047

I don't think it's right for someone to say stop discussing a topic because they are not interested in it or disagree with the content. It is perfectly legitimate to say it's idiotic for me to safely fly my camera as a 'hobbyist' in places where nobody objects to, BUT if I charge for the footage I take - I am violating the law. The FAA is diminishing it's credibility by letting this issue drag on without clarity for those of us who want to fly responsibly.

Thanks for all the feedback on this topic. It's really interesting and helpful.

I was curious, given the title of the topic. That's all. I've seen copies of citations, and personally know of a professional business shut down for the reason of this subject matter. My question wasn't a complaint. I asked, I saw the answers and that's all I could ask for.
Thanks.

 

[Wedeliver]

I was under the impression that this forum was mostly frequented by those who flew for a hobby and was interested in staying within the bounds of the law. If the law is presently not to fly for a fee, why are we using this forum to discuss methods of breaking that law? Should there be a different forum for professional Phantom Pilots, or those who use their Phantom in the line of employment? Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of? Please, I am not trying to be contentious. This is a sincere question. A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me.

Humm, perhaps it is the way you start, "I was under the impression" and I have to wonder where did you get "the impression" that speach should be restricted here other then keeping it civil? Ok, now I don't mean to attack or make you defensive but your question and the way it is phrased makes me think of someone wanting to keep people from speaking freely about a subject that is clearly important to them. Actually that is exactly what you suggest, that you think we are asking for trouble by sharing our lives and experiences with each other. I don't want nothing to do with a world like that. Above you say " Is this forum not watched by those who would attempt to issue a cease and desist, which many of us have seen copies of?" Why don't you join the AMA and help us fight for reasonable rules that encourage our hobby. Oh, and by the way have you heard of Hobby Shops. This is a group of "Commercial Business's" that earn money from our HOBBY. And finally, when I put a bunch of money into something, I want to have to opportunity to sell the results of my efforts. That is why I live in America. reasonable rules! and as MLK said, an unjust law is no law at all.

Finally, I don't want to "A simple, good answer will probably satisfy and quiet me." as there is no "simple" answer to complicated questions. I really don't want to quiet you either, that goes against my ethos so, your turn, defend your position. come on let the debate continue. (my friend) (I might use strong language, but that is only to highlight my thoughts)

 

[TodayTrader]

I too am exploring ways to make money with this investment. Will most likely focus on Golf Courses as I have been a golfer all my life and have an "eye" for what golfers want to see in a video.

I didn't care for the tone of that guy's comment either. Saying ...."will quiet me." implies you are hostile and intend to disrupt.

Dude, choose your words better and then join the AMA.