So, I'm watching the new DJI Phantom 3 demo videos and such... and on this one at the 2:50 Mark, they are clearly touting the brand new indoor functionality of the drones... by showing it in use at an indoor church wedding, hovering seemingly just a few feet from the couple on stage.

Yeah... I see that going over real well.

I'm not seeing any mention of a "silent operating" mode - but maybe that's later in this 7 minute presentation.

Lol, you mean below video? This was hilarious, especially the part where he is shooting the couples first kiss from like 20 cm away, or when he hovered just above the priest during the ceremony.

https://youtu.be/MfqZVh8E7bs

Strange how that video was clearly targeted at wedding videographers, but any actual wedding videographer would have a checklist of problems -- intrusive, huge audio problems (the sound of a bee swarm echoing through the church), lowlight problems, not enough space in many churches, battery wouldn't last the ceremony, he seems to be using it as his sole camera, no videographer is going to be casually sitting in the pews operating a camera remotely, no priest or church would sign off on it, potentially breaks the law by flying too close to people...

A while back, I started a thread about using multiple cameras in the aisle to get different shots simultaneously, and someone sarcastically replied, "Why not have a quadcopter hovering over their hands for the ring shot as well?" or something like that. Well, maybe DJI searched for the keyword and stumbled on the thread! Be careful what you wish for...

I did not see that YT video, this is the one I saw.

http://youtu.be/7jJn7uvqgc0

None of these shots would pass muster with the new FAA regs requiring separation between the unit and people, along with the safe operation provisions originally likely targeted at areal stunts but which could be as easily applied to "areal stunts around chandeliers".

Hah - I've just had a conversation with a vicar who clearly says only one unmanned camera in the church - what are my chances of getting a drone in!!!

You could sit outside and fly the drone inside, from he vicar's perspective it would be a unmanned camera, he didn't say anything about not allowing a flying camera...:)

None of these shots would pass muster with the new FAA regs

You don't even have to apply FAA rules here, just the thought of a drone circling the couple, doing closeups or hovering just above the priest and guests during a religious ceremony is the most ridiculous thing you can think of, maybe in the country where the DJI is produced this can be done but where I live that would be unthinkable to perform in a church. Even if it would be allowed, the high pitch buzzing of the rotors would a very disturbing factor in a location where you can here a pin drop.

None of these shots would pass muster with the new FAA regs requiring separation between the unit and people, along with the safe operation provisions originally likely targeted at areal stunts but which could be as easily applied to "areal stunts around chandeliers".

In the UK the CAA does not have any jurisdiction over flying drones indoors & I suspect the same is true of the FAA in the US.

In Belgium the new law that will go into effect later this year should allow this kind of flight if the owner of the property you use it on approves it, even for hobbyists, so actually all attending guests could bring their own drones with them. These drones are going to be the new smartphones, imagine no people standing up anymore blocking your view when they try to get a shot of the couple, they can just use their drone instead and get real close without having to leave their seats.

So this is where wedding videography is heading ... robots to replace the conventional camera man. You can't deny those aerial shots look great. It would only be ideal for situations where the vicar / bride groom are happy with a constant buzzing hovering drone in their midst. So not all weddings.

Is it worth going down the drone / flying avenue ??

Balloons or an airship would be far less intrusive. I doubt that many would enjoy their wedding with the background noise of an angry swarm of bees.

Is it worth going down the drone / flying avenue ??

The number of usable shots you could make with such a drone are very limited, you could fly over a venue a couple of times or use it on a photoshoot but other then that it's yet another piece of gear you have to drag along during the day. I remember seeing a video from Joe Simon where he used a drone to follow the family in several tuk tuk's in Guatemala when they drove from their home to the church which looked pretty awesome but that kind of scenery you don't get to see often.

If there are venues that you regularly shoot at it would be worthwhile shooting some stock footage of aerial views for inclusion in multiple projects.

The number of usable shots you could make with such a drone are very limited, you could fly over a venue a couple of times or use it on a photoshoot.

If there are venues that you regularly shoot at it would be worthwhile shooting some stock footage of aerial views for inclusion in multiple projects.

Agreed.

Ideal for landscape / outdoor shots. But unless you're a business operating as a 2-3 man team it's not feasible dragging it along among all the other gear we already have to take with us.

Nearly fell off my chair as soon as I saw that shot from inside the church. I mean, really? Yes it looks lovely, but the cons heavily outweigh the pros here (noise, intrusion, higher risks, etc.).

Not sure what DJI have been thinking since a lot of wedding videographers already have a lot of restrictions filming ceremonies in many different countries.

Let's just say this will be another reason why some venues hate photographers and videographers at weddings.

DJl are targeting the videographers that "absolutely must" buy the latest tech to feel professional.

For those who haven't stood near one of these when its flying, but along with the noise in general, there is definitely a fear factor, a defensiveness, from anyone not controlling it that is nearby. Specificially anytime it gets louder/closer.

I'd love to see a real, natural version of this idiocy as the B&G flinch and stare at the drone as it flies around. Oh, and the guests watching it instead of the ceremony. And the audio of the pastor yelling over the noise.

Strange how that video was clearly targeted at wedding videographers, but any actual wedding videographer would have a checklist of problems -- intrusive, huge audio problems (the sound of a bee swarm echoing through the church), lowlight problems, not enough space in many churches, battery wouldn't last the ceremony, he seems to be using it as his sole camera, no videographer is going to be casually sitting in the pews operating a camera remotely, no priest or church would sign off on it, potentially breaks the law by flying too close to people...

A while back, I started a thread about using multiple cameras in the aisle to get different shots simultaneously, and someone sarcastically replied, "Why not have a quadcopter hovering over their hands for the ring shot as well?" or something like that. Well, maybe DJI searched for the keyword and stumbled on the thread! Be careful what you wish for...

So few guests as well - not a real wedding?

When I decided (a few years back) to try out a quadracopter I was pretty concerned just being outside with it and it without any reason (or pilot error) come swooping down on me with 4 rotating props so I could imagine how a B&G would feel. If this is advertising then it's downright irresponsible !! By all means do a flyover when a reception venue is deserted but with people around it's just plain crazy ..especially if some video guy decides to actually try it!! AFAIK our rules are something like the drone must be no lower than 25 metres (about 100') so if something goes wrong at least the pilot could take evasive action!

I'm sure we've all seen this

Drone Quadcopter hits groom in the head // Epic Fail - YouTube

In addition to all of the logistical issues, it is also currently illegal in the states to use a drone for commercial purposes.
I have a drone, but I will not use it for weddings for every single reason listed, let alone the legal ramifications.

In addition to all of the logistical issues, it is also currently illegal in the states to use a drone for commercial purposes.
I have a drone, but I will not use it for weddings for every single reason listed, let alone the legal ramifications.

FAA wouldn't have any jurisdiction indoors. Your biggest risk is liability for when the bride loses her ring finger. Remember to put it in a wet towel for transport to the hospital.

FAA wouldn't have any jurisdiction indoors. Your biggest risk is liability for when the bride loses her ring finger. Remember to put it in a wet towel for transport to the hospital.

LOL

Remember, folks, a waiver of liability doesn't protect you from your own negligence!

http://rainiernew.wpengine.com/yurts/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/01/The_more_you_know_banner.jpg

Unless they've developed a totally silent mode, this would be WAAAAAAY more annoying than SLR "mirror slap".... maybe they've figured out a way to make it nearly silent?

The video does say they have built in collision avoidance, so there's some advanced features... an "AI" that avoids human stupidity would be a handy feature...

What about battery life?? These don't just stay airborne indefinitely, and if a ceremony is 20-30 minutes, it could get a bit awkward... hold the service while I land and refuel...

Not sure what material these are using for rotor/prop blades, but some use foam or pretty soft plastic, not too likely to cause decapitation or other fatal wounding, and on the little "toys" I've used, once the throttle is cut, the blades stop pretty quickly and controlled free fall would be a concern.

Actually, the distinction for the FAA is not "indoors" vs. "out doors" but rather "hobby" vs. "commercial". The proposed FAA rules aside, jurisdiction is with common sense and those that have it vs. those that don't.

True that! Unfortunately, there are many in our field that lack common sense, whether or not they own a drone. It's an uphill battle for us legitimately responsible flyers.

I have never seen that drone/groom collision footage, but that was absolutely horrific.
What gets me the most is that the videographer obviously thought it was okay to post that! Unless the footage was later retained by the groom's attorney for the resulting personally injury lawsuit.

I showed the bride strike video to my best friend and he is convinced the wedding drone strike was staged. Whether it was or was not staged, sooner or later, as Ian notes, some cat is going to make the same mistake, which gives us all a bad name.

Seems the drone video in the church was aimed at the guy who dreams of being a wedding videographer but does not have the personal experience to spot the problems in advance. The voices of experience on this board have articulated those problems well, like the noise and the danger.

I don't think a swarm of bees noise would be welcome at a wedding, I have taken some stock aerial footage of the outside of venues in my area that i can include in a video if i want, it's pretty good for an establishing shot. I must say that the specs on the new Phantom are a big improvement on the one I have.

It would take just one multirotor crashing into a group of seated guests to make the news far and wide and ignite another firestorm against drones. I love the idea of flying a drone through an long, empty, set-up reception hall to capture the décor, but in a ceremony venue packed with people? Seems reckless and unnecessary IMHO.

John

Summerfield Films | Toronto Wedding Videographers (http://summerfieldfilms.ca)

So you've never seen wedding moments re-enacted for the photographer? Of course this wouldn't "fly" during the actual ceremony. The drone shot can be just another staged shot after the fact. But it would still be a risky shot nonetheless. Adventurous couples might want something like this.

Just saying...

I couldn't do anything but laugh at the video. Watching it like "yeah, this ain't happening."

Since I am a very short guy, I like Noa's vision of the future wedding, guests not busting their neck to see, but using their drones to capture the action. I always wanted to be tall, but maybe being short will be o.k.

So unrealistic in practical terms it's a joke. If I was that bothered I'd consider it an insult to my intelligence and common sense.