Just got back from my concert drone shoot and it was a beautiful evening. Hundreds of people showed up to sit around on the grass and enjoy the band. They looked great in the video clips, but it was a real challenge to capture something interesting while observing the FAA regs and not flying over anyone. People are amazing, I had two agency people helping to keep my departure and arrival pad clear but I needed an army. I had the drone about 100' in the air at one point and I'm trying to thread the needle and keep it over some trees looking back at the crowd and the musicians, I look down for a second and a four year old kid is standing on my landing pad with his arms pointed toward the drone, his Mom is standing six feet away engrossed in the music.........sheesh! Then a 50 year old woman screams "that is so cool!" and runs toward the landing drone with her arms out as if to try to catch it. I was beginning to wonder if the $5 million in liability I took out for the shoot was enough.
Ray Swindle wrote:
Yeah, I know, Johnny Depp got $15 million from a girl who pooped in his bed, can't imagine what a drone injury would cost
Clients are becoming more aware of liability, but it is really up to the photographer to protect everyone. Last evening is a perfect example, no one asked me if I was insured to do that shoot, not the client, not the agency, not the owners of the shopping center. You can make book on the fact that if something went south we would all be named in the action and the lawyers would go after each of us with a vengeance. From a good business practice perspective, you don't want to be the photographer that allowed multiple clients to be exposed to a suit like that. I had $5 million covering us last night and that might have been a little overkill, but I'd rather be on that side of the fence.
When I am discussing a possible assignment with a client I like to bring up insurance, once you explain the liability to them a light goes on and you can see that they realized you're. pro and not Zeke from shipping who likes to make a few bucks with his drone. Last night was very challenging and nerve wracking to say the least, but those are great opportunities to show a client what you're made of and how you handle situations, a good bonding experience for everyone.
A gentleman walked over before I began flying and commented on the Inspire (it does separate the men from the boys just sitting on the pad). His real reason for coming over was to ask how I was going to pull this assignment off and not break a reg. He flies drones for search and rescue missions. I told him that I had no intention of breaking any regs and that I was hoping I could capture a series of nice clips while keeping everyone safe. As I mentioned, people are clueless, with every precaution we took, still folks wandered dangerously close to our operation, just clueless. They'd be the first to sue you though, if something happened.
JWilsonphoto wrote:
Clients are becoming more aware of liability, but it is really up to the photographer to protect everyone.
I was shooting a high school football game on the sidelines near a lady with a large live feed video camera. The ball carrier and two defenders came right at us. I had my 300 on a monopod about 5 feet away from her. I moved out of the way and watched all three players run over her and her camera. She was carried off the field in an ambulance, her video camera was in three large pieces. I talked to my buddy about insurance and got it, up to $3 million. The insurance company told me to give them a list of clients who would want a certificate of insurance. I told them no one had asked. They told me that was strange as I told them I did shoot some NCAA games. The newspaper, college and high schools I shoot at have never asked about insurance. I was more concerned about the liability of me and my equipment than I was protecting my gear. So far I have been very lucky.
I have a half a dozen clients that require updated verification of "Named Coverage" on my liability policy, two require verification that my vehicle is covered as well. They will not issue checks if the documentation isn't up to date. I use Verifly for my drone liability and it's on a per assignment basis, $5,000,000 on an annual policy would be untenable and there are many cases where there is literally zero risk so why have an annual policy? Last night was kind of an extreme case and it would have been really irresponsible not to have coverage.
So, looking at your situation from a legal perspective, the players run you over and collide with your 500mm causing bodily injury to one or both, I guess they could come after you for medical expenses.One can't mitigate all risk, but it's important to analyze the potential.
anthonysemone wrote:
So much for USA oil independence. Didn't Ole Dementia shut down a pipeline?
Re "oil independence":
At this time, I believe the United States is the world's biggest oil producer (here's one source) but it isn't, and IIRC never has been, "energy independent" because it consumes a lot more than it produces and a lot of its oil production (e.g. shale) is only viable at relatively high prices.
If the price drops, production drops, so imports are still necessary. USA cannot be "energy independent" on fossil fuels alone due to global price/demand curves. Its best hope for reducing energy imports to zero is though a combination of oil/NG production and renewable sources like wind/solar/hydro.
And though it's comforting to hitch (totally reasonable) resentment at high energy prices to the government currently in power when this is happening, that has little to no basis in reality. The primary drivers of the current fuel-price spike are:
1. Global demand dropped off a cliff in early 2020 as the world grappled with the COVID-19 pandemic. Production was sharply reduced. But far, far more impactful was that it caused entire refineries to be shut down, and those take a LONG time to restart, and some were uneconomical to restart, and damages to refining capacity (see fire at Marathon LA in 2020, explosion at Baytown TX 2021) have further limited refining capacity for a time.
2. Global supply chains took a massive hit as ports shut down wholesale for COVID-19 spikes in their facilities, containers and tankers got stuck in the wrong parts of the world, and the lines for ships to dock at ports were measured in WEEKS. The global supply web is intricate, complicated, and was already pretty strained, and after #1 and #2 it was pretty badly beaten up. Price increases were inevitable.
And THEN Russia invades Ukraine, OK?
3. Look up everything Ukraine produces -- or more accurately, used to produce -- and you'll see some of the impacts on global inflation and global scarcity. Too much data/impact to describe here.
4. Europe bought 40% of its gas from Russia in 2021, and over 25% of its oil. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Europe saw the writing on the wall, that they were eventually going to have an energy-dependence knife to their throats, and immediately set about reducing -- eventually moving to a phased-in total ban in some countries -- on buying Russian oil/gas. They cannot reduce their consumption by that much, so Europe is now competing for oil/gas from other sources... just like every other country, because practically NO ONE wants to buy from Russia right now.
--------------
Hate to tell you this, but high energy prices are going to be here for a while. And there wasn't a damn thing your government could have done about it.
Rodolfo, I think we don't need spin to try to hide the problem with the energy problem in the US. There is a movement, begun years ago against fossil fuels because they tended to donate to the wrong political party. I worked in a refinery and can tell you that while 100% of what you said is true, well, sort of true, let's say it is a perception, it is only 50% accurate when the entire story is told. Those of us who can think for ourselves know who is to blame for the energy problem we have, and it isn't Putin and Ukraine. I am talking about the US. BTW, get ready for fuel shortages thanks to the anti-fossil fuel people, it is coming. And don't forget, farmers use a lot of fossil fuel to bring crops to the stores...expect shortages there too.
I just hope you enjoy driving around in your alternative powered vehicles looking for food...that day is coming.
I find it interesting that this "movement against fossil fuels because they tended to donate to the wrong party" took hold across the entire planet, coincidentally around the same decades as most of the planet realized that anthropogenic climate change is real. Odd, don't you think? That you think it's just a political-party-donation problem and it happens to be global?
I found it utterly disappointing that (what used to be) the Party of Lincoln chose to bury its head in the sand and try to deny reality, instead of saying "hey... there's an opportunity here, if the world wants green energy let's sell it to them and make a fortune!" And having squandered its lead in renewable-energy tech, the USA now lags far behind and buys most of its solar panels from China and Korea.
I respect your right to believe whatever you want. But your comment about "those of us who can think for ourselves", which subtly implies that I don't and am being fed a line of bull that I'm lapping up? Sorry, that dog won't hunt.
I've worked in 26 countries, traveled to 60+, and my business is to advise some of the most successful multigenerational business families on the continent. I chose to live in the USA because I believe in the principles on which this country was founded, and I went to considerable (and absurd and counterproductive) expense to do so legally -- because (what used to be) the Party of Reagan has also decided that we need fewer smart people coming in (see H-1B visa quotas for one example).
I used to favor the Republican party, until a few years ago. Now I'm Independent, with very centrist views. I'm always open to hearing different opinions. You're always welcome to argue with me. But trying to dismiss me, even in your own mind, as one of the mythical "sheeple" who cannot think for themselves...? That, good sir, does nothing for your argument or the image of an open, thinking mind you wish to portray.
So: I can find facts and news sources from around the globe to support my arguments -- and I've made it a habit to cite one or two just to be helpful -- yet you dismiss me out of hand as uninformed (at best) or naïvely misled at worst. Please, then, do show us the kindness of telling us "the whole story" as you see it and believe. Convince me of this conspiracy theory. But when you do, bring data.
Sorry Rodolfo, just because you like to use unreliable sources doesn't help your cause. You should try to be more open minded and look for more knowledgeable information. It is very refreshing. We know who is responsible for the energy crisis impacting the US...and it ain't Putin or Ukraine. I could quote your buddy Biden: "Look, c'mon man, here's the deal, what you said ain't true!"
1. Which of the sources I've cited is unreliable? Which facts do you disbelieve? Be specific, and tell me WHY.
2. You've cited ZERO sources of information. Care to recommend a few?
As noted, I'm always open to a conversation. But if you're just going to keep telling me I need to think more, while offering no support for your own views, then God bless you and I hope things go well for you... but I'm going to leave you alone. No one gains from a one-sided argument.
By the way, despite your efforts to paint me otherwise, note that I've offered no praise for Biden or the current administration.
So follow the Biden quote you chose, then. WHAT have I said that isn't true? For anything I said that isn't true, what do you consider the truth? Show some data or a source as to why you believe it. Share some of those "more knowledgeable" sources you keep telling me to look for but refuse to name. Be specific.
Save your breath Eddie Ray, the 28-38% that still support what has taken place in this great country over the past few years cannot be reasoned with, their minds will not be changed.The failures of the left and their joke of an administration are so epically written on the pages of recent history, if one doesn't see it, there's nothing left to discuss but f stops and shutter speeds......................
At this time, I believe the United States is the world's biggest oil producer (here's one source) but it isn't, and IIRC never has been, "energy independent" because it consumes a lot more than it produces and a lot of its oil production (e.g. shale) is only viable at relatively high prices.
If the price drops, production drops, so imports are still necessary. USA cannot be "energy independent" on fossil fuels alone due to global price/demand curves. Its best hope for reducing energy imports to zero is though a combination of oil/NG production and renewable sources like wind/solar/hydro.
And though it's comforting to hitch (totally reasonable) resentment at high energy prices to the government currently in power when this is happening, that has little to no basis in reality. The primary drivers of the current fuel-price spike are:
1. Global demand dropped off a cliff in early 2020 as the world grappled with the COVID-19 pandemic. Production was sharply reduced. But far, far more impactful was that it caused entire refineries to be shut down, and those take a LONG time to restart, and some were uneconomical to restart, and damages to refining capacity (see fire at Marathon LA in 2020, explosion at Baytown TX 2021) have further limited refining capacity for a time.
2. Global supply chains took a massive hit as ports shut down wholesale for COVID-19 spikes in their facilities, containers and tankers got stuck in the wrong parts of the world, and the lines for ships to dock at ports were measured in WEEKS. The global supply web is intricate, complicated, and was already pretty strained, and after #1 and #2 it was pretty badly beaten up. Price increases were inevitable.
And THEN Russia invades Ukraine, OK?
3. Look up everything Ukraine produces -- or more accurately, used to produce -- and you'll see some of the impacts on global inflation and global scarcity. Too much data/impact to describe here.
4. Europe bought 40% of its gas from Russia in 2021, and over 25% of its oil. After the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Europe saw the writing on the wall, that they were eventually going to have an energy-dependence knife to their throats, and immediately set about reducing -- eventually moving to a phased-in total ban in some countries -- on buying Russian oil/gas. They cannot reduce their consumption by that much, so Europe is now competing for oil/gas from other sources... just like every other country, because practically NO ONE wants to buy from Russia right now.
--------------
Hate to tell you this, but high energy prices are going to be here for a while. And there wasn't a damn thing your government could have done about it....Show more →
.
And this happened over 2 years ago !
.
And if someone in office could act like a Man, President and Billion-air.
That's all I wanted.
.
But like usual, we all gotta put up with what we don't like this term and others don't like it next term, it's always something and no one is ever happy but we still gotta take care of US and America... Jan 6th was a disgrace.
.
Wish Ross P was still around.
Awesome morning at 6:30 a.m. heard a turkey hen cluck. A short time later looking from back porch saw her descend from roost, a tall pine. Then one by one her babies followed her from the pine tree flying to the ground. I ran got camera and took this shot about 6:50 a.m.
Don
For the record, all I've done was try to explain why high fuel prices are an even worse problem than some people think, and why they're going to last longer than anyone expected.
My post was fact-based and had no political content other than "it's normal to blame the government currently in power" and "your government could have done nothing to prevent this". Please note that both of those comments apply equally well to the current administration and the previous one. I'm not taking sides here.
So I find it really sad that the only response was to label me an uninformed and/or brainwashed stooge of the left, with no coherent argument or even a different narrative attached. It's all the Democrats' fault, but no explanation of why is offered; and I should find better sources, but none are given. Insults and patronization, but no debate.
Gentlemen, among the most precious principles the Founding Fathers held was a respect for different opinions AND different values. They treasured debate and the value of open, honest argument so that both parties could learn, and ideally come to an agreement... or at the very least, come to a decision and tolerate their differences.
Remember that George Washington chose Thomas Jefferson for his Cabinet in 1789 specifically because of his capacity and the fact that his political views differed sharply from Washington's.
A republic cannot survive without the participation and acceptance of different viewpoints and beliefs. When you cannot, or will not, engage in the discussion of ideas with reasonable persons, you have lost far more than you think.
And if any of you have reached the point where my political beliefs -- which track closely with those of many leading Republicans throughout history including Lincoln, Reagan, McCain, Cheney and Romney -- are considered too radical, then I submit that it is not I who is being unreasonable.
God bless y'all. I know you're good men and I wish you only the best.
Bill Gass wrote:
Good catch, you know where din din will be in November.
.
Better than the mouse I have roaming around my deck I caught on camera last night.
. 
