Issue link: https://digital.copcomm.com/i/663382
www.postmagazine.com 37 POST APRIL 2016 Drones say, a Red Epic camera, but not everyone is going to have a $23,000 drone." DRONES TAKE FLIGHT Between consumer, prosumer and professional applications, there are, as one would expect, numerous UAVs to choose from. Many come equipped with their own cameras, while in other instances, users can choose which camera they want to use and send it up for flight. At B&H, Domecq says the store carries its own fair share of drones — both consumer and pro- fessional — from leading manufacturers such as DJI (www.dji. com), xFold (www.xfoldrig.com), Freefly (www.freeflysys tems.com) and others. "When most people think of drones, they're thinking of the white model [Phantom] from DJI," Domecq says. "DJI, they're sort of the Kleenex of drones, if you will — everyone has a DJI. And it was really the first one on the scene that was mass-produced. DJI makes a number of different models — the S1000 or S900, basically the same thing but different siz- es, and they can hold a Canon 5D Mark III on the gimbal [for camera stabilization] with the battery and decent-size lens, and keep it in the air for 13 minutes or so at a time. Those are available at a wide assortment of price points. You don't have to spend $20,000 to get one of these things; you can spend $7K or so and have a really nice system that will give you professional results on that style of camera. "Now, if you're shooting Game of Thrones and you're doing a stereoscopic, Red Epic, dual-mounted shoot, for that level of production we carry a company called xFold, and they make these seriously-huge aircraft," Donecq continues. With a variety of models, xFold rigs range from the xFold Dragon and xFold Cinema to the xFold Travel and xFold Spy. Certainly on the higher end, a fully-loaded xFold Dragon kit, ready to fly, comes in at around $27,000, featuring a turnkey, dual-operator drone with radios, batteries and travel cases. It's the company's largest rig, designed for heavy payloads. Festival panel looks at the state of regulations At the 2016 New York City Drone Film Festival, held on March 5th, the first panel of the day looked at "Drone Legality and Policy" for both hobbyists and profession- als wanting to incorporate drones into their production workflows. Randy Scott Slavin, founder and director of the festival, moderated the panel, which included four participants, each of whom brought different insight into the growing unmanned aircraft system (UAS) market. Gretchen West is a senior advisor at the law firm Hogan Lovells and has been pro- moting military and commercial technol- ogy on Capitol Hill in an effort to open up airspace. She spoke of deciphering drone "fact from fiction," including understand- ing the difference between commercial and recreational flying. "There is confusion between the two," she says. "The minute you start to make money, you become a commercial operator." West referred attendees to the Federal Aviation Administration's Website (www. faa.gov), where they could learn more about the Section 333 grant of exemption, which allows drone operators to use their vehicles for business, whether farming, construction or filmmaking. Mark Connot is a partner at entertain- ment law firm Fox Rothchild. He's been in the industry for a little over three years and recognizes that a lot of the laws in place for drones are unnecessary, while also pointing to the importance of privacy and trespassing rules. Steve Cohen is a drone enthusiast and leads the New York/New Jersey Chapter of the Drone User Group Network. He says he became an "accidental advocate" around five years ago and has since been known to speak his mind while sharing knowledge with the unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) community about legislation and local laws. And Jon Resnick is a policy lead at drone manufacturer DJI, where he works to pro- mote as much availability to the sky as pos- sible, but with the lowest level of burden. The panel agreed that all drones are not the same, and that a "micro UAS," which weighs 4.4 pounds or less and is designed for recreational purposes, might be excluded from regulations that restrict larger models used for commercial pur- poses. They also agreed that regulations would need to be forward-thinking, as the technology is constantly evolving. "Five years from now, technology will be much different," echoes the group. "The word 'micro' is being thrown around a lot — low-level, low-weight, reduced-altitude, not flying over people," notes DJI's Resnick, who is somewhat crit- ical of current FAA regulation. "A lot of it comes from traditional 'aviation thinking,' " he says of current policy. "People are not 'on board' and in need of being protected. The 333 process has 31 requirements. It's setting people up to fail. It's so burden- some. Let's get to the idea of what is going to make things safe, and not whether people are making money off it." Cohen echoes Resnick's thoughts on overregulation. "The process takes so long," says Cohen. "They need to get it right, and [we] need to advocate as a community." Cohen cites his own experiences with local politics. When trying to organize a gathering in the New York City area, he found he wasn't able to get a firm con- firmation on what the local regulations allowed, and that he was probably more knowledgeable on the subject of drones than those enforcing such policy. Connot agrees with the importance of the public's involvement and encourages drone enthusiasts to email their legisla- ture to oppose local laws they feel are too restrictive. What can't happen, he cautions, is to have a "reckless cowboy" cause an incident that negatively shapes public perception and sets back progress for the larger drone community. – MARC LOFTUS (Top) Intuitive Aerial's Aerigon at IBC 2015. (Bottom) NAB's Aerial Robotics and Drone Pavilion with flying cage last year.