Hurricane
Well-Known Member
This is getting a bit like an anchoring thread.
Grey Mavic Down
- Thread starter Hurricane
- Start date
GSL
Well-Known Member
Hurricane
Well-Known Member
Ok point taken.
Hurricane
Well-Known Member
OK Here's another Drone Video
Or full screen on this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=PlxkWOcV6aE
WHOOPS
I've just remembered that my drone is dead.
It must have been shot using my cheap £150 pocket camera - JUST LIKE ANY OTHER TOURIST
Really, PF - get a grip!!!
Or full screen on this link
http://www.youtube.com/watch_popup?v=PlxkWOcV6aE
WHOOPS
I've just remembered that my drone is dead.
It must have been shot using my cheap £150 pocket camera - JUST LIKE ANY OTHER TOURIST
Really, PF - get a grip!!!
Richard.C
Well-Known Member
Lucky you weren't shot invading everyone's privacy like that
henryf
Well-Known Member
Portofino.
I have just seen this thread, or rather the direction it's taken. As both an amateur drone operator, DSLR photographer and owner of a CCTV company I have a little expertise which covers many of the points you raise. I'm also constantly speaking to people who are concerned when neighbours fit CCTV.
As Scubaman eluded to in one of his posts this all comes down to angle of view on the the camera you are using to film and all the drones out there used domestically are fitted with very wide angle lenses, as are most out of the box CCTV solutions. This means you won't be able to identify people once you move more than a couple of metres from the lens of the camera. In the case of CCTV the advertising hot air will have you believe the cameras have great range. I made a video to show the reality a few years ago:
Even if you use high definition equipment the results are largely the same, I will be re-shooting in high definition just as soon as the body tones up sufficiently for our long range HD cameras
DSLR cameras on the other hand are a very different beast and a definite threat to your privacy. You don't need a 1m long lens to capture crystal clear high resolution images from considerable distance.
So long as drones are fitted with wide angle lenses you have nothing to fear. My Phantom has a 94º angle of view lens, the equivalent of 20mm on a traditional camera where 50mm would equate to normal vision. For a drone to identify people you would pretty much be able to touch it.
I'm not sure what relevance flying a drone 50m up in the air 5km or 15km from an airport has. If you see a commercial plane less than 200m off the deck that far from the airport you're going to be on the national news that evening.
You are a victim of misinformation and hearsay. That has made you paranoid and you are convinced people are obtaining detailed images where in fact they are merely filming overall views. I did think it a bit arrogant that when JFM was filming you took it upon yourself to "allow" the filming to go ahead. Presumably you had spoken with everyone else anchored nearby? Also what is the difference between Blackpool beach and Swiss ski slopes? Why should it be ok to film people enjoying donkey rides and ice cream showing off their white flesh but not wealthy people covered up in their ski wear or showing off their tanned skin in a bikini whilst bubbling away in a hot tub?
I am always mindful to not invade privacy when filming, be it with a drone or with a more capable DSLR. Like everyone else I have captured people without their consent, particularly when filming holiday videos whilst cruising the world. In some cases it's people I know but not always. In relation to the cruise ship videos everyone who speaks to me says how much they enjoyed seeing themselves in one of my productions. Sometimes they are recognisable, other times they spot their feet, the back of their head or a hat so only they know it was them.
In terms of privacy regulation I would suggest limiting lenses to a minimum of 90º angle of view. That would prevent individuals being identified and it would be very easy to police by having a quick look at the camera feed.
Henry
I have just seen this thread, or rather the direction it's taken. As both an amateur drone operator, DSLR photographer and owner of a CCTV company I have a little expertise which covers many of the points you raise. I'm also constantly speaking to people who are concerned when neighbours fit CCTV.
As Scubaman eluded to in one of his posts this all comes down to angle of view on the the camera you are using to film and all the drones out there used domestically are fitted with very wide angle lenses, as are most out of the box CCTV solutions. This means you won't be able to identify people once you move more than a couple of metres from the lens of the camera. In the case of CCTV the advertising hot air will have you believe the cameras have great range. I made a video to show the reality a few years ago:
Even if you use high definition equipment the results are largely the same, I will be re-shooting in high definition just as soon as the body tones up sufficiently for our long range HD cameras
DSLR cameras on the other hand are a very different beast and a definite threat to your privacy. You don't need a 1m long lens to capture crystal clear high resolution images from considerable distance.
So long as drones are fitted with wide angle lenses you have nothing to fear. My Phantom has a 94º angle of view lens, the equivalent of 20mm on a traditional camera where 50mm would equate to normal vision. For a drone to identify people you would pretty much be able to touch it.
I'm not sure what relevance flying a drone 50m up in the air 5km or 15km from an airport has. If you see a commercial plane less than 200m off the deck that far from the airport you're going to be on the national news that evening.
You are a victim of misinformation and hearsay. That has made you paranoid and you are convinced people are obtaining detailed images where in fact they are merely filming overall views. I did think it a bit arrogant that when JFM was filming you took it upon yourself to "allow" the filming to go ahead. Presumably you had spoken with everyone else anchored nearby? Also what is the difference between Blackpool beach and Swiss ski slopes? Why should it be ok to film people enjoying donkey rides and ice cream showing off their white flesh but not wealthy people covered up in their ski wear or showing off their tanned skin in a bikini whilst bubbling away in a hot tub?
I am always mindful to not invade privacy when filming, be it with a drone or with a more capable DSLR. Like everyone else I have captured people without their consent, particularly when filming holiday videos whilst cruising the world. In some cases it's people I know but not always. In relation to the cruise ship videos everyone who speaks to me says how much they enjoyed seeing themselves in one of my productions. Sometimes they are recognisable, other times they spot their feet, the back of their head or a hat so only they know it was them.
In terms of privacy regulation I would suggest limiting lenses to a minimum of 90º angle of view. That would prevent individuals being identified and it would be very easy to police by having a quick look at the camera feed.
Henry
Bouba
Well-Known Member
Here's a reason to be worried about a drone flying too close
pan
Well-Known Member
Below is an extract, badly translated sorry, story in Diariodenautica.... illustrates the need to be careful, even when using a 90' lens !!!
Yacht denounced for alleged harassment of a group of girls in Mallorca
Thursday, June 08, 2017, 07:00 a.m.
A group of girls has reported to the Guardia Civil the owner and skipper of a yacht for an alleged harassment crime in the town of Porto Colom, a port located to the east of the island of Mallorca.
Last weekend, specifically on Saturday, a group of seven girls set out to spend the afternoon at sea on board a 'Llaut', the classic Mallorcan pleasure boat, in the cove of Porto Colom. They marched just before the exit of the cove along the coast and sunbathed naked when they noticed the presence of a dron that flew over the boat.
It seems that the remote-controlled aircraft was taking panoramic images of the port and the surrounding area when she noticed the presence of the girls and began filming them.
The group of girls verified that the dron was controlled by a group of people aboard a large yacht that was also anchored in the vicinity. The dron took planes and flew over the girls' boat for five minutes, with a red pilot light on, which made him assume he was recording.
The girls reproached the crew of the yacht with their shouting attitude, while they ignored the party and laughed. However, they proceeded to remove the flag and collect the dron, but the girls had already engraved the dron and photographed the yacht.
When the yacht lifted the anchorage, the girls followed the yacht with the 'Llaut' and once he had moored on the dock, the group approached the ship to recriminate their attitude again to the male crewmen aboard the boat. Luxury craft, giving notice, in turn, to the Civil Guard of the post of Felenitx. At that time, the alleged responsible for the aerial filming tried to reach an economic agreement with the girls, which they rejected.
The public force at the dock, the boat owner and skipper recognized that they had recorded the girls because they had finished a regatta and took some pictures when they discovered the 'Llaut' with the girls that caught their attention and proceeded to film it. They contended that the images had already been erased.
The Civil Guard drafted the corresponding certificate and proceeded to offer the appropriate legal actions to the girls who had been filmed.
Yacht denounced for alleged harassment of a group of girls in Mallorca
Thursday, June 08, 2017, 07:00 a.m.
A group of girls has reported to the Guardia Civil the owner and skipper of a yacht for an alleged harassment crime in the town of Porto Colom, a port located to the east of the island of Mallorca.
Last weekend, specifically on Saturday, a group of seven girls set out to spend the afternoon at sea on board a 'Llaut', the classic Mallorcan pleasure boat, in the cove of Porto Colom. They marched just before the exit of the cove along the coast and sunbathed naked when they noticed the presence of a dron that flew over the boat.
It seems that the remote-controlled aircraft was taking panoramic images of the port and the surrounding area when she noticed the presence of the girls and began filming them.
The group of girls verified that the dron was controlled by a group of people aboard a large yacht that was also anchored in the vicinity. The dron took planes and flew over the girls' boat for five minutes, with a red pilot light on, which made him assume he was recording.
The girls reproached the crew of the yacht with their shouting attitude, while they ignored the party and laughed. However, they proceeded to remove the flag and collect the dron, but the girls had already engraved the dron and photographed the yacht.
When the yacht lifted the anchorage, the girls followed the yacht with the 'Llaut' and once he had moored on the dock, the group approached the ship to recriminate their attitude again to the male crewmen aboard the boat. Luxury craft, giving notice, in turn, to the Civil Guard of the post of Felenitx. At that time, the alleged responsible for the aerial filming tried to reach an economic agreement with the girls, which they rejected.
The public force at the dock, the boat owner and skipper recognized that they had recorded the girls because they had finished a regatta and took some pictures when they discovered the 'Llaut' with the girls that caught their attention and proceeded to film it. They contended that the images had already been erased.
The Civil Guard drafted the corresponding certificate and proceeded to offer the appropriate legal actions to the girls who had been filmed.
henryf
Well-Known Member
I suspect something which got all out of proportion when drunk people started shouting at each other not helped by ignorance and arrogance on both sides.
The red light, assuming a Phantom was merely the directional light (two of them) to denote forward and aft.
What we don't know of course is how close the drone got to the girls. My suspicion is probably very close. Pissed up lads on the larger boat trying to hit on a boat load of totty ?
There are countless cases of people having similar incidents when filming others on their mobile phones every day.
Henry
The red light, assuming a Phantom was merely the directional light (two of them) to denote forward and aft.
What we don't know of course is how close the drone got to the girls. My suspicion is probably very close. Pissed up lads on the larger boat trying to hit on a boat load of totty ?
There are countless cases of people having similar incidents when filming others on their mobile phones every day.
Henry
MrB
Well-Known Member
It's a shame the thread ended up like this but i will say it again, the thread title is genius lol. 
:encouragement::applause:
:encouragement::applause:
Portofino
Well-Known Member
Portofino.
I have just seen this thread, or rather the direction it's taken. As both an amateur drone operator, DSLR photographer and owner of a CCTV company I have a little expertise which covers many of the points you raise. I'm also constantly speaking to people who are concerned when neighbours fit CCTV.
As Scubaman eluded to in one of his posts this all comes down to angle of view on the the camera you are using to film and all the drones out there used domestically are fitted with very wide angle lenses, as are most out of the box CCTV solutions. This means you won't be able to identify people once you move more than a couple of metres from the lens of the camera. In the case of CCTV the advertising hot air will have you believe the cameras have great range. I made a video to show the reality a few years ago:
Even if you use high definition equipment the results are largely the same, I will be re-shooting in high definition just as soon as the body tones up sufficiently for our long range HD cameras
DSLR cameras on the other hand are a very different beast and a definite threat to your privacy. You don't need a 1m long lens to capture crystal clear high resolution images from considerable distance.
So long as drones are fitted with wide angle lenses you have nothing to fear. My Phantom has a 94º angle of view lens, the equivalent of 20mm on a traditional camera where 50mm would equate to normal vision. For a drone to identify people you would pretty much be able to touch it.
I'm not sure what relevance flying a drone 50m up in the air 5km or 15km from an airport has. If you see a commercial plane less than 200m off the deck that far from the airport you're going to be on the national news that evening.
You are a victim of misinformation and hearsay. That has made you paranoid and you are convinced people are obtaining detailed images where in fact they are merely filming overall views. I did think it a bit arrogant that when JFM was filming you took it upon yourself to "allow" the filming to go ahead. Presumably you had spoken with everyone else anchored nearby? Also what is the difference between Blackpool beach and Swiss ski slopes?
Henry
Henry
Here's a re post of link
Go to France -to answer you Q on airport km,s and the implied consent re JFM , it's not me who has to asks the others filmed btw ,its the operator .
As mentioned you just don't see drones in a boaty way here . SoF
https://www.heliguy.com/blog/2016/06/14/heliguys-guide-to-global-drone-regulations/#europe-link.
The other Q,s you raised hopefully answered in my post # 40 .
There's some links earlier on CCTV and Switzerland data security etc .Best to keep CH out of this debate I don,t think it's relivant in a boaty sense ,
Somebody in a lift q saw there face on u tube ( helmit gopro ) and the operator was successfully taken to court and sentenced in CH ,it happens max pentity for violation of CCTV /data is I think 3 years inside .
Nobody has CCTV in my town /village --- even looking down @ the drive .8hit scared of getting it wrong .
The Spanish translations from Pan shows the direction of travel with drone usesage legislation .
Think about it for all concerned especially the yacht owner /crew ,i wonder if they wished the girls had "dropped " the drone ,bottom of the sea .
That storey will look great getting back to the owners work /home /nieghbours etc .
If the lens quality is such - the wide angle -as you suggest ( no reason to dought ) -to just show none identifiable images ,then surly the "yacht" by erasing the SD card have destroyed the evidence that if they played in court would help defend them ?
Last edited:
prv
Well-Known Member
But is the drone itself running a RTOS? I know that at least some of the smaller ones are running a fairly standard Linux, probably on ARM.
Pete
Bouba
Well-Known Member
Here in the SoF we were in a dry port with cctv, after a theft we asked them to check the tape only to be told that no one is authorised to look at it.
On a beach here owned by Lord JCB, some people on the beach got out their drone. Security swooped down on them and the drone was quickly packed away and the people left (I don't know if they left voluntarily or were kicked off). The irony is that the transgression was spotted on their cctv
On a beach here owned by Lord JCB, some people on the beach got out their drone. Security swooped down on them and the drone was quickly packed away and the people left (I don't know if they left voluntarily or were kicked off). The irony is that the transgression was spotted on their cctv
Hurricane
Well-Known Member
It's a shame the thread ended up like this but i will say it again, the thread title is genius lol.
Thanks
It came to me in a flash
Just after I'd drowned my sorrows.
jimmy_the_builder
Well-Known Member
... along with your drone. I crashed mine for the first time the other day, trying to fly it under the radar arch. New prop blades delivered a couple of days ago!
rafiki_
Well-Known Member
Still awaiting the pics of you being served afternoon tea on the bathing platform J.
jimmy_the_builder
Well-Known Member
I posted that ages ago, but sadly like the other 700 or so photos I've posted to this forum over the years, photobucket have ph****ucket it up
TwoHooter
Well-Known Member
I came across this while registering my drone in Ireland today:-
The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in December 2014 (C-212/13)[3] found that video surveillance by an individual of a public area outside his home fell under the Data Protection Directive..... As a result, anyone intending to use a drone should ensure that it does not inadvertently capture personal data from third persons as this will mean that the Data Protection Acts will apply and drone operators will have to ensure that the safeguards and obligations set out below are met. Personal data would include, for instance, facial images or car registration plates. Link
As has been pointed out, most drone cameras are incapable of capturing identifiable facial images so it's not necessarily a huge problem but worth bearing in mind if an occasion arises when faces (or boat names?) are clearly visible.
By the way, the actual registration process for Ireland was easy (except that they never bothered to send me an email acknowledging either my registration or the payment of 5 euros) so hopefully it won't be hard to register in the UK when that comes in.
The decision of the Court of Justice of the European Union (CJEU) in December 2014 (C-212/13)[3] found that video surveillance by an individual of a public area outside his home fell under the Data Protection Directive..... As a result, anyone intending to use a drone should ensure that it does not inadvertently capture personal data from third persons as this will mean that the Data Protection Acts will apply and drone operators will have to ensure that the safeguards and obligations set out below are met. Personal data would include, for instance, facial images or car registration plates. Link
As has been pointed out, most drone cameras are incapable of capturing identifiable facial images so it's not necessarily a huge problem but worth bearing in mind if an occasion arises when faces (or boat names?) are clearly visible.
By the way, the actual registration process for Ireland was easy (except that they never bothered to send me an email acknowledging either my registration or the payment of 5 euros) so hopefully it won't be hard to register in the UK when that comes in.
rafiki_
Well-Known Member
I posted that ages ago, but sadly like the other 700 or so photos I've posted to this forum over the years, photobucket have ph****ucket it up
Shame. I never saw the pics. Lost forever unless you reprise the event?
oceanfroggie
Well-Known Member
It's a shame the thread ended up like this but i will say it again, the thread title is genius lol.
+1
Bad luck Henry. Once folk use common sense and don't overfly private residential property or sensitive commercial or security installations there shouldn't be any angst.