Slashdot Mirror


$50 Aerial Digital Photography from a Balloon

jizmonkey writes "This guy built a balloon to take digital aerial photographs from thousands of feet up. It cost less than $50 altogether, including the image sensor, controller, and balloon. The circuit is surprisingly straightforward: just a hacked Vivitar minicamera, a 555 timer chip driving a relay through a voltage regulator, and a one-meter party balloon like the ones you see at used car dealerships. It just so happens that the entire circuit, strapped to a piece of a pizza box and tied to a really long string, is light enough to be lifted by the balloon. What could low-cost aerial photography be used for? I'm sure some people have some ideas...."

205 comments

  1. Impilcations and alternatives... by mgcsinc · · Score: 3, Informative

    Implications? An increased number of one-meter-balloon purchases and camera-raining-down-from-sky events in suburbia... Incidentally, you can get nice high-res aerial images of almost every major populated area in the US for just under the price tag of this rigged weather balloon: Keyhole's Earthviewer software and service, $49.95 a month... By all means, though, if it's an image from above of the new 2:1 scale Star Wars vessel you built in your backyard that you need and Keyhole's archived shots won't do it for you, be my guest and rig one of these babies up!

    1. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by spiritgreywolf · · Score: 1, Troll

      Would someone 'splain to him that it's "upskirt" shots, not "upINABALLOONLOOKINGDOWNskirt" shots?
      Thanks!
      :-)

      --
      Never have a philosophy which supports a lack of courage
    2. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Haha, youre frist psot nd u git moded downe

    3. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      And all while your parent is modded up!

    4. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by Zakabog · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Yeah and why even buy a camera to take photographs, you can just hire a photographer to take pictures of people doing other things you did once. Sure they might pictures that you don't want but who cares right?

      The reason you would do this is not to get just any pictures from the sky, it's to get YOUR pictures from the sky. Like a picture of your house, or your car, or your neighborhood (all of these with you standing in the picture (or out of it depending on how YOU feel) controlling where the balloon goes to take pictures. Not an archived photo of someone elses. And that's $50 A MONTH, not close to a one time fee of $50. And also these are your pictures to share with the world, I'm pretty sure I can't go around sharing keyhole's earthviewer pictures with all my friends.

    5. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by cyranose · · Score: 2, Informative

      There's a missing component for making usable/tilable aerial images -- you'd want position/orientation tracking of the camera.

      If you want to do a EarthViewer-like flyover of your house, you'll need that and a little extra horsepower to orthorectify the images and do some stitching -- not quite as simple as it sounds. Mounting two GPS units some distance apart could give you enough position/heading info (or three if your balloon tilts, which is likely).

      But you could always use this _with_ EarthViewer, not instead. Even the consumer version has the ability to add your own image overlays on the Earth and share them via internet downloads. (full disclosure: I used to work at Keyhole).

    6. Re:Impilcations and alternatives... by ta+bu+shi+da+yu · · Score: 0

      Did I just see right? Is this a first post that actually had something intelligent to say? What is slashdot coming to?!!??!

      Never mind, he more than made up for it with a spelling mistake in the first word.

      Yours humbly,
      Ta bù shì dà yú

      --
      XML is like violence. If it doesn't solve the problem, use more.
  2. So... by James+A.+A.+Joyce · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...how long will it be before he gets sued by Barbra Streisand?

    1. Re:So... by NanoGator · · Score: 1

      "ow long will it be before he gets sued by Barbra Streisand? "

      I missed this story. Explain?

      --
      "Derp de derp."
    2. Re:So... by James+A.+A.+Joyce · · Score: 2, Informative

      Somebody (not the person in this story) was doing a coastal survey of a US coastline (Florida, I think, though I could be wrong) and this involved taking lots and lots of overlapping photographs of it. Streisand has a house on the coastline and she's trying to sue the people taking the photographs for some sum of money, claiming that they're violating her privacy by taking photographs of the coast in and around her house.

      Here's a link I found from some quick Google searching.

    3. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      This site is being sued because one small portion of one (out of 12,000) photos of the california coastline happens to contain a photo of her house.

      Damned conservationists!

    4. Re:So... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's fucking ridiculous.

    5. Re:So... by kimgh · · Score: 2, Informative
      Not Florida. Malibu, California. And you can see the results of the "coastal survey" at www.californiacoastline.com.

      You can get details on the Streisand lawsuit there, also...

    6. Re:So... by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

      Hollywoodland and lawyers. It's a far deadlier combination than speedballs (cocaine and heroin).

      --
      One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
    7. Re:So... by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 3, Informative

      There's a guy who's been flying around the Oregon and California coastlines taking aerial shots and putting them on his website. It's actually quite nice. He has documented the entire California coast except for the restricted area around an Air Force base.

      Goregeous photos.

      And one can tell that he's put a lot of hard work into his project.

      Here's the problem. Barbara's got her panties in a bunch because this guy's photos show exactly how to get to her secluded beachfront mansion. So she's trying to sue him for invasion of privacy or some such BS.

      She seems to not know that any deranged fan who has her address could get directions to her house from Mapquest. Who knows, if she realized this, she'd probably sue them too.

      Sorry, I don't have the project's URL handy.

      wbs.

      --
      Huh?
    8. Re:So... by hazem · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The funny thing is... I would never have known about hte pictures of her house, let alone have looked at them if she hadn't filed this suit. I imagine this is the case with most people who've looked at the pictures. I would say that she has done more damage to her privacy than the original project.

    9. Re:So... by kimgh · · Score: 1

      You hit upon a point that I and many others have noticed. I'll go further: her lawsuit and her attitude have guaranteed that the picture of her house will never be unavailable on the web, even if it gets removed from the CCL project! It'll be cached by Google and a dozen or a hundred other websites.

  3. Two Words: Nude Beaches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Since most are private - no public access - then .... well .... here's the soution

    1. Re:Two Words: Nude Beaches by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You do know that most people who to go nude beachers are like, pretty old right? Your average hot-next-door-neighbor type girl is not a nudist. At best you'll get her mom.

      Ick.

  4. a new low by larry+bagina · · Score: 1, Funny
    so slashdot is now accepting news from a guy called 'jizmonkey'?

    I guess after you publish a 6th grade book report as a review, there's no point left in pretending to have any shame.

    --
    Do you even lift?

    These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.

    1. Re:a new low by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      It might be unintentional... I hadn't noticed...

  5. And when it crashes by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    You have the perfect "It was an alien spacecraft that crashed" story which the government tried to cover up by saying it was a photography balloon.

  6. Good thing it's so cheap by perimorph · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Good thing it's so cheap -- he'll have to study the photos very carefully if he wants to recover it when the helium finally leaks out!

  7. For the government to use it... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    It would have to have WindowsCE Goverment edition - with the tag-line, "Who do you want to watch today?"

  8. That answers the burning question... by Call+Me+Black+Cloud · · Score: 1

    ...so, what does the Stanford quad look like from the air?

    Being near the SF Bay Area he could have come up with better picture locations. How about the Golden Gate Bridge? Palace of Fine Arts? Nice job with the balloon and camera though.

  9. I'm sure the FAA won't be happy... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    Anybody know the regulations that apply for balloons? I know the rules for gliders (I'm a glider pilot) but I have no clue about balloons.

  10. Planes... by Romeozulu · · Score: 5, Informative

    As a private pilot, I hope he keeps this thing below 1,000 feet.

    1. Re:Planes... by dopaz · · Score: 1

      The pictures are interesting. They also show that he's nowhere near your flight path. The cheap digital camera used would have very little detail at higher altitudes. I doubt he even raised the balloon above 100 feet. The first image of it shows it hovering around the top of a palm tree... how tall can a palm tree grow?

    2. Re:Planes... by Penguinshit · · Score: 2, Informative

      Even an old cloth-covered, tail-dragging, C-150 throttled back to near-stall would have no problem slicing through this little balloon without even noticing. You're in good shape.

  11. Invade! by Adam.Steinbaugh · · Score: 1

    This guy is building weapons that rival Iraq's! Invade!

    --
    "Mother, should I run for President? Mother, should I trust the government?"
    1. Re:Invade! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ok, we'll get right on that

      -- the Man

  12. AAAAAAARH by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Funny

    Pictures of healthy people doing fun things outdoors in the sun!??!

    NOOOOO!!!!1 THIS IS SLASHDOT

  13. Doesn't sound like as much fun... by kzinti · · Score: 4, Informative

    ...as Kite Aerial Photography. Same idea, except you suspend the camera from a kite.

    1. Re:Doesn't sound like as much fun... by heli0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      Kites can lift a lot more weight and subsequently people are usign higher quality (SLR) cameras.

      Here is a project camtroller to use a Parrallax Basic Stamp to control a digital camera on a kite.

      More info here: rc-soar

      --
      Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
    2. Re:Doesn't sound like as much fun... by Lust · · Score: 1

      Similarly, the amateur scientist article from SciAm: here

    3. Re:Doesn't sound like as much fun... by chloroquine · · Score: 1
      Benton's stuff never fails to amaze me. I can't take a decent picture standing firmly on the ground and he manages to get such wonderful stuff using a kite. It is a neat perspective - not as high as most aerial stuff taken from helicopter or airplane. There is a curious sense of intimacy that you feel in his photos.

      I'm glad that you posted the link, because otherwise I would have had to.

    4. Re:Doesn't sound like as much fun... by Liem+Bahneman · · Score: 1

      I experimented with this just this weekend at Long Beach, WA with a regular delta kite and a coolpix 885 suspended from its line. I used the corded Nikon timer that allows interval pictures every 2 minutes. It was a fun experiment that I'll hope to take further with a picavet harness and a larger, loftier kite.

      my kite pics

      --
      Remember, its called GNU/Linux, but pronounced "Linux".
  14. Two Words by mhesseltine · · Score: 4, Funny

    Naked Sunbathing

    --
    Overrated / Underrated : Moderation :: Anonymous Coward : Posting
    1. Re:Two Words by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Well don't let your limited vocabulary hold you back, I say go for it!!

    2. Re:Two Words by jstockdale · · Score: 1

      Uhm ...
      you do realize this is Stanford University right? Most of the chics that would be sunbathing nude would cause whoever downloaded the pictures to go a) blind b) insane c) celebate

      I should know, I go there :P

      --
      **AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
    3. Re:Two Words by curtlewis · · Score: 1

      I worked at Stanford back in 95 for a year and there were alot of stunningly gorgeous gals walking by my desk to go into the computer lab all the time.

      I must admit that maintaining a professional demeanor was difficult at times, but somehow I managed.

    4. Re:Two Words by jstockdale · · Score: 1

      But those girls arn't about to be nude sunbathing except in the perverted dreams of /. geeks. If you've ever been to a UC school (particularly UCSB) you'll realize why the running joke exists among students at Stanford that we happen to have the lowest demographic of hot chics in Cali. And yes, its a running joke.

      --
      **AA: a bunch of mindless jerks who'll be the first against the wall when the revolution comes
  15. 'jizmonkey' writes?! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    What, was Penisbird's submission not good enough?

  16. A Sweet Idea by aaky · · Score: 1, Funny
    I'm sure some people have some ideas....

    You know what every guy is thinking...some sweet shots of your neighborhood babe suntanning!

  17. heh by The+Tyro · · Score: 4, Funny

    this criticism from a guy named "larry bagina?"

    Too funny. Only on /.

    --
    Even if a man chops off your hand with a sword, you still have two nice, sharp bones to stick in his eyes.
    1. Re:heh by Alien+Being · · Score: 1

      Don't be pickin' on my brother.

      -Harry

  18. Other solutions... by pen · · Score: 2, Informative
    Cheap aerial photography has already been around for a while. A lot of people have been using kites to accomplish this, but a cheap balloon is much less dependent on the environment being just right. (It doesn't have to be windy.)

    Kite Aerial Photography
    Mosaics of kite aerial photographs
    Aerial photography using a balloon at Burning Man
    Other types of aerial photography (balloon, helicopter, kite, even periscope!)

    1. Re:Other solutions... by kzinti · · Score: 1

      (Troll? Seems pretty on-topic and informative to me.)

      I know of at least one older form of amateur aerial photography: the Estes Cineroc, an 8mm movie camera launched as the payload of a small solid-motor rocket. I remember seeing one of these advertised in an Estes catalog back in the late seventies and drooling over the idea. Unfortunately, I was just a poor kid with little pocket money for rockets.

    2. Re:Other solutions... by BWJones · · Score: 1

      I remember seeing one of these advertised in an Estes catalog back in the late seventies and drooling over the idea. Unfortunately, I was just a poor kid with little pocket money for rockets.

      Estes had another version with (I think) 110 still camera film. We had a group of about ten of us that all saved up and bought one back then. The pictures were OK...... Sometimes all you got was blue sky, but other times they were pretty good except that you could never get the fins and the base of the rocket out of the picture.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
  19. FAA Regulations for Balloons. by sglider · · Score: 3, Informative
    A quick search on Google provided this link.

    It reads as follows:
    No person may operate an unmanned free balloon- (a) Unless otherwise authorized by ATC, in a control zone below 2,000 feet above the surface, or in an airport traffic area; (b) At any altitude where there are clouds or obscuring phenomena of more than five-tenths coverage; (c) At any altitude below 60,000 feet standard pressure altitude where the horizontal visibility is less than five miles; (d) During the first 1,000 feet of ascent, over a congested area of a city, town, or settlement or an open-air assembly of persons not associated with the operation; or (e) In such a manner that impact of the balloon, or part thereof including its payload, with the surface creates a hazard to persons or property not associated with the operation.
    In english, it basically means that you are out of luck trying to get camera footage of anything if there is so much as a cloud in the sky.
    --
    War isn't about who's right. It's about who's left.
    1. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      What a square. I bet you always walk that extra 10 feet to get to the crosswalk too.

    2. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by BWJones · · Score: 0, Flamebait

      What a square. I bet you always walk that extra 10 feet to get to the crosswalk too.

      What a looser. I bet you always post Anonymous Coward too.

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    3. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by FatAssBastard · · Score: 1

      What a loser, can't even spell 'loser'.

      (that was a joke, d00d, laugh! :)

      --
      /.: why the hell am I here?
    4. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by BWJones · · Score: 0

      Yeah, you got me there. It's been a long day. Time to leave work and go home....

      --
      Visit Jonesblog and say hello.
    5. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by bfischer · · Score: 1

      but wouldn't the "free" part of unmanned free balloon mean not attached to the person on the ground with string like this one is?

    6. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by whorfin · · Score: 2, Funny

      Where you live, you call somebody who uses a crosswalk a square.

      Where I live, we call people who don't walk the extra 10 feet to the crosswalk an ambulance.

      BTW, I live in San Francisco.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
    7. Re:FAA Regulations for Balloons. by OrangeTide · · Score: 1

      Only the immigrants driving the city buses hit anyone in SF. The rest of the people seem to avoid running over pedistrians. Now Chicago, that's where you have to dive out of the way, even if you're in a crosswalk.

      --
      “Common sense is not so common.” — Voltaire
  20. That's cool and all..... by Hogwash+McFly · · Score: 1
    --
    Mother, do you think they'll like this sig?
  21. "Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by dpbsmith · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Speaking of gadgets to use in projects like this one...

    In the July 24th Boston Globe, Ritz is advertising something called a "Dakota Digital Single-Use Camera."

    Now, I've seen a "digital single-use cameras" from Kodak which just used film, and the only thing "digital" about them is that when you send them in for processing, they scan the negatives and send you a CD along with the prints.

    But this one SAYS "Delete and Retake Last Shot," which, to me, suggests that it really IS digital. It's $10.99. It says it will take 25 images. No indication of resolution. And no indication of precisely what you do after you have taken the pictures.

    I probably need to get one and crack one open. It sounds like a very interesting device for hacking.

    It will be very annoying if it turns out that $10.99 means that you pay $60.00 up front and get $49.01 back when you bring it in for "processing," though.

    Googling on "Dakota Digital Single-Use Camera" and even "Digital Single-Use Camera" doesn't turn up anything except that phony Kodak film camera...

    1. Re:"Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by heli0 · · Score: 4, Informative

      I think Walgreens beat them: Walgreen's single-use digital camera

      "it's 'the only single use camera' with a delete button to let them retake shots"

      --
      Whenever the offence inspires less horror than the punishment, the rigour of penal law is obliged to give way...
    2. Re:"Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by McAdder · · Score: 2, Interesting

      The one I made used a "single-use" film camera. It turned out that with a little care, I could reload it with a higher-resolution (extremely fine grain Tech Pan) film plenty of times.

      I made a frame out of balsa and spruce that the camera slid into. Mounted on the frame was a small servo. I had it rigged so that a full throw in one direction would trip the shutter. Moving the control back and forth near the other end of travel would move a pawl back and forth over the film-advance wheel. I could load it with over 40 exposures.

      If you don't have a servo, and the radios, then that blows the budget. But many geeks have them laying around in a crashed plane. So not counting the cost of that equipment, the budget would be well under US$15. And even if the baloon burst, the radio and servo were pretty tough (designed to be in things that crash).

      --
      Every great advance in natural knowledge has involved the absolute rejection of authority. - Thomas Huxley (1825-1895)
    3. Re:"Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by lorax · · Score: 1

      I saw an ad for this in Ritz Camera (they are also Wolf camera I think) It is only in selected stores (and doesn't seem to be on the web site. I had the same thought you did, I haven't seen it, but I bet it uses some funky connector on a USB cable to unload the pictures and recharge it.

      I just saw the ad and from it I was unsure if prints/cd was included or if that was another $11 and it also didn't give the resolution. Anyone try it?

    4. Re:"Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Interesting

      Bought one - It really does cost $10.97 or $10.99.

      Under label that is taped on, there is a slot
      about one inch wide that takes some kind of a
      10 pin connecter - Today's edition of USA today has a story about the camera - claims 2 megapixel resolution. - The camera takes two AA batteries which are included in the purchase price and which can easily be changed without cracking open the camera. - I wonder if Ritz really plans to repackage and resell them - The money is in the processing- It might be better just to give the camera back to the user.

    5. Re:"Dakota DIGITAL single-use camera," $11??? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      I took the camera apart and put it back together - It was not difficult and still appears to work
      fine. - I have been told by someone in another
      camera store that the connector socket appears to fit the circuit board test cable from a Fuji Fronteer printer. -I also noticed that you can delete the previous shot - but you can't go back and delete the shot before the previous shot.

  22. +5 Insightful by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    it's not funny - it's true

  23. Uses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

    I spoke to a guy doing aerial photogrophy using a blimp (not motorized ... essentially a balloon). He said his main business was doing promotional photos for land developers and local governements (Gold Coast, Australia).

  24. Ex-prisoners by darnok · · Score: 5, Funny

    I just had a vision of releasing prisoners early, and using this balloon/camera thingy to track their every move. It hovers over them all the time, and feeds pictures back to some central point so their whereabouts can be monitored at all times. They're free to go wherever the rest of us can go, but they have this camera hovering over them all the time until their sentence is up. Think of the savings in jail accomodation!

    Then the fatal flaw hit me: the ex-con goes for a job interview, holding a 1m balloon with a camera suspended below it, on a piece of string, in an office trying to describe how he'd be a great employee.

    The local bad guys' public bar would look like a fairground, full of shiny balloons. "Mum, can we go play in that new inside park?" would be the cry from the kindergarten set.

    Or imagine a typical NBA game. With the number of balloons that would be floating over the players, nobody would be able to watch the game. Hold on - there's no reason the balloons couldn't contain advertising.

    Well, actually that's several fatal flaws, but I still think it has "weird and cool" merits that override the "it's a really, really dumb idea" issues. This idea has a really great application somewhere, but I just can't see it at the moment.

    Gotta get more sleep tonight

    1. Re:Ex-prisoners by naejulak · · Score: 0

      I don't believe that the answer to the United States of America's crime rates and overcrowded penitentiaries involves balloons at all.

    2. Re:Ex-prisoners by darnok · · Score: 1

      Since when did the guys who run jails start using their imaginations? Maybe they need guys like me to start helping them out, coming up with wild and wacky ideas that would get prisoners roaming free again.

      Or maybe they don't.

    3. Re:Ex-prisoners by dietlein · · Score: 1

      Until I (the prisoner) pull out a BB gun and shoot the balloon...

      (bulletproof balloons might raise the cost a bit.)

      I like the NBA image though.

    4. Re:Ex-prisoners by Penguinshit · · Score: 1

      I am not a number! I am a free man!

      And keep those goddamned giant balloons away from me!

      oh.. wait.. wrong Prisoner.

      sorry.

    5. Re:Ex-prisoners by darnok · · Score: 2, Funny

      All you'd have to do is make the balloons out of something pretty tough. Steel reinforced concrete ought to do it.

      There's gold in these ideas, I tells ya.

    6. Re:Ex-prisoners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
  25. Bitmaps?! by paul248 · · Score: 1

    Uncompressed Bitmaps + Slashdot = Very Bad

  26. 79,000 feet by squashdot · · Score: 1

    http://vpizza.org/~jmeehan/balloon/

    --
    A-OK \A-O-'kA\, adverb or adjective, very definitely OK.(Websters http://www.m-w.com/)
    1. Re:79,000 feet by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 1
  27. You're wrong. by V.P. · · Score: 1

    If the government wanted to use this baloon to spy on its citizens, this would cost 50 million dollars.

  28. Not a free balloon by localroger · · Score: 4, Insightful
    No person may operate an unmanned free balloon

    This is an unmanned tethered balloon. Unless I'm missing an obscure bit of aeronautical jargon here, this regulation doesn't apply. And for good reason I'd gather, since a tethered balloon can be reeled in, but a free balloon (like most weather balloons) goes where it wants once you release it.

    --
    Brackets contain world's first nanosig, highly magnified:[.]
    1. Re:Not a free balloon by sglider · · Score: 5, Informative
      Excellent point. The regulations for a Tethered balloon are:
      (a) Except as provided in paragraph (b) of this section, no person may operate a moored balloon or kite- (1) Less than 500 feet from the base of any cloud; (2) More than 500 feet above the surface of the earth; (3) From an area where the ground visibility is less than three miles; or (4) Within five miles of the boundary of any airport. (b) Paragraph (a) of this section does not apply to the operation of a balloon or kite below the top of any structure and within 250 feet of it, if that shielded operation does not obscure any lighting on the structure.
      This regulation is even worse, due to the limitation of 500 feet above ground. Again, thanks to Google and to these guys.
      --
      War isn't about who's right. It's about who's left.
    2. Re:Not a free balloon by NotQuiteReal · · Score: 1
      So, um, the last step before launching said baloon or kite is to wipe your fingerprints off of it, right?

      Eyes roll up to the right as I wistle, past smoking wreck of downed commuter flight...

      --
      This issue is a bit more complicated than you think.
    3. Re:Not a free balloon by powerg3 · · Score: 3, Interesting

      No person may operate an unmanned free balloon

      You may, however, operate a manned free balloon. See Lawn Chair Larry.

      --
      Wild Eeep!
    4. Re:Not a free balloon by whorfin · · Score: 5, Insightful

      This was a 1 meter balloon, so isn't affected by these rules.

      These rules, as specified in the link, apply only to a balloon with a diameter of more than 6 feet or a gas capacity of more than 115 cubic feet.

      --
      Laugh while you can, monkey-boy!
    5. Re:Not a free balloon by brakk · · Score: 1

      But, you would be ok releasing it downtown in a big city. Just be within 250 feet of the tallest building.

    6. Re:Not a free balloon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Ok, here's the FAA regulation that will get you. IANAL, but IAAP (I am a pilot) - I still read a LOT of FAA regs.

      101.7 Hazardous operations.

      (a) No person may operate any moored balloon, kite, unmanned rocket, or unmanned free balloon in a manner that creates a hazard to other persons, or their property.

      All the other rules (including the one about size) are overridden by this because of the clauses stating "Except as provided for in 101.7, ..." The size of the balloon doesn't matter in 101.7.

      Don't you think that raising a tethered balloon a thousand feet in the air is a hazard to some aircraft? I bet the FAA would think so. Anyone caught trying this would probably be found in violation of 101.7

    7. Re:Not a free balloon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      If I cant fly a balloon because of something called 101.7, there's something really wrong.

    8. Re:Not a free balloon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      As a teenager we flew kite's with 15,000 feet of fishing line and the airport was only a half mile away. Planes used to "buzz" around the kites. Only bad part was if the kite came down, that was a lot of line to wrap up.

  29. How much? by spudchucker · · Score: 0, Troll

    Please quantify "ass expensive".

  30. Wireless + Balloon + Camera? by TibbonZero · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, so I have two ideas here. One i think someone has already implemented.

    I'm first thinking that balloons could be a really easy way to get a wireless network to cover a large area. A stripped down wireless unit, a super light battery ( or solar/wind power source), and a really large balloon. Put a few of these up on long strings, and i could cover cambridge or back bay (Boston) pretty quickly I would think.

    Ok, second idea. What about some wireless hookup for the digital camera, so that you could put a camera up there, and not take it down often, but control the camera (zoom?) - or at least take the pictures, and then transfer them to the ground. I would think that this could really rock. Get 4-8 of those party balloons (at what point is this a 'weather balloon' and are there any laws about these?), so you could pick up 2-4 lbs, then, mount the stuff on a little box. Put a few strings on it, and let it fly. Snap snap snap, download the camera, zoom in, etc...

    --
    Tibbon
    tibbon.com
    1. Re:Wireless + Balloon + Camera? by homer_ca · · Score: 1

      Wouldn't it be easier to just run an antenna up the balloon tether and keep the radio on the ground?

    2. Re:Wireless + Balloon + Camera? by AdEbh · · Score: 1

      Your first idea has already been covered on /. here.

      - Alex

  31. Automobile traffic analysis by ErikTheRed · · Score: 5, Interesting

    Funny that this story should come up; I was making an exceptionally long commute to a project today (80 miles each way, 40 of which were in heavy traffic) and was thinking about an analysis of traffic patterns - starting with the hypothesis that the density and speed of vehicles in each lane constitutes a form of pressure and the how this is affected by the number of cars entering and exiting at each intersection, and also the addition / subtraction of lanes along the course of the route. I was thinking that this could be accomplished with some custom image recognition software and a medium-resolution video stream from a several cameras a few thousand feet up (I was thinking helicopters, circling aircraft, and even blimps, but all would be much too expensive). I hadn't considered that a balloon might work so well.....

    --

    Help save the critically endangered Blue Iguana
    1. Re:Automobile traffic analysis by happystink · · Score: 2, Funny

      Congratulations, you just turns something extrenely awesome and fun into something painful and boring. You work for the government right?

      --

      sig:
      See the "..for smart people" banners Wired runs here? Look elsewhere guys.

    2. Re:Automobile traffic analysis by Bushcat · · Score: 0, Offtopic
      The most important aid to recognising a vehicle as it moves about a network is its number plate, and to see that the camera has to be viewing an oblique or horizontal plane. The Hanshin Expressway network (Osaka, Japan) has video cameras all over the place. They track numberplates through the network to calculate journey times to various destinations which are then displayed on information boards and relayed via highway radio to car GPS systems that are designed to accept that information. At accident black spots, cameras use motion analysis to detect accidents in progress. (At tollbooths, cameras identify the location of the driver's head to decide from which of a column of vertical slots the ticket should be dispensed, to be within easiest reach)

      I expect other networks do something similar with video networks.

      In your situation, you could probably get better analysis data from a few static video cameras coupled with some image processing: you don't need to know exactly where every vehicle is all the time to carry out congestion analysis, for example. Since you mention "heavy traffic", the video data may already be available on tape, since you don't need to do this in real time, I assume.

    3. Re:Automobile traffic analysis by Xerithane · · Score: 1

      There is some work being done that is mapping traffic patterns out and comparing them with electron flow, which is more accurate than analogous high/low pressure fronts. I wish I could find some google links for you, but coming up empty. You may just google around for "electron flow traffic congestion" and see if anything strikes your fancy.

      --
      Dacels Jewelers can't be trusted.
    4. Re:Automobile traffic analysis by golgotha007 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      when driving thru Los Angeles traffic every morning, i would do my own traffic pattern analysis.

      here are my results:

      brakelights. that's right, brakelights is a serious cause of traffic.

      currently, brakelights are either on or off, there's no middle. from a small distance, it's hard to tell weather someone is braking hard or soft. result? you end up using your brakes a little more than the person in front of you.

      so if one person taps his brakes, it could conceivably cause a traffic jam 5 miles down the road, sort of like the domino effect.

      the solution? put in some sort of dynamic brakelighting. the harder you hit your brakes, the brighter the lights.

    5. Re:Automobile traffic analysis by toddestan · · Score: 1

      Wasn't there some Cadillacs that blinked the brake lights really fast when the brakes were pressed hard? I remember reading about it, but maybe it never actually made it into a production vehicle. Still not a bad idea as long as they wouldn't be confused with the blinkers/hazard lights.

  32. REAAAAALLLLLY high balloon pics by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 4, Informative
    Or, for only two or three hundred more, you can get pictures from the edge of space on a balloon. We have gone to over 110k feet and recovered inexpensive film cameras, and have some incredible shots.

    Photos

    or

    High Altitude Balloon Project

    1. Re:REAAAAALLLLLY high balloon pics by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That's a farily good effort. I think you guys win the geeks of the week prize. Cool stuff.

    2. Re:REAAAAALLLLLY high balloon pics by hlee · · Score: 1

      These are impressive. And I've seen hundreds of aerial shots (mostly from a helicopter) as my dad's an urban planner. Considering they spent several hundred thousand bucks charting various air services.. ballooning could be very cost effective, though I'd imagine the logistics of covering vast areas could be a nightmare. Still.

      Except for the link you sent, I haven't seen many pics.. just takes too long to load via modem. But have you guys tried out any stereoscopic shots? Seems you could put together some dazzling 3D images.

    3. Re:REAAAAALLLLLY high balloon pics by brakk · · Score: 1

      Wow! nice shots, really! I really like the first shot of the ocean. I didn't know it looked so textured from up high. But, what I'm afraid of is what the hell that GIANT FOOT is attached to and where it's going?!?!?!

    4. Re:REAAAAALLLLLY high balloon pics by vonsneerderhooten · · Score: 1

      wallpaper heaven. truly beautiful. -D

  33. Here's some other examples using kites: by Kheldar99 · · Score: 4, Informative

    William Freeman has a good page on his MIT AI lab homepage about doing the same thing except using kites to take pictures. (Btw, check out William T Freemans MIT e-mail address...)
    http://www.ai.mit.edu/people/wtf/kite.html

    And another link to a good site is Charles Benton's site.
    http://www.arch.ced.berkeley.edu/kap/

    Its interesting to note that there are lots of methos for creating unstructured panoramas. Where you have a set of images and the algorithm does its best to determine how to stick the images together to form a panorama. You could imagine a similar algorithm using these images to auotmatically create aerial maps... might make a good paper.

  34. hmmm, a previous slashdot story...... by unclefungus · · Score: 0

    http://slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=03/02/22/171124 2&mode=nested&tid=137

    copy and paste, for those of you mad that i didn't use html!

  35. Similar Story by eap · · Score: 1
    Slashdot linked to a similar story here.

    The article is located here, and it basically talks about a guy who built a balloon with a mobile computer accessible over ham radio through ssh. It is a very good read and he gives plenty of technical details and photos (though not the kind of photos you might be looking for).

  36. Outside? by matguy · · Score: 4, Funny

    Wait, so this involves going outside? Forget that.

    --

    matguy(.com)
    1. Re:Outside? by brakk · · Score: 1

      Just think of it as the big blue room.

    2. Re:Outside? by mikefoley · · Score: 1

      Just send it out the skylight...oh, right, no skylights in the basement!

      --
      What's my Karma Mr. Burns? "Excellent"
  37. It's illegal by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The FAA would have a hemorage. This is illegal. If it's anywhere near a flight path, people could get seriously hurt. Think of the damage this could do sucked into an engine.

    This isn't cool tech - it's stupid.

  38. Ewww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Poking around this guy's site: http://www.stanford.edu/~lindholm/chinf_tal.html (WARNINGNot lunch safe; don't look at this and eat.)

    I'm all for individuality. But posting scat shots on your Stanford web page is nuts.

    Besides being just gross (a not presented in any sort of artistic manner; it's just "here's some scat"), it's hardly a way to get on the good side of future employers. But I read elsewhere that he flits about the globe: Ireland, Scotland, Japan, all during his stay at college. So perhaps working for a living like the rest of us is not a concern.

    1. Re:Ewww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      ...and the guy holding the see-through balloon seems to have dropped his shorts.

    2. Re:Ewww by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      That "see-through balloon" is a condom. See the photo of the board at the bottom of the page.

  39. hmmmmm....... by Lord_Dweomer · · Score: 1
    http://www.8thStreet-Bang-Balloon-Hunter-Fiesta.co m anybody?

    --
    Buy Steampunk Clothing Online!
  40. Not fun for GA by ehintz · · Score: 3, Interesting

    In populated areas fixedwing can't go below 1000' (legally) but rotor can. I routinely fly between 500 and 1000' feet. I'd probably see one of these things in time but if I didn't it wouldn't be fun. Probably wouldn't damage the aircraft (unless I got real unlucky and a blade hit the camera itself) but it would surely scare the bejeezus out of me. Birds are bad enough, lots of little cameras in ballons does not sound fun.

    --
    ehintz
  41. AIPTek Pencam and Mustek Mini3 cameras by pm · · Score: 4, Interesting

    For a modest increase in budget, you can get a big increase in the quality of the photos. In the really light, fairly cheap, and better quality digtal camera catagory are the AIPTek Pencam 1.3 and Mustek Mini3 cameras. I bought my AIPTek Pencam for about $70 and it takes pretty good digital photos at 1.3MP.

    Both of them are fairly easy to modify as well and there are sites that show in detail how to take them apart and enable other triggering options - such as a 555 or a radio controlled trigger. One example: http://www.rc-cam.com/camman.htm

  42. Nice by future+assassin · · Score: 1

    Haha secret squirrel paparazzi shots.

    --
    by TheSpoom (715771) Uncaring Linux user here. I have nothing to add to this but please continue. *munches popcorn*
  43. Game Boy Kite Aerial Photography by hiroshi912681 · · Score: 2, Informative

    how about this cheaper alternative.

  44. Who needs a 555? by twitter · · Score: 1

    While a 555 timer offers flexibility, I decided a christmas tree light and relay required less effort. Let's see if I've got that page up. Yep Dinky Cox page lacks space!

    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  45. USB Remote by sakusha · · Score: 2, Interesting

    I'm working on a similar project (well, if you consider trying to raise the money to be "working"). Being a professional photographer, I want professional results, and that means remote preview through the camera via USB (why oh why don't prosumer cameras come with FireWire?) and of course USB craps out after about 5 meters. But I just found out that someone finally did the impossible, a 1000ft USB extension device. It's an active microprocessor controlled relay device, you need one at both ends, runs off 12v so I could use a 12v battery to power it. But now I can't find the damn vendor. Anyone know who makes this device?

    1. Re:USB Remote by Rooterbaga · · Score: 1

      like this?

      Raritan CAT5 Reach USB Extender
      Extend USB devices up to 1000ft using CAT5 cables. Includes transmitter and receiver

      http://www.kvms.com/kvm_extenders/usb_extenders. as p

      --
      ~ this space brought to you by ~
    2. Re:USB Remote by sakusha · · Score: 1

      Hey thanks, that page helped me find the item I was looking for:

      http://www.gefen.com/kvm/product.jsp?prod_id=130 6

      1650ft range over Cat5 cable. I wonder how much helium it takes to lift 1650 ft of cable, the USB extender & battery, plus my camera?

    3. Re:USB Remote by jea6 · · Score: 1
      --

      sarchasm: The gulf between the author of sarcastic wit and the person who doesn't get it.
    4. Re:USB Remote by sakusha · · Score: 1

      That was awesome. Unfortunately, it was completely incomprehensible.

    5. Re:USB Remote by nexusone · · Score: 1

      Better yet, use a micro video camera with a RF transmiter to pre-view the image, and a digital camera to take the final image.

      --
      Wise men speak because they have something to say, Fools because they have to say something!!!!
    6. Re:USB Remote by gfilion · · Score: 1

      I'm working on a similar project (well, if you consider trying to raise the money to be "working"). Being a professional photographer, I want professional results, and that means remote preview through the camera via USB (why oh why don't prosumer cameras come with FireWire?) and of course USB craps out after about 5 meters.

      I would personally would try to go wireless instead of trying to pull a 1000' cable with the baloon. You could plug your USB cable to a very small computer (Soekris) and have that computer send the JPG preview wirelessly using 802.11b. You could see the previews with a laptop computer using a 802.11b card.

      That's an interesting project, good luck with it,
      GFK's

  46. this guy is a TERRORIST by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    this guy is taking pictures of stuff he shouldnt be. he needs to be sent to guantanamo bay and tortured/killed immediately!!

  47. land use , development , regional planning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    someone's probably mentioned these already

    a service of this sort could be useful to municipalities , civil engineering firms , as well as commercial/residential developers

  48. (Ex-?)prisoners by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    I just had a vision of releasing prisoners early, and using this balloon/camera thingy to track their every move. It hovers over them all the time, and feeds pictures back to some central point so their whereabouts can be monitored at all times.


    Well, you got the monitoring part right, but we all know that the primary use of balloons as applied to misbehaving prisoners is to smother them for later retrieval.

    Be seeing you.
    1. Re:(Ex-?)prisoners by darnok · · Score: 1

      > we all know that the primary use of balloons as
      > applied to misbehaving prisoners

      I thought the primary use of ballons as "applied" to prisoners involved an orifice insertion process, and that's all I'm going to say on the matter

  49. Nothing new by andyring · · Score: 1

    This is nothing new. This has been done in agriculture for decades. A guy at my church, who is an agriculture professor at a local community college, used this method to take aerial photos of the site for our congregation's new church. I know him pretty well, he said that method has been used for a long, long time.

  50. Oh yeah. by twitter · · Score: 1
    --

    Friends don't help friends install M$ junk.

  51. 640 x 480 pixels? by flowerp · · Score: 1


    ah, come on. You really want a 4 MPixel camera up there.

    --
    --- Eat my sig.
  52. More upskirt photos! or downshirt.. should I say.. by Information+Minister · · Score: 0

    More voyeur for us /.ers

  53. How did you recover the balloon? by scarolan · · Score: 1

    Did it land hundreds of miles away? Did you go chasing it across the corn fields with a four-wheeler?

    1. Re:How did you recover the balloon? by AmigaAvenger · · Score: 4, Interesting

      we have had 26 or launches, recovered all but the first one. ground distance is anywhere from several miles up to 200 miles. It radios back telemetry through a ham radio link, which gives us a moving map of us and the payload. actual recovery usually is in northern minnesota swamp/forest land, so we have had a couple that have taken a days to recover. the walk is usually never more than a mile, but that can be in some fairly hostile areas.

  54. ...Begin Anal Retentiveness.... by phuturephunk · · Score: 1

    ...The site is neato, but one thing..This guy must not have spooled alot of line in his lifetime...I used to fish a whole lot and changing line can be about as annoying as getting a rootcanal in the back of a pickup truck (Another thing I've gone through, but its too difficult to talk about right now..someone pass the scotch..)..

  55. Just do it... by dark-br · · Score: 1

    And don't forguet to drop one in roswell... :)

  56. Cheap replaceable Wi-Fi tranmitting station by zymano · · Score: 1, Interesting
    It would make a nice temp transmitter antenna for Wi-fi. I know this has been talked about before on Slashdot.

    news sidenote. Rapper Ice T and white girlfriend at SPIKE launch party at the Playboy Mansion. Rapper Ice T and white girlfriend

  57. 1 AAA battery for a 3V camera by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    I bought a $37 Sipix Digital Cam which is pretty much identical to the Vivitar one used in the article.

    It took one AAA battery but on a little sticker on the battery case it said it was rated for 3V. Which explains why it was crap. It was horribly under powered. Out of a several dozen pictures all of two came out. I took it back and got the AipTek Trio for $10 more and it works far better. Every picture I take comes out fine. It takes 2 AAA but that makes all the difference.

    Ben

  58. Aerial Photography... by xkenny13 · · Score: 2, Informative

    If you don't want to spend all the time, you can download some pretty cool aerial maps from Terra Server USA. The pics are B&W and circa 1994 (at least, in Southern California), which makes them less current, but kinda cool to "look back in history".

    Additionally, MapQuest has added aerial maps as an option (enter address, retreive regular map, then click the "Aerial Photo" tab ... these are in color, and might be a year old.

    1. Re:Aerial Photography... by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 0

      >>Additionally, MapQuest has added aerial maps as an option (enter address, retreive regular map, then click the "Aerial Photo" tab ... these are in color, and might be a year old.

      I've got a story about the fantastic entity called Mapquest. Though it's offtopic.

      Bout' a year after 911, I went to mapquest to find a buddies office in downtown Manhattan. I got the location, and started scrolling around till' I got to the World Trade Center site. It wasn't labeled as anything (in the past it was named). Then I switched over to picture mode... I was curious what was there, hoping for yet another picture of my beloved towers.

      They had a picture of the destruction. No joke. It looked to be about 4-5 weeks after the strike.

      I was pretty pissed, having been there on Sept 11, and I sent a message to them explaining how inappropriate I thought the pictures were.

      All I ever got back from them was a cold form letter explaining how photos in general couldn't be changed. Not even an acknowledgement of the subject of the photos.

      The picture was updated this past January, with the less shocking '16 acre hole in the ground'.

      I saved a screenshot & named it 'mapquest_sucks'. If anyone wants a copy, drop me a line and I'll send it to you.

      wbs.

      --
      Huh?
    2. Re:Aerial Photography... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      i'm sorry i feel your pain, but grow up... don't fucking bitch about something this trivial. ass

    3. Re:Aerial Photography... by dotgain · · Score: 1
      I've got a story about the fantastic entity called Mapquest. Though it's offtopic.

      Bout' a year after 911, I went to mapquest to find a buddies office in downtown Manhattan.

      A year after 911, that'd make it, erm 911 again wouldn't it?

    4. Re:Aerial Photography... by Hognoxious · · Score: 1
      I was pretty pissed, having been there on Sept 11, and I sent a message to them explaining how inappropriate I thought the pictures were.
      Reporting things as they are is inappropriate? So it's inappropriate for me to say that you're a 'tard?
      I saved a screenshot & named it 'mapquest_sucks'. If anyone wants a copy,
      I am mapquest's lawyer, and you owe my client 89 squazillion dollars for copyright infringement.
      If anyone wants a copy, drop me a line and I'll send it to you.
      I'll pass, thanks. What I will do is save a copy of your post as wideBlueSkies_sucks.htm in my reallysuckyposts folder though.
      --
      Confucius say, "Find worm in apple - bad. Find half a worm - worse."
  59. thats not a ballon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    when this guy built this he really went on the
    cheap side. that ballon is a condom with cardboard
    and electrical tape all over it. it's pretty funny
    and no doubt a valid slashdot story all the way.

  60. Voila! by Valar · · Score: 1, Funny

    Total (Balloon) Information Awareness. That's right. I can see you, right now. By the way, put that down, it's disgusting.

  61. followup by KalvinB · · Score: 1

    The AipTek can run on a single 1.5v battery but it has the same problems as the Sipix: it can't process an image fast enough and ends up with horribly blurred and underdeveloped pictures.

    It's trivial to take the camera apart and end up with a 1"x2" camera. A small wire is needed to hold the lens in place and then a 2 AAA holder can be wired up to it. The LCD status display isn't needed.

    Ben

  62. Private investigation by kaydon · · Score: 1

    I could see myself using this for survelliance...when I get my PI license...if I have a case watching someone at a car dealership...

  63. Cool... by The+Master+Control+P · · Score: 2, Funny

    Set them up and use them for Airborne recon of M$ and RIAA Headquarters, and if the returned pictures show the HQ below, you press a button to release a small canister of urine, or other disgusting liquid of your choice.

    Just a sec, there's some guy in a black trenchcoat at the door...

  64. bad idea.. by Suppafly · · Score: 1

    This isn't a good idea unless you are a terrorist.

  65. What to do with hi altitude photos by TheQuietDan · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Many states require that you have an overhead shot of large parcels of land ie. farm sales before the deal can be compleated.

  66. THIS PHOTOGRAPHY ARTICLE IS A HOAX by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Look at the last picture. See that latex ring? That is no part of a balloon. It's a condom!

  67. FUN W/ MONOFILAMENT by drayzel · · Score: 1

    Sometimes I by those cheap plastic delta kites and see how high I can get them. It's a cheap date and alows for much much more talking and getting to know a girl than a movie.

    They mentioned using $2 900 yard spools of monofilament at Target and Wal-mart. In my expirience the $2 spool are adequate but they break easy, have horible stretch characteristics, have massive diameter (thus weight) and are just a general pain to work with.

    When I fly kites past 1,600 yards I much prefer Berkely XL or XT (6lb or higher) fishing line. Much higher quality, lower diameter, less stretch (for the XT) and very forgiving (for the XL). Of course loosing a $1 platic kite is really no big deal. My record is 3,000 yards (not straight up of course), and yes... I was to lazy to wind the whole thing back up, I snipped the line.

    I should look into this ballon photography, sounds like a fun hobby.

    ~Z

  68. Tied to a piece of a pizza box?... $50 total? uhhh by voxel · · Score: 1

    The pizza you bought to get that pizza box cost at least $10... More like $20 :P

    - Voxel

    --
    Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes
  69. it http://www.californiacoastline.org/ by acomj · · Score: 1

    http://www.californiacoastline.org/

    has a link to the latest in Barbra Steisands lawsuit.. Her house is on the coast and is included in there CA coast photo collection.

    This is the page on the lawsuit with links to stories and a picture of her house on it.. Funny those guys. I hope they win.

  70. A Real Man takes his own pictures by AndroidCat · · Score: 1

    Of course, you have to avoid the problems this guy had. (There a number of versions of this one. Apply salt.)

    --
    One line blog. I hear that they're called Twitters now.
  71. Re:Tied to a piece of a pizza box?... $50 total? u by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Just hang out near a college dumpster for a few minutes and you're sure to find some for free. I get 2 pizzas every 3 days.

  72. Bagina? by BorgCopyeditor · · Score: 2, Funny
    Check out this skit from The State:
    • Show 103
    • "Mr. Magina"

    Of course, you should check also check out "$240 Worth of Pudding," but now I'm off topic....

    --
    Shop as usual. And avoid panic buying.
  73. Kite Aerial Panoramic Photography by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    but what about Kite Aerial PANORAMIC Photography ?

    http://www.philohome.com/kitephoto/kapp.htm

  74. Re:FUN W/ MONOFILAMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Dude, letting 3,000 yards of monofilament line loose is SERIOUS LITTERING!!! YOu should get a big ass fine for that one, $5000 is not enough.

  75. For completeness... by floydigus · · Score: 1

    To get the camera in the air, there are basically three options: a balloon, a kite, and a rocket. ...or a helicopter or a plane or a trebuchet or a ballista or a bow and arrow or a bird or...

    --

    All things in moderation; including moderation

  76. blimp vs balloon by mulvane · · Score: 1

    What would be really cool is a radio control blimp with a webcam, small computer, a wireless nic. A balloon just seems to limited and hard to recover..With a good enough radio, or other long range method once could deflate the blimp to a safe landing in high winds and maybe use gps to go get it..

  77. Re:FUN W/ MONOFILAMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    no shit serious littering.

    Next time just use a cheap fishing rod and reel, you lazy beotch.

  78. Kite Aerial Panoramic Photography by dcigary · · Score: 3, Interesting

    That's pretty cool, but check out Kite Aerial Panoramic Photography from one of my heros, Philo!

    --
    ...my Karma ran over your Dogma...
  79. I made it to 1200 feet or so by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    here you go......

    http://mysite.verizon.net/johnsullivan2k/balloon /i ndex.htm

  80. Weight by brakk · · Score: 2, Informative

    He could save some weight with just a few little mods. First, get rid of the voltage regulator and just put a current limiting resistor in series with the relay. Second, use the 9v battery as the power supply for the camera. All he would have to do is measure the current the camera uses and put a resistor in series with it to drop the voltage (or maybe two resistors acting as a voltage divider if the camera doesn't use much current). Third, remove the case from the camera and just use a couple pieces of tape to hold everything together. 4, if he's using the 9v to power the whole thing, the timer is going to have a common ground with the camera so he can use another method to trigger the shutter and save the weight of the relay. One option would be to tie the output of the 555 to the shutter through a couple voltage dividing resistors to trigger it directly bypassing the switch, but this would depend on how the trigger circuit in the camera works.

    As for the timing, he could add another 555 timer as a delay to start the second one after the balloon is at the desired height. Then it wouldn't matter how long it took to get it in the air and more of the pictures would be usable.

  81. I did this by G3ckoG33k · · Score: 1

    I did this, almost... At least I downloaded a whole suite of high detail aerial photographs of our lake, which is fairly big (about 20 by 4 km).

    Then I glued all aerial photographs together in Gimp producing a huuuge map.

    Then I imported it into Sodipodi and drew a vectorised contour.

    Now, I am searching for a nice GIS program where I incorprate my freshy-fresh +4000 GPS-coordinates! Any help appreciated! Perhaps Grass is the best? It seems intimidating however.

  82. What? by stinky+wizzleteats · · Score: 1

    I'm sure some people have some ideas....

    They're going to take aerial photos of CNN transcripts?

  83. You must have small feet. by Dean+Edmonds · · Score: 1
    This guy built a balloon to take digital aerial photographs from thousands of feet up.

    "thousands" of feet? He says that he gets up to 600 feet and talks about the possibility of getting to 900 feet.

    --

    -deane

  84. Nice picture of Kirstin there ... by neiljt · · Score: 1

    ... but I could have taken that from atop a step ladder.

  85. Similar idea by mirko · · Score: 1

    Photoplane takes aerial pictures using a small remote-controlled plane.

    --
    Trolling using another account since 2005.
  86. Warballooning by SKPhoton · · Score: 1

    I'd love to see an application of this combined with wardriving. Warballooning perhaps?

    1. Re:Warballooning by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      and thats exactly how we do our site surveys for our growing WISP.

      I knew I kept that balloon from college for a reason. *grin

  87. Imagery used for vegetative and soil properties by chod · · Score: 1
    Another example of using inexpensive aerial imagery can be found here:

    http://extnasa.usu.edu/on_target/nir_tutorial/ni r_seven_webpage.html

    I have been working as a graduate student at Utah State University where we have been using a helium filled blimp to collect near-infrared (NIR) imagery of bare soil and vegetation. It is similar to the one shown, but we use two Nikon 950 digital cameras and attach a NIR filter to one of them. The filter is very close to those used on Sony "night-vision" cameras to see through clothing. The imagery is then taken into Photoshop and analyzed to determine crop stress. Some of the other uses that we are looking at include measuring soil organic carbon (carbon sequestration) levels and weed detection. These experiments have been performed in conjunction with a NASA Geospatial Extension grant at the University. You can check out the blimp in all its glory at the URL.

  88. Surely you jest! by cr0sh · · Score: 1
    I mean, do you realize how much 1000 ft of cat5 weighs? Unless you are planning on using many, many tens of cubic feet of helium, the cat5 is going to weigh it down.


    If you really want to do this, you are probably looking into a *very* custom board - I would be thinking something like a camera connected to a microcontroller communicating via 802.11 to the ground. It would have to be completely wireless for what you are wanting to do, unless you are planning on using a very large balloon envelope, or hydrogen (and even then, you would need a large envelope, but not quite as big - probably 12-20 feet in diameter)...

    --
    Reason is the Path to God - Anon
  89. How about model rockets? by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    or radio-controlled airplanes and helocopters?
    Shouldn't be too difficult to put a camera on one of those...video camera even. The ever shrinking size and weight of digital devices opens up a lot of possibilities.

  90. Re:FUN W/ MONOFILAMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    Screw monofilament. Braided dacron is the way to go. Its much stronger and lighter and almost zero stretch. Yeah it'll cost you more, but what the hey, its for science. Sold at a fly fishing shop near you, unless you live at the South Pole.

  91. Re:Tied to a piece of a pizza box?... $50 total? u by voxel · · Score: 1

    You get 2 pizzas every 3 days by hanging out near dumpsters?

    No thanks, I'd rather not get my pizza out of dumpsters.. I prefer my pizza with cheese not encrusted with fly's.

    - VOxel

    --
    Modesty is one of life's greatest attributes
  92. Re:thats not a balloon by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    There was more than one level to the hoax, not just the condom balloon. For the shot of the guy holding the condom, he dropped his shorts in the Stanford Quad. His floppy disk casts a shadow on his nuts and leg.

  93. Somthing fishy going on... by twoslice · · Score: 1

    I live in an apartment where a newlywed couple sneaks up to the roof to do something every night. So, I am going to build one using a big yellow smiley-face balloon to find out exactly what these two are up to =).

    --

    From excellent karma to terible karma with a single +5 funny post...
  94. Mapquest Areial Photos by chrisatslashdot · · Score: 1

    Check out Mapquest for areial photos of much of the country. Resolution, color, and age of photos vary by location.

    --


    Simple people talk of people, better people talk of events, great people talk of ideas.
  95. Re:FUN W/ MONOFILAMENT by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    The 'experiment' in the parent post was not scientific. It was for impressing a girl. This might be even more impressive.

  96. I think it means trouble by weeboo0104 · · Score: 1

    I guess this means that there will be a new set of annoying pop-up ads replacing the existing set of annoying pop-up ads for x10 cameras.

    --
    It is easier to build strong children than to repair broken men. -Frederick Douglass
  97. Aerial Survey Archaeology by ubrayj02 · · Score: 1

    I worked on an archaeological survey last summer and constantly wondered why my crew of about a dozen or so people was hired in the first place to survey the land. We had to hike to previously "found" sites and use a bunch of pretty unimportant measures of erosion, vegetation cover, as well as photograph and map sites. It was all circa 1920's technology (with the exception of our GPS's), and the data we colleted was very questionable (like the slope of cliff sides and the soil content). The work we did took about three months, and we only covered a tiny part of the national park we worked in.

    I remember talking with one of the crew members about all of this stuff. He had worked on survey teams for about 20 years and he agreed that there were better ways to get things done. He pointed out that a pilot in a prop airplane equipped with some sort of high grade photography equipment (that would let you take infrared and other sorts of photographs) could do all of our work in less than a week. Those photos coupled with already established means of having computers analyze photos could give us extremely accurate data on soil content, vegetation cover, slope, site size, etc. He said that, unfortunatley, it is extremely expensive to do this as well (it could be done with satellites, but we did't have access to satellites that would give us the resolution we needed).

    So our conversation moved on, and I wondered about a more human scaled flying baloon-digital- photography idea. He mentioned a friend of his in grad school who had tried this, and had basically been rejected by his faculty for trying such things.

    This article shows that we weren't the only ones thinking about this sort of thing. It's too bad that the invention of a technology does not always lead to its widespread use. But since the /. post wanted suggestions about what this could be used for:
    Survey Archaeology.

  98. Weight reduction & circuit suggestions... by morcheeba · · Score: 2, Interesting

    Ok, I'm an EE so I need to offer some advice...

    First, I don't see a protection diode on that relay. You need a diode that will be normally reverse-biased on the coil... otherwise, when the relay clicks off, the inductance of the coil will kick back enough voltage to blow out the 555. It's a reliability issue.

    Second, the 555 is a nice analog circuit that's rated for 4.5-15 volts, so no need to use a 7805 voltage regulator; you can connect to the battery directly.

    Third, a battery idea: Radioshack has some 12 volt batteries that are about N-size (sub AA). They are typically used for lighters, pagers, or remotes.

    Lastly, as you mentioned, the ultimate would be to get rid of the relay and connect directly to the camera. The CMOS version of the 555 would be ideal because (1) it's low power, so you might be able to drive if from the camera's step-up power supply and (2) it has a FET output, so it'll drive much closer the the GND&VCC rails than the TTL version (this should help compatibility)

    Good luck, and nice photos!

  99. google cached it by claygate · · Score: 1

    http://216.239.39.104/search?q=cache:KLNlUqjhDEoJ: balloons.space.edu/habp/project_4/airphotos.html+& hl=en&ie=UTF-8 i imagine such an image intensive page might not handle /. so well?

    1. Re:google cached it by claygate · · Score: 1

      I'm really smart how about this... Google's cache

  100. Uses by macguiguru · · Score: 1

    We just bought a piece of remote mountain property and the USGS and satellite shots of the area are over 10 years old - frankly useless for showing the access roads created in the last two years. A quick aerial shot with this rig might be just what we need. I've easily spent >$50 in time trying to find what I want from satellite companies. To get anything current (5 years) it seems to be rather pricey. Anyone with better info? I'm open to it.

  101. PAPARAZZI!!! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    "What could low-cost aerial photography be used for?"

    Photographing coastlines....

  102. I can think of a use for it! by ajs318 · · Score: 1

    As long as they can make an infra-red version, anyway. Suppose you were leasing a house to a bunch of hippies and you suspected them of growing some happy herbs in the attic using high-powered electric lights which give off infra-red radiation. If a police helicopter with infra-red camera were flying overhead, you might get asked some awkward questions. So it would be good to use to make sure that your tenants weren't doing anything naughty. You could get an overhead infra-red image before the helicopter does, and perhaps have a quiet word with your tenants.

    Or, of course, you might be a bunch of hippies growing some happy herbs in your attic, and want to make sure you weren't putting on too much of a light show for the Old Bill.

    Of course, if you had some legitimate business growing legal plants in you attic, you might want to avoid attracting unwanted attention from the authorities {and wasting their time while they could be going after evil drug barons ;-) .....} and, if that was the case, you could line the roof space with insulatuon, with reflective foil on the inside, and use an extractor fan to draw out hot air into a disused chimney. Then you could use the camera to check the effectiveness of your stray heat management measures.

    --
    Je fume. Tu fumes. Nous fûmes!
  103. California Coastal Records Project URL by russiste · · Score: 1

    A bit of googling turned it up...

    http://www.californiacoastline.org/

    Enjoy

    Gr*g

    --
    Loopsh of fury.
  104. Actually, there's a 4th way to do it by mangu · · Score: 1

    The guy didn't think of a remote control model aircraft. These can be built either from scratch or in kit form in sizes that can lift far more weight than a balloon. Do-it-yoursel Predator, anyone?

  105. URLs by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
    1. Re:URLs by wideBlueSkies · · Score: 1

      http://www.californiacoastline.org/cgi-bin/image.c gi?image=3850&mode=big&lastmode=sequential&flags=0

      Near the bottom center of the photo it looks like a big white drainage pipe. It seems that Barbara is dumping some sort of wastewater on the beach (note the healty looking greenery beneath the pipe). I wonder if that pipe is legal. Should she be dumping water like that?

      One of the goals of this website is to protect the CA. coastline. Looks like they have something here that might be worth investigating.

      wbs.

      --
      Huh?
  106. Crazy ideas by jriskin · · Score: 1

    1. Obtain balloons and fill with hydrogen (for superior lifting)
    2. Launch balloons with compact Linux box with an 802.11b card, gnutella and a bunch of MP3's
    3. Set it up to connect to any open 802.11 network
    4. See how long it takes the RIAA to find a place to send the subpoena.

  107. I had the exact same thought! by RAEJlN_HARDONNE · · Score: 1

    I wondered why you were hired in the first place, too.

  108. aerial photographers don't care about hot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    they only care about naked. And female human.

    We used to have helicopters hovering over our backyard, instead of doing traffic reports, in the futile hope that we'd roll over. The choppers didn't exactly have "whisper mode" so it was easy to avoid showing them anything titillating. And there was nothing hot about us unless you like bleached whale.