DJI put me in business, and is taking me out...

[janoots2]

I've been flying and consulting for over three years now and was head first into growing this industry. Designed my own machines and flew two WKM's for some awesome clients and venues and even turned more down due to their unsafe flying requests. In the past few weeks I have watched numerous of these turned down clients go out and purchase Inspires by themselves and fly the jobs that I denied due to unsafe flying conditions/populated areas. It is just TOO easy for people to get their hands on this technology now and TOO easy to use. I fear that the only winners in this wave will be the manufacturers and much of the mid-level available work will follow the demise similar to that of standard professional photography, ie: it's way too easy to take "acceptable" shots anymore with a mid-level camera or even an iPhone. Yes, there will always be demand for high-end, but unless you're doing it full time, the future looks way too crowded with competition. I've had my finger on the pulse of many different industries wanting to utilize the technology, and what I am seeing is everyone is purchasing individually for their each and own discipline/industry and simply running with it.

 

[Bartman]

the pendulum swings left and the pendulum swings right. of all of those people that bought Inspires, some will get results good enough for themselves but some won't. and when they don't they'll come looking for you. some will crash and then come looking for you, charge them more!

 

[dazzab]

I totally agree with the OP. I recently heard a client talking about buying an Inspire specifically because a licensed operator would not fly as close as the client wanted them to. But that was in Australia where we have licensed pilots and companies that are certified to hire them. I guess a client might be willing to try and skip certification but the fines are quite large if they get caught doing it. So, for the time being that creates a bit of a barrier.

So, in the US how does the fact that it's actually illegal to shoot commercially from UAVs, with some very limited exceptions, fit in to this conversation? Or is this just a case of assuming that no one bothers with licensing and everyone is shooting illegally anyway? It all sounds very messy.

But at the end of the day Bartman is probably correct. Clients will pay for the value that you can add above and beyond what they themselves might be able to do. That could be that your are licensed, you have insurance, have a reputation for outstanding work, have the appropriate equipment to handle various situations, have some sort of certification/qualification that they value etc etc. Personally, I really don't want to work for people who don't value/respect what I bring to the table because there are plenty of people out there that do.

Back in the old days when I worked in a studio and did a bit of wedding work I can't tell you how many couples came in asking if we could fix up a botched job that a well meaning relative who 'takes great pictures' had done at their wedding. They would always look at the albums we had on display and say that they wished they had hired a professional. Thirty years on and that studio is still doing lovely wedding work. As far as I know they still get paid well for it in spite of all the weekend pros out there.

It's certainly easier for a talented amateur to do a very nice job with today's technology but odds are you'll get better value from a pro who has a lot more experience. And before someone says it for me, yes there are some shocking examples from professionals as well. Hopefully it's a very small percentage in comparison.

 

[maxwelltub]

This happens in all industries in some way or another. Its so hard for me not to get salty about it, but the truth of the matter is getting bitter or blaming anyone or anything else is not productive. Focusing on you and how you can be better is the only way to survive. Establishing the difference between you and the store bought model is what you need to really focus on and use that as your selling point. There will be many who wont want to pay for that, which will make the higher end market more competitive.
Dazzab hit the nail on the head. You think about all the photographers who spent a life time perfecting film, and then all of the sudden everyone has a DSLR. Did it end the trade? No but it certainly completely reshaped it, and made it a lot more difficult for many to make the same living that they once did.

 

[Motopreserve]

Have to agree with Maxwell. This happens in so many industries. I went through this with audio recording, having owned/operated a professional, commercial studio for 15 years, we saw our bookings plummet when home recording became available in a single trip to guitar center.

Everyone fancies themselves an audio engineer, until they heard the final result. And then they came back to the pro studios when they had to admit they couldn't achieve the quality they desired, because they lacked the experience.

The pendulum will swing. And when it does, I trust your experience and know-how will be appreciated and ultimately rewarded. You just have to wait out this period if you can. At the rate this industry is changing, it probably won't take long....

 

[cootertwo]

The "Pendulum" effect is a strange critter. It spends most of it's time either far left, or far right, as it slows to a stop, then slowly starts the other direction. In the "middle" "median", it is traveling the fastest, and zips past the center, at it's fastest speed. I guess that's what keeps "change" constant.

 

[econfly]

I think the comparison to photography is dead on correct. There was a time when the main barrier to entry in photography was having the equipment. Now the barrier to entry is having artistic ability, skill, and being able to market and deliver those talents professionally. And even then, much of the potential market will be price sensitive (or quality indifferent). Similarly, in recent years and certainly farther into the past, the barrier to entry for aerial photography and video work was having the equipment. That's about over, and just as in the photography realm the result will be survival only for those with artistic ability, skill and professionalism sufficient to differentiate themselves. The wrinkle here is that government is making it even harder on the AP professional with laws that limit an honest business but are routinely ignored by many.

 

[scotth]

When I went freelance after leaving a staff job in news, my Sony Betacam w/lens was over $60k. Tripod, $8k, wireless mics, lighting, etc.. another $25k. Then you needed a Suburban with a cage to cart it all around. I had to mortgage my house to get into the business. So not just any idiot was hanging out a shingle. News and high end production still have a higher threshold for entry, but the noise level in the corporate video marketplace is really high thanks to a much lower cost of entry. And you can't deny there's some beautiful stuff being shot with a $5000 5D package. A lot of crap though, too.

 

[Old Man]

There's a lot to be said for DJI making for an easy entry into aerial photography, but much more that I don't think is understood. Most going the DJI package route have shot their wad by the time they've used up their credit line or disposed of their disposable cash. Loss of GPS will mean loss of control and perhaps loss of an aircraft to a flyaway. The first crash and they will be severely hobbled, with no means, knowledge, or ability to repair. And they will crash.

The easy entrants will still for the most part be limited to the low end of the customer base. Those customers would have never looked to the higher professional levels to begin with. The cameras they will be carrying will for the most part be Go Pros and whatever type is included with the RTF package deal. The gimbals are slaved to the FC and any issue with the FC means there will be an issue with the gimbal. Even having 4k at their fingertips they can't shoot a truly good panoramic scene with those cameras, and there's still the editing that has to be performed to make a good still or video. It takes a long time to learn those skills, just as it requires a good eye developed through lots of experience to frame a subject to be photographed. ISO, f stop, depth of field, back lighting, how important could that stuff be anyway?

Then we have the accidents that are inevitable when a large group of amateurs elect to become instant professionals. Those that play by the rules or responsibility will be insured for injury and liability but the vast majority will not. A couple of injury accidents will encourage civil laws requiring liability insurance for commercial operators. People employing commercial operators will soon start to require certificates of insurance naming them as additional insured and the fly by nights will slink away from the exposure. Businesses that employ commercial operators or fly their own stuff will quickly recognize their liability, both in increased Workman's Comp rates and company liability and return to contracting out to avoid the direct liability.

In the short term the budget shoots will see a lot of influence from the entry level, ready to fly "professionals" but I think that will even out fairly quickly. The real professionals that know what they are doing will be sidelined only long enough for the customers to see the product quality they are receiving, or not receiving, from the DJI crowd and decide they would rather set up and pay just once to get a good job instead of several times. We should also remember that DJI is in it for DJI, not the user, and when things go bad their users have consistently been left hanging.

 

[DucktileMedia]

DJI is definitely the Skynet of drones for better or for worse. I still don't understand why other countries don't implement a 100%+ import tax on everything from China. That alone would level the playing field more than anything. I'm also not convinced things that fly should be massed produced like this in the first place. China doesn't know the meaning of quality control. So they cram out all this plastic sky garbage, we buy it, complain about it, then get angry when everyone else who bought the same heli is trying to do business with it just like we are. The whole intent of technology is to make things as easy as possible for anyone to use it. That means that having an understanding of how the equipment works becomes that much less important, until something goes wrong. For those of us who came from SRH and 640x480 cameras and had to disassemble our gear and balance every component, we are dinosaurs. One of the main reasons I got out of this business was that most people just wanted a few seconds of aerials in their shots and it wasnt worth paying $3-5k/day for something that they might not even use. It got to the point where the producers just said "I got some kid with a quad and a gopro that will do this for free." So I obviously told them to go do that. The jobs that made it worth while were just far and few. They were out there but I didnt want to fight for them.So I surrendered to the fact that DJI has changed the aerial geography for all of us. I think they do make some good products and having the resources to put into R&D gives them an exponential head start in leading the industry forward. They will be hard to compete with for years to come. It's really the way the global economy works that irritates me more than the fact DJI's helicopters are everywhere. It's not just DJI and helicopters that are the problem, it's the idea that we are willing to support someone in another country that makes plastic crap before supporting someone at home first. That's why I strongly believe (WE) are the only ones to blame in the end for their global domination of the market. Our impulsiveness as a species is our biggest flaw.

 

[Str8 Up]

I am by no means a DJI fanboy but I find your comments out of touch. DJI saw a need and filled it. They continue to do this. If someone else had the foresight, drive and intelligence to do this, they would have, but they didn't. It has nothing to do with supporting a foreign supplier.

If you want to lay blame, point the finger at the fact that the US continues to be in a steady decline graduating engineers. Each successive generation has less drive and ambition than the previous one. STEM programs have poor participation.

Most of the concerns expressed here are similar in nature. You won't succeed long term in a business being a follower. If you are thinking in the present you won't survive. You must have a business plan and update it continuously. You need to know your cost of doing business. You need to have a marketing plan. In short you need to be good at about a dozen things, not just one or two.

 

[econfly]

Money goes where it is most productive. Anyone who has ever operated a small business (or any business) in America knows how much money and effort goes to dealing with endless regulations and taxes. On top of that we have a patent system that feeds trolls and inhibits genuine innovation. No wonder China is where innovation is taking place. As for that innovation, DJI is owning more and more of the market by offering what a huge portion of the market wants. The future is crystal clear: Unless government screws it up or regulates otherwise, technological advance will make it easier for people to get better quality cameras in the air. As I said before, just owning the equipment is no longer a barrier to entry. The successful will be artists, businessmen, marketers, and desirable partners all at the same time. Everyone else will just complain.

 

[Efliernz]

I've done part-time AP stills for 8 years now... I built my original Trex-600 AP system/ gimbal from my own design and we did ok with a canon 400D camera. Numerous system upgrades happened, I even stretched a Trex600 to be a 12S 700 before Align built one! Not bragging - just putting things in perspective.

Being one of the first had it's challenges but now of course, everyone provides a "professional photography service" with 'drones' carrying Gopros and Mobius cameras. We moved away from the models and have secured some long-term monthly road construction work with some of them being over 10 miles long (next to an airport). The right tool for the job now is... a commercial charter with a commercial charter pilot (as I am legally required to have for commercial full-size photography) and me - with a 5Diii. We shoot 8 intersections over 10 miles from 400-800' and 2500' (straight down) and are drinking coffee on the ground in under 50 minutes. Less insurance, less paperwork, single camera operator. ATC co-operation... no worries.
What I've leaned is that not everyone is happy hanging out of a plane at 115Kts doing endless circles... I've found my niche market!!! Sometimes the business model needs to adapt for the work out there.

The helis are gone but I still have a shed full of copters - mainly multis and the odd job still comes up for 'better quality' low altitude stills...

Pete

 

[janoots2]

Example 1:
http://www.doyouconvert.com/attack-of-the-drones-2015/

Example 2:

 

[Str8 Up]

https://www.faa.gov/contact/safety_hotline/

 

[janoots2]

Would never do that....I don't think it is many of these 'green' operator's faults as they are not informed or aware when they purchase the products. Just citing some recent examples for conversation sake from two industries 1. Night Life (who would have thought) 2. Real Estate. Industries and employees are just running with the technology with no regard. I do feel that manufacturers should have a sense of duty when selling these (even though it technically isn't their responsibility and will eat into profits) BINGO....

 

[Str8 Up]

It is the FAA'S job to educate these types. It is the only way to get their attention. I consider it one's civic duty to report those who put the public at risk.

 

[Banana Furikake]

Would never do that....I don't think it is many of these 'green' operator's faults as they are not informed or aware when they purchase the products. Just citing some recent examples for conversation sake from two industries 1. Night Life (who would have thought) 2. Real Estate. Industries and employees are just running with the technology with no regard. I do feel that manufacturers should have a sense of duty when selling these (even though it technically isn't their responsibility and will eat into profits) BINGO....

I mean, in this example these guys are winning awards and can't even spell 'Altitude'
View attachment 24168

Interesting thing is that this would be allowed under the microUAS proposed rule.

Anyone can fly- but the key difference is to be able to fly well. There's a big difference between someone who knows how to get the right shot and someone who sucks. And that's on any platform be it a DJI product or a Cinedrone X8.

Liability insurance along with a corporate form is a must.

I do think a 333 is useless at this point unless you're going for higher end customers, even then with 700 in the pipeline you likely won't be approved until after the proposed rules run through the process. Then you're flushing $5K or more down the tubes if you hire an attorney.

The other piece is that I'm hoping that there's some interim legislation is passed- I'm waiting to see what Sen. Booker comes out with. I'll ask Brendan Schulman about it during his webinar this Thu.

 

[Old Man]

Please keep us posted with what you find out.

For the record, I'm one that provided an FAA comment opposing the use of Micro UAS over people, and suggested reducing the defined size of Micro UAS to 1 kilogram from 2.

 

[janoots2]

Prime example: Lets market to wedding photographers so they can fly over crowds of people in churches - the FAA can't touch us there. Highly irresponsible.