Is it wrong to use drone photography in promotional literature?
1 Like
Bobbins
His bio is intresting
I started out on a Nikon D3500, which was the ideal entry-level digital camera, but have since upgraded to Sony’s Alpha system. My go-to setup is the A7III (and later A7 models) paired with the 24-105 F4 G lens. In all honesty, cameras are so advanced these days that I don’t think it matters what make or model you use.
I’d argue if he’s never shot on film he’s not a proper photographer
Digital really did kill the tog.
8 Likes
I’m a photographer who’s loves images from all the genre’s I started with film which I still have and use (I’m old school) but also love the digital way too …as long the image I have in my head comes to paper then I’m happy whether it’s drone footage camera or phone it’s all about the image … there’s more time to be had with film less rush because you only have certain amount of shots so you think a lot more about the image composition lighting or of course stick it on auto 
2 Likes
Back to my Uni days, when an assignment days when you were given a 12 exposure roll of XP1
Good grounding for my early Journo days when you only had a couple of rolls of film and 5fps to play with
The latest A7’s offer 30fps at full frame, tech is great, but old is cool
3 Likes
Drone photography is awesome. However, does drone photography become false marketing in say tourism promotions when such images overhype visual experiences that most visitors cannot, and will not, experience?
2 Likes
AI might be a bigger threat in that scenario in the future, rather than drone photos?
At least the drone photos are real 
5 Likes
Have you ever looked at a menu board?
6 Likes
this 
4 Likes
The camera cannot lie! But post-exposure editing, which can be done just as much (albeit less easily) with film as with digital images, is incapable of doing anything but altering the camera’s truth, which is a sort of lying…
It is pretty obvious to anyone that drone photography does not equate to what one would see at that location on the ground, nobody’s deliberately trying to misrepresent anything. It’s a ‘bird’s eye view’, and I’d say that people fully understand this. Travel brochures have always lied through their teeth about what you will see if you go to the places they advertise, and used aerial images long before drones came on to the scene. How often do you see shots of The Pyramids that include the crowds of tourists queueing for camel rides, with the coaches that brought them there in the background?
3 Likes
Photography, in essence, is about showing your own vision of how you see the world, be it landscape, people, buildings, seascapes etc. Go back to the early days of Magnum and photographers like Cartier Bresson and his approach, showing elements of life from a perspective that people didn’t expect or imagine. The difference between that era and now is one of information and image overload. Everything in life now is image driven. Back then cameras were largely the preserve of the wealthy, or professionals. Today everyone has a camera, on at all times. I remember seeing on Michael Macintyre’s show, one element, the 'Unexpected Star of the show". As the girl was revealed to the audience, her auto response was to pull out her phone and take a picture. Some might argue, why can’t today’s generation just be in the moment. It seems that they see that ‘moment’ behind the lens. What was truly unexpected, was how quickly she did it. It even took MM by surprise. And that is today’s Gen Z. Drone photography offers that unique personal perspective that not everyone has the opportunity to see and thats why it is worth doing.
The author of that drivel is an absolute melon. By his reckoning, anyone who post-processes an image (whether in a dark room or a light room), takes photos with anything other than a standard ~50mm lens, or uses any filters will be guilty of misleading people. Total plonker
9 Likes
… and, as a photograph is a two dimensional representation of a 3D scene at a specific monent in time ALL photographs are misrepresenting reality …
2 Likes
And then there’s what you choose to exclude when framing the picture.
2 Likes
It’s a fairly silly article. I started with Kodak Box Brownie a long time ago, and printed my own B&W photos. I’ve always been intrigued by aerial photos, and made a parafoil kite. I strung my Canon SureShot film compact camera under it triggered by an RC servo on the shutter button (I used to fly RC gliders). The results were disappointing, with no control over direction, and usually blurred. I did launch it from a boat off Alum Bay on the Isle of Wight once, and got it back dry. I’ve basically been waiting for about forty years for the current incredible camera drones.
I live near the Chilterns, and have red kites over my garden every day. I have always wanted to see familiar places from their perspective, and now I can. As a retired graphic designer, I started using Photoshop from version 1, and have loved the power of editing digital photos, in my case to overcome the limitations of current sensors etc. I aim to edit to match what I remember seeing. The process is prone to abuse though, and I bemoan the Instagramifcation of the online world. AI is far more of a threat, and is already destroying trust in any remarkable image. They are all just tools, and humans have, and always will misuse them for effect.
2 Likes
Isn’t all promotional photography false? Every paper, magazine or story I read online is photoshopped,squeezed, recoloured. I think the kettle (not you sir) is calling the pot black
He considers himself to be a qualified journalist? - heaven help us. I wonder what Mickey Mouse college he attended as he needs to get his money back. I wasn’t going to waste time commenting on this post but I couldn’t help myself. He’s obviously clueless and I hope he didn’t get paid for writing such rubbish.
With you all the way with this one. Mega plonker.
I’ve been a photographer for over 65 years and I’ve known for most of that time that the idea that the camera cannot lie is rubbish as is the idea that drones alone can allow photos that cannot otherwise be obtained. Has he never heard of the microscope? Even without postprocessing a photo can in an instant capture someone or something that would pass unnoticed normally.. The press use such photos of politicians and celebrities all the time. A long lens can create an illusion of proximity that the eye/brain will not perceive. I could go on. It’s clickbait.
2 Likes
Pointless clickbait semantics. All any photographic image is is a recording of the pattern of light visible through the apeture at the moment of the exposure, or lots of sequential exposures in the case of video; it is impossible (and bad deductive reasoning) to attempt to connect it empirically to any state of truth or correctness, or lack thereof.
You can’t use a photographic image to mislead anyone, any more than you could use a beer mat to mislead anyone. You can, of course, give the image a misleading caption or present it in a way that is out of context, but you can hardly blame the camera, or a drone, for that!
He also uses cameras that actually process the image in camera. 