|
MicrostockGroup Sponsors
This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.
Messages - PeterChigmaroff
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72
1
« on: May 28, 2020, 21:30 »
Do you pay tax to the Canadian Government?
I just re-read your post. Yeh that's what's known as an infinite loop.
2
« on: April 19, 2020, 18:11 »
1990 for me.
3
« on: April 19, 2020, 18:07 »
2006 = 1 million images
2009 = 6 million images
2010 = 10 million images
2012 = 20 million images
2014 = 40 million images
2016 = 80 million images
2017 = 160 million images
2020 = 320 million images
Change the numbers a bit and the relationship is the same for Covid-19. If there is a parallel then it means that eventually those numbers will flatten but this means that the number of available hosts has been depleted making it impossible to propagate any further.
4
« on: March 19, 2020, 09:37 »
Do I detect a bit of cabin fever here? 
Well at least it's not name calling or arguing about reviews and sales?
Actually the way I read it, the guy who designed the graphic interchange and the peanut butter people, actually agree? It's the same.
Anyone want to apply the rules to Gigabyte? Jig a bite I saw Back to the Future, who can doubt Doc Brown?
By the way, I've pronounced GIFs with the hard G myself.
Steve Wilhite created the Graphics Interchange Format: "It's pronounced JIF, not GIF." From the man himself? Who's going to tell him that he's wrong?
Interesting in the early days I would hear people say Jigabyte. These rules have many exceptions but help explain why you hear Jif
5
« on: March 18, 2020, 15:39 »
There is general rule for this, (note how you just said jeneral not "G"eneral.
Usually, a c or g sound is hard or soft depending on the vowel that follows it. Here's the general rule: When c or g meets a, o, or u, its sound is hard. When c or g meets e, i, or y, its sound is soft.
6
« on: November 18, 2019, 12:05 »
You're probably overthinking this one.
I agree.
We see lost sales because the clip isn't 4k, because it's not ProRes or better, because it's not 23.98 or 24 but I've never had anyone ever ask for C4k over UHD or the other way around.
Do you mean that buyers have contacted you, asking for ProRes, 4k, and/or 23.98p and you didn't have it, and therefore they didn't buy? Or do you THINK you lost sales?
---
The last three months I've sold around 50 clips on Pond5.
94% were HD.
6% 4k.
36% of the HD sales had 4k (ProRes) versions available. 64% were HD native.
---
From this small sample I can just assume that MOST buyers don't care about 4k, at least not enough to spend more $$$. They also MIGHT not care that much about getting ProRes since the h264 downconverted versions worked fine.
Of course, very small sample, and I don't have time to go back further right now, but right now it seems HD h264 is still fine for most, with a few "advanced" buyers wanting 4k.
The download time alone for, say, 30 ProRes HQ 4k clips would be a couple of hours, which may or may not be too slow for some customers.
---
Just a bit of guesswork here... Anyone with conflicting data?
I'm sure your stats are accurate. We have lost sales to poor codecs, to being HD and to not having the desired frame rate but never to a clip being UHD. We had the right clip with wrong tech specs. We also see requests for specific frame rates, codecs and resolution but I've not seen one that specified C4k. I don't acutally think there is an overall best practices to all this. Just pleasing some of the people most of the time. You choose who those people are.
7
« on: November 17, 2019, 20:10 »
You're probably overthinking this one. We see lost sales because the clip isn't 4k, because it's not ProRes or better, because it's not 23.98 or 24 but I've never had anyone ever ask for C4k over UHD or the other way around.
8
« on: September 02, 2019, 13:17 »
The market for footage (and stills) is not only large it's also very broad in the style of footage that is needed. I find the collection interesting and whoever compiled it did a good job. 282 Euros shouldn't be a burden at all for anyone interested in it.
9
« on: August 20, 2019, 00:38 »
I read on Jim's news letter they will be closing the Marketplace on September 10th
10
« on: July 29, 2019, 14:19 »
Dealing with dust can be time consuming beyond what you counted on. Having tried and tired quickly of this method and gave up on it some years ago. Nikon scanners or others with ICE technology were much better.
11
« on: June 17, 2019, 14:55 »
If it's CGI I assume you would be shooting 4k. If it's 50 MB/s then that is very adequate, if it's 50 Mb/s then that's rather poor. 1 Byte = 8 bits. I think Adobe uses bits so 50 isn't that good. If you've been using PJpeg then your used to large files. ProRes 422 would be a much better choice over 264.
12
« on: June 01, 2019, 11:04 »
I've not read the terms for credit pack or subscription purchases but would be surprised to find a refund option available. The whole idea is that the buyer commits to purchase a certain value of content at a reduced rate. The agency makes a commitment to sell for less with the advance payment for a credit pack.
13
« on: May 20, 2019, 00:48 »
That's typical for our TV pricing but the license is still only non-exclusive. It's quite uncommon to be asked for an exclusive license except maybe advertising.
14
« on: May 08, 2019, 20:32 »
Can anybody recommend a Canon 4K camera? "Dirt cheap" would be nice but not expected. 
I don't know of any Canon cameras with 4k video capability off hand. However, I believe some of the current mirrorless options from Sony can accept Canon EF lenses with expensive, specialised adaptors and some of these Sony models do record in 4k video (like the A7sII.) Though I'm not sure if there are comprises in some of the functionality in the adapted Canon lenses.
The 5D4 does. M-JPEG 4:2:2 8-Bit DCI 4K (4096 x 2160) at 23.976p/24p/29.97p [500 Mb/s] The files are ginormous but the quality is quite good. I would opt for a GH5 or the new BlackMagic though.
15
« on: May 02, 2019, 09:01 »
16
« on: May 01, 2019, 14:44 »
I decided to try out Quicktime pro (again), and it actually can do the job. To make the frame accurate selection, you have to select the time bar and use arrow keys. And then edit > trim to selection. And then just save as.
iFFmpeg does this as well. It has a passthrough mode and simply use the trim filter. You can enter the start and start frames quite easily. However what I don't understand is how you would know in this case or with QT that they aren't re-encoding.
Re-encoding requires time, this in QT doesn't - it's instantaneous.
Interesting. In that case both methods work the same way.
17
« on: April 30, 2019, 21:32 »
I decided to try out Quicktime pro (again), and it actually can do the job. To make the frame accurate selection, you have to select the time bar and use arrow keys. And then edit > trim to selection. And then just save as.
iFFmpeg does this as well. It has a passthrough mode and simply use the trim filter. You can enter the start and start frames quite easily. However what I don't understand is how you would know in this case or with QT that they aren't re-encoding.
18
« on: April 05, 2019, 18:09 »
You guys do realize that article was published on April 1st?
19
« on: March 27, 2019, 13:00 »
Yea the GoPro that I was using was quite an old model. I believe that later GoPro models have some degree of control over exposure but I don't know how much.
I do know that many people mount cheap action cameras and GoPro clones to their quadcopters for budget based aerial videography and unfortunately, just about all of those cameras rely on auto exposure.
In my opinion the GOPro is a very specialised camera: it does well one thing: action camera.
I was never fond of drone footage shot with a GoPro
There may be better ways to hang a GoPro than there used to be but the jello effect off of them was severe in most cases.
20
« on: March 26, 2019, 09:36 »
Thank you,
I didn't know that the GoPro is auto only.
I agree that shooting in auto causes a lot of problems
Auto exposure and auto white balance has ruined a lot of what otherwise would have been great footage. It doesn't work so it's best to learn manual techniques.
Then you're not using the GoPro where a GoPro is supposed to be used. Good luck being in manual when you film that POV jumping off a cliff into dark water. 
Different type of camera and mode of filming for different situations.
That being said, for drones, manual is generally the best, yes. But not always.
The beauty of photography is there is always an exception to the rule. And I concede that there is a place for such a setting. I haven't seen any GoPro footage for quite a while and am not sure what their cameras are capable of these days. However for all general low speed beauty shots I'd go manual.
21
« on: March 24, 2019, 13:18 »
Thank you,
I didn't know that the GoPro is auto only.
I agree that shooting in auto causes a lot of problems
Auto exposure and auto white balance has ruined a lot of what otherwise would have been great footage. It doesn't work so it's best to learn manual techniques.
22
« on: March 07, 2019, 11:31 »
Having even a remote chance at being successful in producing stock content relies on you being efficient. You can't be efficient using programs meant for transcoding. You need to spend time learning how to grade and with this includes how to use scopes and other correction methods. Maybe others have a better eye than I do but if you're not using scopes, you're not grading you're guessing. My suggestion is don't overdo the grading. Don't go "artisitic". Gentle is the operative word here. You are not producing a final product but something that others can take and finish off. Your the first step in the production chain that yields the final product. Don't approach it as if you need to be the last.
23
« on: January 21, 2019, 15:42 »
I used to always recommend Media Pro by Phase One, it was nearly perfect in every respect. Sadly they have discontinued the product.
And THAT is why I typically stick with the front-runner. Over the decades, I have tried way too many "gee this looks good, and the xxx feature that yyy is missing" products. In the huge majority of cases, the cool little tool became discontinued, leaving me with thousands (and sometimes hundreds of thousands) of files that no longer had support.
No more...
I use Adobe Lightroom. The clear frontrunner in the image cataloging field. It also has top notch image editing tools, and every one of my 277,924 images has been processed by it. They also have an excellent keyword / title / description / etc, etc, etc field support.
For video, they are not suitable for editing, but still have all the metadata support. I have roughly 3000 videos in the catalog. I do all the editing of metadata inside Lightroom, then can copy/paste to any website that needs it (since video does not support metadata).
FWIW, they existed a long time. My copy of iView Media Pro 2.6 is dated Feb 2005, which goes back further than the release date of Lightroom. Every edition has been rock solid. Microsoft owned it for 4 years and changed its name to Expression Media and then Phase One picked it up. It's hard to explain unless you've used it to generate metadata, it's orders of magnitude better than Lightroom. Or I guess I should say was orders of magnitude better than Lightroom.
24
« on: January 21, 2019, 11:14 »
I used to always recommend Media Pro by Phase One, it was nearly perfect in every respect. Sadly they have discontinued the product. I did see this which may have good possibilties. http://www.cdfinder.de
25
« on: January 08, 2019, 11:07 »
There is no such thing as a free lunch. If your camera is limited in bit rate, which many are, then you're sharing a finite amount of image data to write twice as many frames of which only half you'll likely ever use and will be of lesser quality. The files will be much larger which will drag down your bandwidth and increase your upload times while costing more for storage and limiting the shooting time for any given media. When shooting at 60p the shutter angle is different than it would be at 30p and once those alternate frames are removed to make it 30p this will show. But it does make great slo-mo. 60p is also very good for reducing rolling shutter effects in environments with high vibration.
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 72
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
