Upload & Sell: On
There was a story on AvWeb about that. I can't be an unbiased source in that debate because I'm sure I lose a few jobs a year to someone with a Rebel and Quadcopter, or a blimp with something hanging from it. From what I've seen the imagery is just acceptable, but one of the side effects of the dumbing down we've been discussing is the fact that "barely acceptable" is just fine these days.
I have no idea what a person with a Rebel and a drone charges to go to a site, fly and shoot, but if it's less than three or four hundred dollars they are crazy. They'll do to themselves what photographers have done to the stock market. I rarely side with "The Society For The Prevention Of Flight" (FAA), but one reason I can see for limiting commercial use of drones for photography is that a bunch of the folks who would jump on, would not pony up for the liability insurance. I have heard that it is not only difficult to secure, but pretty pricey if you are able. A quad with a 5D hanging from it has the potential to be lethal if something goes south.
Aren't the feds busy these days though, sleep apnea, considering prohibiting most non high end flight sim use, and several other initiatives. I thought they were so underfunded and short handed they can't take care of what is already on their plate. No secret that they and the airlines, would like to see GA relegated to the scrap heap, and warbirds to static displays. Given the level of government overstep these days, they just might be able to get it done without so much as one of their patronizing "Notice of Proposed Rule Making".
Edited on Jan 11, 2014 at 05:15 AM · View previous versions