«

Well, drone in the sensor of remote. But this has been done before by
individual photographers. I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
the arena rafters.

http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs

On 06/07/2012 05:36, RichA wrote:
> Well, drone in the sensor of remote. But this has been done before by
> individual photographers. I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
> the arena rafters.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs
>

No problem, the defence spooks will soon sort 'em out:
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18690861

On Friday, July 6, 2012 5:36:17 AM UTC+1, RichA wrote:
> Well, drone in the sensor of remote. But this has been done before by
> individual photographers. I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
> the arena rafters.
>
> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs

Any idea how those cameras on arms behind the goal at the recent Euro soccor cup thingy were controlled ?. Wondering if they'll ever manage an automated ball tracking system.

On 06/07/2012 13:53, Whisky-dave wrote:
> On Friday, July 6, 2012 5:36:17 AM UTC+1, RichA wrote:
>> Well, drone in the sensor of remote. But this has been done before by
>> individual photographers. I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
>> the arena rafters.
>>
>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs
>
> Any idea how those cameras on arms behind the goal at the recent Euro soccor cup thingy were controlled ?. Wondering if they'll ever manage an automated ball tracking system.

Remote heads are an old hat in the film/video world. Been around for at
least 15 years.

Stuff like this:

<http://www.arri-rental.com/grip/remote-heads/remote-heads.html>
<http://www.arri-rental.com/grip/remote-heads/stabilized-remote-heads.html>
<http://www.panavision.co.uk/catalogue/default.asp?cid=17>

etc.

--
Illegitimi non carborundum

On 7/8/2012 3:19 PM, Joe Rocketry wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 13:53, Whisky-dave wrote:
>> On Friday, July 6, 2012 5:36:17 AM UTC+1, RichA wrote:
>>> Well, drone in the sensor of remote. But this has been done before by
>>> individual photographers. I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
>>> the arena rafters.
>>>
>>> http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs
>>
>> Any idea how those cameras on arms behind the goal at the recent Euro
>> soccor cup thingy were controlled ?. Wondering if they'll ever manage
>> an automated ball tracking system.
>
> Remote heads are an old hat in the film/video world. Been around for at
> least 15 years.
>

More than that. Back in the 70s a magazine cover shot of the Kentucky
Derby was shot by a cheap P&S mounted on the rail.




> Stuff like this:
>
> <http://www.arri-rental.com/grip/remote-heads/remote-heads.html>
> <http://www.arri-rental.com/grip/remote-heads/stabilized-remote-heads.html>
> <http://www.panavision.co.uk/catalogue/default.asp?cid=17>
>
> etc.
>


--
Peter

On 09/07/2012 07:20, Alfred Molon wrote:
> In article <>,
> says...
>> To buy something, see http://www.raidentech.com/rchespycacos.html
>>
>> To see one in action see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-GjFhMcNZM
>
> These are all tiny spy cameras. Is there any arrangement which can carry
> a heavy DSLR+lens?

Yes. http://www.pictorvision.com/
Not a quadrocopter though, might be an wee bit awkward indoors...

These guys do a smaller, remote controlled version: http://www.hovercam.com/

If you've got the camera on a gimbal anyway, Quadcopters don't offer you
any advantage over normal helicopters. AFAIK you get more lift from a
single rotor, and you gain maneuverability if you stabilize your camera
independently from your aerial platform.

--
Illegitimi non carborundum

On 9/07/2012 8:21 AM, Alfred Molon wrote:
> It would be cool to fix a standard camera to a quadrocopter and use this
> setup to take photos from above. Would require a remote control capable
> of positioning the camera with the right angle at the altitude you need,
> some capability of the camera to transmit the image being framed upon to
> you (on some kind of screen) so that you can frame the shot before you
> take it, and some kind of robotic arrangement so that the zoom and the
> camera buttons can be actuated.
>
> I guess that would be easier with a compact camera with a motorised zoom
> and light weight than with a heavy and manual DLSR (which would also
> require a more powerful quadrocopter).
>
> From a technology perspective all this should be easily doable, but is
> anybody selling such equipment?
>


I query the use of a SLR for this application. Surely there are other
compact cameras around that will fit the bill and be much cheaper and
lighter. Crashes come to mind when wrecking equipment.

Joe Kotroczo <> wrote:
> On 09/07/2012 07:20, Alfred Molon wrote:
>> In article <>,
>> says...
>>> To buy something, see http://www.raidentech.com/rchespycacos.html
>>>
>>> To see one in action see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-GjFhMcNZM
>>
>> These are all tiny spy cameras. Is there any arrangement which can carry
>> a heavy DSLR+lens?

> Yes. http://www.pictorvision.com/
> Not a quadrocopter though, might be an wee bit awkward indoors...

> These guys do a smaller, remote controlled version: http://www.hovercam.com/

> If you've got the camera on a gimbal anyway, Quadcopters don't offer you
> any advantage over normal helicopters. AFAIK you get more lift from a
> single rotor, and you gain maneuverability if you stabilize your camera
> independently from your aerial platform.

The advantage of the quadrocopter is that it's much easier to control
because it's more inherently stable.

--
Chris Malcolm

Eric Stevens <> wrote:
> On Mon, 9 Jul 2012 00:21:27 +0200, Alfred Molon
> <> wrote:

>>It would be cool to fix a standard camera to a quadrocopter and use this
>>setup to take photos from above. Would require a remote control capable
>>of positioning the camera with the right angle at the altitude you need,
>>some capability of the camera to transmit the image being framed upon to
>>you (on some kind of screen) so that you can frame the shot before you
>>take it, and some kind of robotic arrangement so that the zoom and the
>>camera buttons can be actuated.
>>
>>I guess that would be easier with a compact camera with a motorised zoom
>>and light weight than with a heavy and manual DLSR (which would also
>>require a more powerful quadrocopter).
>>
>>From a technology perspective all this should be easily doable, but is
>>anybody selling such equipment?

> To buy something, see http://www.raidentech.com/rchespycacos.html

> To see one in action see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V-GjFhMcNZM

But you need to bear in mind the possible legal problems. In the UK
for example it is illegal to operate such a camera within some
significant distance (100 metres?) of any private dwelling unless you
have the owner's permission -- invasion of privacy rights.

--
Chris Malcolm

On Jul 6, 4:23*am, Nemo <inva...@invalid.invalid> wrote:
> On 06/07/2012 05:36, RichA wrote:
>
> > Well, drone in the sensor of remote. *But this has been done before by
> > individual photographers. *I've seen remote DSLRs at hockey games, in
> > the arena rafters.
>
> > *http://www.dpreview.com/news/2012/07...rsroboticdslrs
>
> No problem, the defence spooks will soon sort 'em out:http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-18690861

Why would they tell people where the missiles were? How stupid.