Shoting an outdoor footage without drones are outdated and backward?

[Stears555]

Hello!

Shoting an outdoor footage without drones are outdated and backward?


Watch this video in UHD resolution!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zkMsD1yn1xM

Share your opinion!

[TreeTops]

I beat you. Look at forum topic "Latest Video News".

[newpball]

I beat you. Look at forum topic "Latest Video News".

And I beat you!

https://forum.videohelp.com/threads/371144-Throw-away-that-crane-4K-drones-are-on-their...ne#post2383699

[Cornucopia]

Again, stop being awed like a middle-schooler, looking at simple, single numbers: Pay attention to the TCO and ROI (and PEOPLE'S BUDGETS).

Also, outdoor footage will always still have need for options BEYOND drones, when:
1. Stability is of prime importance.
2. Silence is of prime importance.
3. Extended shooting time is required (higher power, storage limitations).
4. Bitrate is beyond what gear can handle remotely/portably.
5. Rig is larger/heavier than drones can handle.
6. Repeatability is of prime importance.
7. You don't have time to master the remote smooth operation of one.

There are probably more, but that should be enough to put this to bed.

Drones are great, cool (and hopefully within budget), but it is still just another tool. You use the appropriate tool in the toolchest for the job, not just the "cool" tool.

Scott

Also, that Phantom 4k 1000fps cost $100k minimum. Get real.

[newpball]

Someone is going to be embarrassed when the bond movie after Spectre is going to use this.


And seriously, stop being awed?
Who are you to decide who is going to be awed about something?

Sheesh!

[Cornucopia]

"Sheesh!" - so middle school.

And I would bet money that the bond movies would/will use a combination of drones AND cranes, AND dollying/trucking, AND tripods, etc. to get the shots right - for the intended impression. NOT oversimplifying it by being gung-ho middle schoolers hell-bent on their newest toys.
Plus, they actually have money in their budget to support use of a Phantom cam. Unlike the rest of us here (including you).

Scott

[usually_quiet]

I don't get all the excitement either. This is merely a refinement of something that has been around for some years, radio controlled model aircraft equipped with cameras.

[newpball]

I don't get all the excitement either.

That's OK, you certainly don't have to!

But others do and they should be allowed to!

It's what makes us diverse!

[usually_quiet]

I don't get all the excitement either.

That's OK, you certainly don't have to!

But others do and they should be allowed to!

It's what makes us diverse!

Yeah, it is going to be really cool when the wind kicks up unexpectedly, crashes the drone and wrecks the 100K camera.

[hech54]

I am very surprised that everyone here has missed the other side to these "drone" stories. There are politicians and cops and government agencies who are desperately trying to make drone flying illegal under almost every circumstance....at least drone flying by "us".
In England:
http://www.amateurphotographer.co.uk/latest/photo-news/drones-43790

You can't fly yours:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/volokh-conspiracy/wp/2015/03/30/no-drone-surveillan...ve-police-say/

....but cops can fly theirs:
http://www.detroitnews.com/story/news/politics/michigan/2015/03/09/michigan-state-poli...rone/24654161/

[newpball]

Yeah, it is going to be really cool when the wind kicks up unexpectedly, crashes the drone and wrecks the 100K camera.

That would certainly an expensive accident!