MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Show Posts

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 7 8 ... 72
51
General - Top Sites / Re: My 5 cents on this
« on: May 08, 2017, 08:45 »

 HD is still the standard, the normal, today. It will be many, many years before (if ever) 8k is the standard. Of course for ONE camera content, not VR environments. That is not comparable. Fully realistic VR will require 100k.

I agree totally. Even as the last brick and mortar video rental store shut down, the transition to renting out BluRay hadn't really happened. In an area of production, where the highest standards of production were attained, the end user didn't really care or notice. Plain old vanilla DVD was fine.

52
General - Top Sites / Re: Thoughs On 4K Video For Stock
« on: May 07, 2017, 13:29 »
Way back when the transition from film to file for images was taking hold almost no one would consider taking a jpeg. It was for the most part lossless TIFFs. Those that suggested jpegs might be alright were usually scorned for not understanding the nuances of the new digital landscape. I suspect that sensors weren't quite as good and RAW files not as robust but fast forward a decade or so and I don't think anyway delivers anything but jpegs. It's kinda where I see h.264 right now.

53
General - Top Sites / Re: Thoughs On 4K Video For Stock
« on: April 05, 2017, 11:54 »
Again, I did a pixel by pixel comparison of frames from a video rendered to PRORES and a video rendered to H264. The difference was negligible, the file size of H264 was significantly smaller.

It is a complete myth that PRORES is a good codec.

Out of 8,000,000 or so pixels, only 500 to 2000 differed between the H264 and PRORES rendered frames, and the H264 file size was a fraction of the PRORES file size.

People using PRORES are deluded into thinking it is superior to H264, and they are completely wrong.

I agree with what you say about H264 but can't agree on what  you say regarding ProRes. They are both good and have a place in a person's workflow. When working natively with H264 I find everything takes a little longer. Playback is less responsive and render times for proxies or transcodes also take more time. But then moving large files around takes more room and takes a little longer. As far as quality, I too cannot see any real difference. I use FCPX now and it's all rendered to ProRes for post and the performance is amazing. Scrubs and playbacks and doing almost anything happens in real time.

H264 if shot with high data rates and properly exposed etc has a lot of latitude to bend.

Forget PhotoJpeg. There is always issues with banding which are unacceptable. And despite the continued argument that it makes life easier for the end user I simply don't see it especially with similar file sizes, much better video quality and superior predicable performance of ProRes. If you're a medium or high volume 4k producer H264 will get your content to more places a lot quicker.

54
Well you can convert to 24 from 30 by dropping the occasional frame here and there. But to go from 24 to 30 you need to find six extra frames from somewhere. You could alter the duration of each frame to fit, but then it's still only 24 frames as there's only 24 individual still images to make up that second. I can't think of any physical way that you can increase the frame count without using duplicated frames or some kind of frame blending/interpolation.
Fortunately most of our work has no audio associated with it so rather than add or subtract frames it often makes more sense to retime the clip. I think PP calls it conform footage and FCPX is Automatic Speed. 24fps to 30 looks a little faster while 30 to 24 is slightly slomo. I personally find slomo more pleasing. It may not work with all footage but for a lot of it you simply don't notice any difference. 24p has more jutter and is widely accepted but it also has more rolling shutter and jello issues depending on camera, not so good.

55
Manuel, 
I use the GH4 quite a bit on a wing strut of a 172. Like you I want good results but without spending large amounts of time in post. After trying a many of the settings I've settled on the Standard. It still requires some boost in contrast and color saturation but not so much that it takes up a lot of time. My camera is always in manual mode.
Peter

56
Manuel, ProRes422 is very good but can create some huge files from 4k. It depends on your hardware resources. There is nothing to set for ProRes. H.264 is also very good exported from PP and the file sizes are much easier to deal with.  Do strip off the audio in both cases. Create a preset in Media Encoder to send your clips to. It speeds up the process.
It sounds like you have some great footage. Consider adding overflightstock.com to agency uploads.
Cheers,
Peter
Dear Peter. Thank you so much.
I will try  overflightstock too.
Cheers,
Manuel
Thanks Manuel

57
Manuel, ProRes422 is very good but can create some huge files from 4k. It depends on your hardware resources. There is nothing to set for ProRes. H.264 is also very good exported from PP and the file sizes are much easier to deal with.  Do strip off the audio in both cases. Create a preset in Media Encoder to send your clips to. It speeds up the process.
It sounds like you have some great footage. Consider adding overflightstock.com to agency uploads.
Cheers,
Peter

58
General Stock Discussion / Re: Batch Loading Video From Dropbox
« on: September 30, 2016, 18:50 »
You want Hazel John.

59
Here's a good enough definition of Codec borrowed from Wikipedia "A codec encodes a data stream or signal for transmission, storage or encryption, or decodes it for playback or editing. Codecs are used in videoconferencing, streaming media, and video editing applications." The key word being the encoding, which in all cases means taking a huge amount of data and making it as small as possible while maintaining best quality. The method used by the various codecs differs and  during the decoding stage the image differs from the original. The question is, which of the two looks closest to the original? Which has the fewest artifacts? And which file is the smallest?

60
Cameras / Lenses / Re: The GH5 is here (well, soon)
« on: September 19, 2016, 19:09 »
10-bit 4:2:2 internally is a BIG BIG thing. Hopefully it's not just HD...
If it can do that at 4k 60p it will be a dream come true.

61
Cameras / Lenses / Re: The GH5 is here (well, soon)
« on: September 19, 2016, 11:11 »
A full frame would be nice.. Pentax did it this year, why not them :D
Wouldn't really be a micro 4/3 then. I personally like the MFT format and see the GH5 being a mega seller. They could develop a full frame system but lots of those out there already. I'd rather see the MFT line fully developed than adding yet another FF to the mix.

62
Photography Equipment / Re: This I believe is truth
« on: September 13, 2016, 09:19 »
I don't know why the camera manufacturers haven't used amdroid more.  There's a few cameras using android but not many.  Then they could have apps like instagram, snapchat etc. on the camera.  I use dropbox to backup my phone photos, would be great to be able to use that on my camera.

Sony and Olympus have tried cameras that use a smartphone for the screen and connect wireless but they didn't do a good job.
I've used the Panasonic GH4 for shooting interiors for clients. I had it  connected to an iPad via WiFi and they totally loved it. Previews are huge, no one has to bend around and try make out what is happening in a teeny screen. You can use the iPad as shutter release, focus, etc etc. They can see the shot after it's taken, okay it and move on.

You can easily do the same with Canon and a $30 credit card size TP-Link WiFi access point.
But I give you it is more convenient to have it embedded in the camera.
I looked into these and could see some benefit but couldn't find an app as slick as Panasonic's for operation. Each of us has different requirements and Canon and Nikon have failed to meet mine. Panasonic was one of my last choices in systems and yet it's what I shoot on these days.

63
Photography Equipment / Re: This I believe is truth
« on: September 12, 2016, 11:04 »
I don't know why the camera manufacturers haven't used amdroid more.  There's a few cameras using android but not many.  Then they could have apps like instagram, snapchat etc. on the camera.  I use dropbox to backup my phone photos, would be great to be able to use that on my camera.

Sony and Olympus have tried cameras that use a smartphone for the screen and connect wireless but they didn't do a good job.
I've used the Panasonic GH4 for shooting interiors for clients. I had it  connected to an iPad via WiFi and they totally loved it. Previews are huge, no one has to bend around and try make out what is happening in a teeny screen. You can use the iPad as shutter release, focus, etc etc. They can see the shot after it's taken, okay it and move on.

64
Photography Equipment / Re: This I believe is truth
« on: September 11, 2016, 22:53 »
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AGp3JXKtHBM
I watched the presentation and have to agree. Personally sold all my Canon gear in favour of Panasonic.

65
This is probably the best overall program out there. https://www.phaseone.com/en/Products/Software/Media-Pro/Highlights.aspx

66
General - Stock Video / Re: Video editing software
« on: August 25, 2016, 12:35 »
As far as white balance goes, scopes are your friend.

67
Software / Re: Mpeg Streamclip Help
« on: August 05, 2016, 09:50 »

Like I said earlier - if the agency wants pjpeg then give them what they want, if its a bigger file then so be it - it will live on their servers anyway.

True enough. There was a time when agencies demanded TIFF photo files. Never would they let an inferior jpeg touch their servers. No way. "you know how jpegs are made -- don't you?" they would say. "buyers want to manipulate a high quality file that hasn't been compressed..." You'd hear the  odd photographer grumble, "but I can't tell the difference..." who would quickly be shut down for his/her inferior eye. I think this is where we are at with h.264

68
Software / Re: Mpeg Streamclip Help
« on: August 05, 2016, 09:05 »
So I am not surprised that converting h.264 to PJPEG results in a larger file.
Just give the agencies what they want and don't worry too much about smaller file sizes.
Its a good thing that you are not trying to convert to ProRes - then your file sizes will really go through the roof...

I'll say right off the start I'm not a fan of PhotoJpeg. FWIW- I took a short 7 second clip shot with H.264 on a GH4 with a original file size of 84MB and ran it through MPEG Streamclip. The ProRes 422 yielded a file size of 246 MB and the PhotoJpeg yielded a file size of 581 MB, more than twice that of ProRes 422. That's at 100% setting. I guess you can diddle with the Quality slider but why? With ProRes you only get one thing, max quality. Half a gig plus for 7 seconds of 1080P?? I also found that by the time you get the P-jpeg to a reasonable size, there really is a degradation of quality especially WRT banding in narrow graduations of colour or luminance. This is just me, I'd go for the 422 over Pjpeg.

69
Off Topic / Re: Tips on how to FAIL in this business
« on: July 03, 2016, 15:55 »
"A few years back I got to watch a top tier microstocker do a photoshoot. It was a pharmacy photoshoot. He actually bought a label printer and made fake labels for over 1000 bottles with made up medicine names so he could avoid copyright problems in the images. Also there were tens of thousands of fake pill capsules he bought off ebay filling the bottles, as well as shelves to hold it all up and of course models. "

Been there, done that. 

Anyone want to buy some empty pill bottles?
This made me laugh. I just spent 3 hours in the basement emptying out boxes of props and tossing them. Two of which were filled with various pills, syringes, IV bags.... Anyone need a good stethoscope?

70
General Stock Discussion / Re: PRORES vs H.264 Tested
« on: June 09, 2016, 14:18 »
You're probably absolutely 100% right 75% of the time.

71
"They penalized me in search results after a long long history of retaliating against me to try and make my videos unsellable."

Does this make any sense at all? Really? A company pays to stock inventory, pays for shelf space and then purposely makes it unsellable?

72
The ultimate situation is they closed my account because they wanted me to write "long titles" and I don't have the time to rewrite titles for my 20,000 clips. in fact, they have other sellers on their site with "short titles" similar to mine. to them, a short tile is 8 to 10 words. they want narrative titles with 25 to 30 words.

I contacted about 7 people at their company, their founder and president, and their investors, and they don't care, and the majority did not respond, including the founder and president.

Then they claim I released confidential information about there company which is nonsense, I have no confidential information about their company.
You contacted 7 different people about this issue? Each time thinking someone besides you must have it wrong.? Variations in company policy WRT to submission standards has been the norm since the first dusty slide went out on submission. No, I would suggest you had your account closed because you are calling out individual people by name and unbelievably  saying they are bad employees on a public forum because they don't agree with you.

73
FWIW metadata is lot more important than many contributors give time for, especially the title. You have an agency pointing out problems to you. Ones that will impact sales of your clips on their particular site and you choose to ignore them. Instead finding fault in policy changes after you don't see the sales levels you'd like. If they simply didn't like your clips they would reject them and not bother with the suggestions or policy changes. They are going to take the time to upload and maintain all that storage and then penalize you by hiding the clips on the bottom so no one can buy them to be nasty to you? Maybe no one is finding them and the search algorithm is pushing your clips further and further down the stack.

74
@helloitsme, the P5 subscription is merely another salvo in the tit-for-tat battle that's been raging the past 25+ years. You are a proponent of a recent subscription service that you believe is paying you more therefore more worthy, and pardon the vulgarity, but you came into that scheme on the tit end of the saying. It's a tat now and you don't like it.

What?  Are you the Anonymous or something?  It's my fault now?
As @Pablito so succinctly put it, the shoe is merely on the other foot is all. No fault, just a recurring condition. All I'm hearing from you is "my subscription program is better than your subscription program" and your not getting all the facts correct to make a proper argument.

75
@helloitsme, the P5 subscription is merely another salvo in the tit-for-tat battle that's been raging the past 25+ years. You are a proponent of a recent subscription service that you believe is paying you more therefore more worthy, and pardon the vulgarity, but you came into that scheme on the tit end of the saying. It's a tat now and you don't like it.

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6 7 8 ... 72

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors