Hoverfly What Makes Good Aerial Video

[Aerovideo]

I thought it might be a good idea with all the pros here to discuss what makes a good video including ideas, techniques, shots, etc.

I feel like from a technical perspective I've got a couple of quads that can take nice video. But I don't really have a videography background so I think it would be interesting for others like myself to discuss what makes a shot interesting or what is the best use of an aerial camera. Good ways to shoot your subject etc...

For example Jeff aka "workshop" mentioned in one of my videos flying down a path was particularly interesting as it allowed the viewer to know where i was going to go.

One of you guys that posts here, I can't recall who, also started a learning series on shooting aerial video. Something like always keep the camera moving, but unfortunately they only did one show

Or once by complete accident I was flying up and just crested over the tree line and rotated around at the same time, turned out to look pretty cool.

Total open creative discussion

Thoughts?

 

[workshop]

1. Start with the standard vocabulary of established camera shots:
Pan, dolly, zoom, rack focus, jib, boom, crane, techno boom, etc...
Camera shot call outs are "theater arts 101" and a great starting place for a common conversation. Now that we have mastered the nomenclature of multirotors, it is time to do so for camera work.

2. Know "why" storyboards exist and use them:
Think of a storyboard as a work order. The producer works with script writers, creative consultants and artists to storyboard a program. Each frame in the storyboard is a camera shot that the director is hired to deliver using his team of lights, camera and action (gaffers, grips and actors).

3. Camera moves tell the story
Watch movies (especially classics before 1980) and carefully observe "establishing shots" and how the camera work sets the tone for the scene to follow. Usually it is the camera work and music that are in command of a scene's pace and place of importance in a script (how come one is always aware when something bad is about to happen in a movie?... You've been subconsciously cued by the camera work and music).

4. Fly with a story in mind...
Even if we are out because the wind is down, fly with a purpose... Steady cam a tree, whatever... Always have a movie in your head.

jeffparisse.com

 

[DucktileMedia]

A few tips:

have a subject. Flying aimlessly over grass is boring. All good video has a subject or interesting scenery. The subject also gives you something to track/frame.

Dont do too much movement. Normally the less crazy you try to get the better the shot. Helis are good for elevator shots, fly overs and the reveal shot.

Coordinate with the cam op ahead of time.

Learn how to not exceed the frame rate in your pans. What often looks like a real slow pan in the air will look "normal" on video.

Keep your altitude consistent or gradual in ascent/descent.

Thats all I can think of off hand.

 

[DennyR]

The best way to make interesting videos is to fly in front of more interesting subjects. Who really wants to sit there waiting to see if the the grass in front of the camera is ever going to move. Or is he going to do yet another lap of the garden shed. Hose piping everything in sight is another no no. Panning from a fixed position is also out. You should do the reverse of that and fly around the subject keeping it framed as you go. The less you move the camera and use the model to create the move then the more professional it will start to look. Try to do everything slowly and then do it at half that speed. To become a cameraman you should first become an editor then you can understand what you need and when to cut. Most aerial video sequences last for 5-10 seconds only. The sideways tracking shot should only be used if you are following a moving subject or you will have motion blur for no reason. The story should always start with an establishing shot and you should also understand what is known as crossing the line. Otherwise you will create a complete disorientation of where everything is.

For example:- if you were capturing a news story of a disaster with people running away from whatever. As you head for that whatever the people should be shown running say left to right as you move in right to left. The editor cant do much with your footage if it is all shot moving in the same direction as it will look like they are running towards the disaster.

In creating an intro or establishing shot you can be a little creative here and start from behind something and reveal the scene in an interesting way, rather than come flat out from nowhere.

 

[RCJardin]

As a film editor I can say one of the most important things is to have shots that do not move around. By this I mean that having set a course shoot 10 -20 seconds without changing anything. The trick of smooth video is to not edit in the middle of little lurches or if you do start the next shot on the same lurch direction. Pan speed should be half of what you think it shouls be. With LCD viewing it is best not to pan then the refresh rate is not challenged.

 

[Warmupper]

Most sophisticated way to shoot aerial is the tracking sequence shot.
i.e. for example start flying in low altitude next to a moving object, let's say an actor.
Follow him smoothly for a few seconds, then pick up another moving objekt... a car.
Follow this car still in low altitude while crossing some trees. Loosing the car and then heading
towards a house and rise slowly. Cut the roof still rising, crossing another tree. Pick up the car again
driving up the hill, cross the driving direction of the car and fly up the hill to an actor waiting for the car.
Loose the actor and end in high and wide framing.

We did that for a feature film as the opening sequence and it took some hours to hit the right timing. In the end
it was a beautiful 40 seconds tracking shot without a single cut.
It's not broadcasted yet, so I'm not allowed to post it. Perhaps I can do that very soon, if somebody is interested.

Heiko

 

[Benjamin Kenobi]

What a great thread! Subscribed!

 

[fj_montilla]

Just reading through these threads, inspires new ideas. I've been in production for years (tv, film, video games), and been immersed in this aero photo/video for less (a bit over a year). The videos I admire not only have the planning that 'workshop' mentions, the pilot skills and steady-hand camera op is there as well. I'm dealing with a new layer in this 'great video' quest. Camera, camera, camera. I've never been a DP, but finding that combination to make light look right, is an art in itself. What shutter speed, f-stop, exposure, ISO, and focus combination you use in the many locations you'll encounter. Go Pros make everything look really nice, but stunning video usually comes from a camera that can be manually set.
For me it's hard to view the the details of the image in a 4 - 7 inch camera/fpv monitor. How many here bring a decent 1080 hd monitor on-set to actually see what your camera sees before you take off on your shoot? I plan my shoots too, but the camera settings can surprise you in good and not so good ways. Great video needs good camera understanding too.

 

[Aerovideo]

This is fantastic stuff, some really great tips and ideas. I fly almost always aimlessly around hoping something good results. Of course some of my locations make it possible but incorporating this info will definitely help. I look forward to a lot more contributions, example shots, etc. would be cool too!

 

[multirotorxy8]

Warmupper, I'd love to see that shot when you can!

Most sophisticated way to shoot aerial is the tracking sequence shot.
i.e. for example start flying in low altitude next to a moving object, let's say an actor.
Follow him smoothly for a few seconds, then pick up another moving objekt... a car.
Follow this car still in low altitude while crossing some trees. Loosing the car and then heading
towards a house and rise slowly. Cut the roof still rising, crossing another tree. Pick up the car again
driving up the hill, cross the driving direction of the car and fly up the hill to an actor waiting for the car.
Loose the actor and end in high and wide framing.

We did that for a feature film as the opening sequence and it took some hours to hit the right timing. In the end
it was a beautiful 40 seconds tracking shot without a single cut.
It's not broadcasted yet, so I'm not allowed to post it. Perhaps I can do that very soon, if somebody is interested.

Heiko

 

[Av8Chuck]

Here's a slightly different opinion.

All of the suggestions so far are great and although applicable to aerial cinematography I think there are some differences, that a few talented people are exploiting, that differentiate it from traditional cinematography. And that goes for traditional aerial cinematography.

As the quality of cameras increase and the size and weight decreases, while at the same time the barriers to entry of complexity and expense are being lowered on the RC aircraft with the capability, reliability and predictability of those camera platform increasing I think we could use these tools in ways never before thought possible. So while much of the discussion can, and should include "production 101" suggestions, I believe that focusing on those really limits what aerial cinematography can become.

Sorry, I'm not so much a prophetic writer as a pathetic one so please bare with me. For example:

I read this thread and then watched Paul's "Stanley Lake" video, [side note: I'm a pilot and have flow over and walked through the exact terrain featured in his video, which in part is why I find it so compelling. I've also flown countless people in the same area who after seeing it from that perspective expressed the experience as almost a religious one] one thing that struck me about this video is that you looked at the magnificence before you and then flew through it in order to capture it from the air, but it seems that there was a sense of purpose, a feeling that you knew where you were going. I think you can only capture that through flying FPV, so much of the LOS footage looks like the camera is just meandering around.

So that's an example of how bringing different technologies together perhaps helped you capture something that would have otherwise been cost prohibitive or not even possible just five to ten years ago. The series Planet Earth is another example of breakout thinking of how to use technology differently than it had seldom been used before, clearly there where shots [a lot of them] that television audiences had never seen. I was meeting with a company that was shooting a lot of aerial footage about a year before that series came out and I remember thinking how did they do that? But I knew how they did it because I could see the camera's, lenses, oxygen equipment and the hot air ballon they used to shoot it and I remember how odd the debate was in the edit suite on whether Planet Earth would find an audience. All of those people in that bay could not have been more wrong! It seems that the more people know, the more myopic they become to the point that everything they produce starts to look the same and when they see something that is so different and well done, they don't get it.

So to conclude my diatribe, we could be film makers that learn how to fly, we could be pilots that learn cinematography or we could be something different and I think how much different we can become will be largely determined by how we discuss it.

So back to the OP's remarks, Paul you are taking this relatively young hobby of yours to a new art form, I think your videos would improve if you had a wider diversity of shots, I loved the timelapse at the end, you might consider including some closeups of foreground objects from the ground and if your looking to expand your audience beyond us rotor heads then you need to make me care about Stanley Lake.

I hope this thread really explores ways for all of us to capture footage that really blows audiences away.

 

[Aerovideo]

Thanks Chuck, that was a really nice read. I'm kind of in a spot where I really need to learn both about cinematography "101" and also realizing that FPV flight gives you something more and how best to take advantage of that. My day job is working for a health information company where I do illustrations and animations to promote better understanding of various conditions and health issues. So I'm no stranger to working with storyboards and do that on every project, but I'm also working with a script writer. So when it comes to my own aerial videos I feel a bit at a loss as to what to do. I need to bring a script writer along with me so I can develop that story that would make someone care about Stanley Lake, so to speak .

I am working on adding to my ground video shooting equipment as well as I think it would be cool to have the ground shots as well as the aerial shots.

One of my favorite things to do and you'll probably see it in a lot of my videos is to cruise along close to the ground almost like a dolly shot then pull up to a height that makes the viewer wonder how it went from the standard dolly shot to some kind of crane shot. I also think it looks really nice when you just barely clear something as you crest over it. Seems to give a greater sense of dimension. One of the harder things I'm starting to try is to circle around a subject in the air, with a one man setup that actually gets kind of tricky

There is a commercial for Boise State University airing tonight during their first football game. I was brought in to do a few aerial shots on it. At the time the director seemed to really like the shots but who knows if they'll end up on the cutting room floor. I'll find out tonight though! After it airs I can post the video I shot. It was pretty cool getting to fly around a football stadium (empty of course

I really appreciate everyone's feedback thus far and hopefully I can start posting examples and it would be cool to have some critiques of videos and get feedback on how they could be made better.

Thanks again everyone, keep it coming!

 

[DennyR]

What MR or SR filming brings to the table is a refreshing alternative to the conventional full size technologies. The lower level experience is there to be exploited in may new ways. But the traditional rules will never change. You can get away with something artfully different once, but then it becomes boring and the audience will fall asleep. A long single sequence with all the turnarounds etc. may be tricky to get right but does it have any value to the story?Probably not. A sequence should have an element of disguise to make the viewer study it and try to guess what is going to happen. The novelty value of aerial footage soon wears off if it is not produced in a way that almost hides the fact that it is from an aerial vehicle. It must blend with different perspectives.

 

[FerdinandK]

If you are a pro, or want to become a pro you should act as a pro, so you will have to do what "they" tell you, and you have to learn the skills you need to meet "their" demands.
If you are an artist, you will have no choice as to do what your heart tells you to do, and you will have to learn skills you need therefore.
If you are not a pro, why (the hell) stick on the "rules"? There are already a lot of pros out there who know the rules and are better on that, it will take a lot of blood, sweat and tears (and money) to become better than them. Follow your heart, follow your passion and the people will start to feel that.
If you want to make a video, with the aim that others say "awesome", it will just not work, you can follow all the rules, and respect all the tips and hints, and still it will be just a piece of work. If it should be breathtaking, it has to come from your heart, or it has to show something completely new and unknown.

Unfortunately music/sound is much more important than most people think, as the "sound/music" will access the brain directly.

best regards
Ferdinand

 

[SMP]

+1 ^ Audio for the win. TBS videos are one dimensional as hell but are synced PERFECTLY to their audio track.

 

[Aerovideo]

If you are a pro, or want to become a pro you should act as a pro, so you will have to do what "they" tell you, and you have to learn the skills you need to meet "their" demands.
If you are an artist, you will have no choice as to do what your heart tells you to do, and you will have to learn skills you need therefore.
If you are not a pro, why (the hell) stick on the "rules"? There are already a lot of pros out there who know the rules and are better on that, it will take a lot of blood, sweat and tears (and money) to become better than them. Follow your heart, follow your passion and the people will start to feel that.
If you want to make a video, with the aim that others say "awesome", it will just not work, you can follow all the rules, and respect all the tips and hints, and still it will be just a piece of work. If it should be breathtaking, it has to come from your heart, or it has to show something completely new and unknown.

Unfortunately music/sound is much more important than most people think, as the "sound/music" will access the brain directly.

best regards
Ferdinand

I do think you have an awesome point that audio is WAY more important than most people think. I feel like I've made a much better video when I can time it to events in the music. Of course the music you choose will always be subjective

Whether or not someone wants to be a pro I do think you can want to improve your craft by learning from the pros. I also totally agree that working as a pro you would need to do what the director may tell you but it would also be good to be able provide input into how low altitude aerial can best be used if the director should ask.

For example: If you were just taking some landscape type scenic video, which is what I do mostly, what type of shot list would you build up?

Or if you had a real quick story to tell with a setup, conflict, resolution type arc what types of aerial shots could be useful. Would you use an aerial shot for the establishing shot? I realize this last question may be a little to vague to answer but it kind of get what I'm thinking I hope.

For those that are interested here is the television commercial I had the opportunity to provide footage for. Blink and you'll miss it it's the opening shot of the commercial though!

http://news.boisestate.edu/update/2...nces-takes-center-stage-new-boise-state-spot/

The photo at the top of the page is from my video. The commercial itself is at the bottom of the page.

Or better yet here's the video on youtube

 

[Breezemont]

That was cool, Paul.

 

[Av8Chuck]

That's great, you gotta love that blue field. I would like to see the rest of your footage.

This video is a good example of something that is really cool but it doesn't say anything. As a reveal it was a great shot to open with, but I'm surprised that they didn't stay on it a little longer. Probably trying to edit to the beat of the music.

I realize a lot of people may not agree with this, but I'm sure we've all heard someone on a project say that they want something different, they want to think outside the box. What does that mean? How do you do that? What almost always happens is that they end up producing something for the sake of being different and it doesn't work. There are a lot of reasons for this, non more relevant than how do you define the box in the first place. Everyone defines the box from they're own perspective, but how effective a video is at communicating requires something that includes all of those perspectives which often means compromise and conformity, (production 101) so you end up with the same old thing. I know that sounds negative but it isn't, but its in part the reason that the Boise State video is the same as a lot of other university promotions produced over the past decade.

Good production isn't about conformity, production 101 is simply a nomenclature so we all speak the same language but knowing it doesn't make us professionals. It shouldn't be the thing we use to define the box we spend the rest of our professional lives trying to get out of.

What kind of shot list you need/want depends on the problem your trying to solve. I'm sure someone you worked with for the Boise video told you they wanted some aerial of the stadium, they might have told you specifically what they wanted, "up and over here to reveal the field over there" sort of thing or more likely they point you at the stadium and tell you to go nuts. Since you know it's for Boise State you'd likely want the logo in the middle of the field, the stadium inside and out and if they had a sense of humor you could put a duck bill in front of the camera and crash into the field for the birds perspective.

Regarding your landscape videos, you've done this enough to know the shots your good at and which ones you like so you could make a list before you go, but you can always make the list afterwards, that's called editing. Actually a lot of people call it "documentary" film making. You could still use the footage from Stanley Lake, write something about your experience there or some profound point of view of the beauty etc., record some natural audio of the tranquility, compose some music and re-edit your own Planet Earth. Of coarse the reason most of us just edit the footage to music is because we're single artisans that have to do it all.

As you try to take your production to the next level I think you might be struggling not so much with creating the right shot list but how do you add all of the other perspectives to your work? Do you learn audio, cinematography, script writing etc., or figure out how to branch out with other artisans to produce the sort of videos that you want. It's an age old problem that they don't really teach in film school..

 

[Aerovideo]

Here's the rest of the footage I shot for the commercial.

The director suggested the shots I just did my best to execute them. He was interested in any ideas I had but I didn't have much just little suggestions Thus one of the reasons I had to start this thread.

 

[Droider]

Integration with a production is key. If a director really understands how MR footage can be integrated with the rest of the production then the more we will see the use of MR's.

Here is our contribution

- clips

End result

Dave