Hypothetical question of course.

The only down side with all this cash in hand is that you are probably not insured should something go wrong, me for one bought the P3 with every intention of using it commercially and so will bite the bullet and go down the legit route. I actually think that by doing that it will open up many more opportunities.
 
The only down side with all this cash in hand is that you are probably not insured should something go wrong, me for one bought the P3 with every intention of using it commercially and so will bite the bullet and go down the legit route. I actually think that by doing that it will open up many more opportunities.

What can go wrong whilst filming for cash in hand that wouldn't go wrong if you were just flying for your own pleasure? You would be equally uninsured but the course owner would be infinitely less understanding.
 
Loophole: a means of escape; especially: an ambiguity or omission in the text through which the intent of a statute, contract, or obligation may be evaded

Shenanigan:a devious trick used especially for an underhand purpose.

Maybe I can do a Shenanloopiganhole!
 
  • Like
Reactions: Apparition
Since I fly in populated areas (but not around people in the immediate vicinity), and around other people's property, I believe insurance is a must.
 
I will take your question seriously and answer what I would charge. First I would determine exactly what the golf course was planning to do with the media that I produce. That matters as far as what I will shoot and what I will charge. I would discuss if I got accreditation on the final distribution. Also ask the golf course to notify the employees and golfers of the filming activity and to have them act normally.

If used for brochures and a short video, I would charge $5000 but retain the right to use unidentifiable clips and photos for my own use. If used for a full blown 25 minute video then I would start at $25,000.

I have no problem at this time selling my work using my Phantom or other cameras. Don't forget, you will have the land owner's permission.

Would probably get a model's release signed by the players if they were identifiable.
 
Donco234, that sounds like good advice, along with insurance...
 
What can go wrong whilst filming for cash in hand that wouldn't go wrong if you were just flying for your own pleasure? You would be equally uninsured but the course owner would be infinitely less understanding.

If you have gone to the trouble of CAA Permission then I would imagine you would have insurance?

As an armature you can become a member of British Model Flying Association (BMFA) and if you are flying for fun with permission you have civil liability cover up to £25m. Obviously this does not cover you for commercial work.

Everyone has there own view on what is or isn't acceptable/legal and the risks. I wouldn't preach to anyone but hindsight can be a wonderful thing.
 
It's a ridiculous position to find oneself in. I work my gundogs at a local pheasant shoot, the grand house of which is a castle. The guys there know I fly a Phantom and asked me if I would consider using it to photograph some of the more inaccessible parts of the roof, chimney stacks and stonework to assess the condition of the stonework, some of which had not been examined for years.

I felt a little embarrassed but agreed to do it. I had two mornings there, on the first occasion filming from ground level, and on the second from up on the flat roof. The head mason was with me, directing me as to what he thought was of particular importance. They were absolutely thrilled with the result, the images revealing detail well beyond their expectations. They freely admitted my use of the Phantom had saved them a huge amount of money.

When they asked me what I charged, I was unable to answer, insisting it was just a hobby and that I was looking for no financial reward. Truth be told, I think on this occasion I shall settle for an evening with some friends on the castle's snooker table, the evening perhaps stiffened somewhat by a bottle of their own branded malt!

I related this story to a fishing guest whereupon he immediately invited me to take on the job of filming a section of the river Spey for inclusion on his web site. Really, I'm beginning to think I'm in the wrong job! Best of luck to anyone - and particularly the original poster - if they are enterprising enough to maximise whatever opportunities come their way. The work is most definitely out there.
 
I have a friend who regularly charges for his Phantom video work, when he makes out the invoice he lists the video as Free and only charges for the Post production and editing work. Seems to be OK as he has been doing it for 2 years without any IRS issues, he even pays his taxes on the editing side. Don't know about other countries. He hands the "Free" video to the property owner, then the owner asks him how much to edit some video he has, seems to be a loophole here.
Often mentioned in the forums but the FAA etc wouldn't take a microsecond to see through that fiddle.
You'd only be fooling yourself doing this.
Fly safe and stay below the radar .. like everyone else does.
 
Stay below the radar - best advice ever! But even that would not protect you from a disgruntled witness who didn't want their picture taken...that's when it blows up!

As for insurance, I can't find a company offering recreational UAS liability so guess I'll need to hide my assets....
 
I agree the FAA would see through the ploy of free filming/money for editing approach. In college our fraternity could not charge guests for beer, so we charged $1 for a cup. That worked for a weekend. The next weekend we charged $1 for music, then the gig was up...

Can someone point me to the statute or a summary of the statute that everyone is worried about? IOW, on what basis are we precluded from charging for UAV filming work?
 
I have a friend who regularly charges for his Phantom video work, when he makes out the invoice he lists the video as Free and only charges for the Post production and editing work. Seems to be OK as he has been doing it for 2 years without any IRS issues, he even pays his taxes on the editing side. Don't know about other countries. He hands the "Free" video to the property owner, then the owner asks him how much to edit some video he has, seems to be a loophole here.
I agree, there is a lot of time in editing and that's what you charge for.
 
I agree the FAA would see through the ploy of free filming/money for editing approach. In college our fraternity could not charge guests for beer, so we charged $1 for a cup. That worked for a weekend. The next weekend we charged $1 for music, then the gig was up...

Can someone point me to the statute or a summary of the statute that everyone is worried about? IOW, on what basis are we precluded from charging for UAV filming work?


You can start here...
http://www.faa.gov/uas/legislative_programs/section_333/

...and here's another one
http://www.roelegal.com/?p=323
 
Last edited:
If you were doing a photo shoot for a 18 hole golf course, much would you charge?
Photos only?
Video only ?
Too many arm chair lawyers here.....seek professional advice. I would do it free and maybe get some golf !
 

Attachments

  • catch-me-if-you-can1.jpeg
    catch-me-if-you-can1.jpeg
    36.8 KB · Views: 251
  • Like
Reactions: dirkclod
I enjoyed the RoeLegal article, from a non-armchair insurance lawyer - quick, easy and informative read...
 
I'd charge about $50,000 so I'd have some money to pay for my lawyer in defense of a lawsuit from the FAA!
Its my understanding that the FAA has not yet issued guidelines other than the 400 foot ceiling, and restricted airspace. DJI's latest SW is a bit more restrictive, but you can fly and make money, IMO. What they're worried about is Amazon putting thousands of drones in the air to deliver packages. Does anyone have solid facts to add?
 
I agree the FAA would see through the ploy of free filming/money for editing approach. In college our fraternity could not charge guests for beer, so we charged $1 for a cup. That worked for a weekend. The next weekend we charged $1 for music, then the gig was up...

Can someone point me to the statute or a summary of the statute that everyone is worried about? IOW, on what basis are we precluded from charging for UAV filming work?

This is a link to the FAA's website, in which it has a list of "Dos" and "Don'ts".....I'm sure somewhere on their site you can find the actual copy of their complete regulations that list this as a FAA violation. Honestly I wish it wasn't a law, I'm always looking for a way to make extra $ without tying myself down to a second job...so for guys like me this is a bummer.

https://www.faa.gov/uas/publications/model_aircraft_operators/
 
If used for brochures and a short video, I would charge $5000 but retain the right to use unidentifiable clips and photos for my own use. If used for a full blown 25 minute video then I would start at $25,000.
I'm not sure surgeons make THAT kind of money. I would think the person getting this quote for drone video and editing would retain the right to find someone else....fast.
 

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
143,066
Messages
1,467,358
Members
104,936
Latest member
hirehackers