pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: Unusual rejection reason  (Read 4349 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

« on: February 06, 2021, 02:57 »
0
Recently, I submitted some super 8 footage to Pond 5 and got a rather surprising rejection reason. They claim that they cannot accept this clip because of the visible black bars on the sides and that I should resubmit it with it's native dimensions. Well of course it has black bars on the sides - it's super 8 film footage. As most people know, super 8 has a 4:3 aspect ratio and so there will be black bars on the left and right when the footage is displayed on a 16:9 screen. That can't be helped.

And yes, obviously it has the native dimensions - super 8 cameras expose a 4:3 frame (unless the gate has been modified.)

I have also submitted another super 8 clip in the past and there were no issues accepting that one despite the 4:3 aspect ratio. And a search on P5 will reveal many 4:3 clips.

I wonder if they're developing a bias against 4:3 clips.


« Reply #1 on: February 06, 2021, 05:01 »
0
Theres a field where you can post explanations for the reviewer at the end of the submit page- have you tried to explain?

« Reply #2 on: February 06, 2021, 07:11 »
+1
Theres a field where you can post explanations for the reviewer at the end of the submit page- have you tried to explain?

Ah I didn't realise that was the case. Then again, it's clearly stated in the description that the footage is super 8 so that should have been a clue. I would have thought a decent number of reviewers would have realised that super 8 is 4:3.

Regardless, I submit my footage with Stocksubmitter. I'll have to check if there's a way to leave reviewers a note with that program.

« Reply #3 on: March 04, 2021, 01:09 »
0
I submitted the same clip again and it was flagged by their duplicate detector. I sent P5 an e-mail and in their reply, they recommended that I submit the clip as a 4:3 file instead of 4:3 inside of a 16:9 file. So I selected 4:3 with an NLE program and exported it as  3840 x 2880. When I view the thumbnail of the clip, there are no more black bars on the left and right. Though now there are thick black bars on the top and bottom. I wasn't expecting to see those.

Uncle Pete

  • Great Place by a Great Lake - My Home Port
« Reply #4 on: March 04, 2021, 08:08 »
0
I submitted the same clip again and it was flagged by their duplicate detector. I sent P5 an e-mail and in their reply, they recommended that I submit the clip as a 4:3 file instead of 4:3 inside of a 16:9 file. So I selected 4:3 with an NLE program and exported it as  3840 x 2880. When I view the thumbnail of the clip, there are no more black bars on the left and right. Though now there are thick black bars on the top and bottom. I wasn't expecting to see those.

It's a uphill battle against the wind and storm sometimes, isn't it? Good luck with that formatting. Keep coming back to inform us, I'm following with interest, as I have some old 16mm film I'm considering having converted. I want to know how to have it formatted the way P5 wants it.

« Reply #5 on: March 04, 2021, 08:39 »
0
Hi! this happened to me too in P5.

If you're resubmitting the same clip you will get the double detection. Double detection reads metadata of your file. So the workaround that i found was to render it again. That will create a new metadata ID for your clip and will be good to go.   

When you edit your 8mm clip before submit to review you got at the end "curator note".
Just write there "Native format 8mm 4:3" and use some tags like 8mm, old film, archival in the description.
Sometimes It will pass but others not really. I suspect not all curators read the notes that I put in the clips.

Anyway after review simply send the reply with your justification in case of rejection. That worked for me.

In terms of sales it didn't match my expectations. But each case is one case... GL!


« Reply #6 on: March 04, 2021, 08:58 »
0
I submitted the same clip again and it was flagged by their duplicate detector. I sent P5 an e-mail and in their reply, they recommended that I submit the clip as a 4:3 file instead of 4:3 inside of a 16:9 file. So I selected 4:3 with an NLE program and exported it as  3840 x 2880. When I view the thumbnail of the clip, there are no more black bars on the left and right. Though now there are thick black bars on the top and bottom. I wasn't expecting to see those.

Why not just crop it tightly and tidy to 4:3?
I'm with them with this one, if the original is 4:3 submit as 4:3, buyer can easily incorporate it into 16:9 as he pleases.

« Reply #7 on: March 04, 2021, 09:57 »
0
Why not just crop it tightly and tidy to 4:3?
I'm with them with this one, if the original is 4:3 submit as 4:3, buyer can easily incorporate it into 16:9 as he pleases.

Yea I'm trying to give them what they want. By exporting the clip as 4:3 and 3840 x 2880, I thought it would end up as 4:3. Just a little surprised to see those black borders on the top and bottom.

« Reply #8 on: March 04, 2021, 10:08 »
0
I have some old 16mm film I'm considering having converted.

Oh that sounds cool. I hope you get that 16mm footage added to your port. Ive shot a bit of 16mm with a Russian camera (Krasnogorsk 3.) The K3 had a wind up spring motor and was very reliable for a few years but one day, it refused to run anymore.

« Reply #9 on: March 04, 2021, 10:39 »
+1
Hi! this happened to me too in P5.

If you're resubmitting the same clip you will get the double detection. Double detection reads metadata of your file. So the workaround that i found was to render it again. That will create a new metadata ID for your clip and will be good to go.

Ah yes, I found that out the hard way.   

When you edit your 8mm clip before submit to review you got at the end "curator note".
Just write there "Native format 8mm 4:3" and use some tags like 8mm, old film, archival in the description.

Good tips. I'll definitely write a note to the reviewer. I wish I could use tags like "ld film" and "archival" but in actual fact, this footage was shot two years ago. I shoot mostly digital these days but once in a while, I'll expose a little bit of super 8 with a 1970s movie camera. I like that retro look.

« Reply #10 on: March 11, 2021, 21:36 »
+1
Okay this isn't as clear cut as it seems. I'm not sure if I'm using the right pixel dimensions for the 4:3 4k export. The 16:9 version is 3840 x 2160. According to google, 4k video for the 4:3 aspect ratio is 3840 x 2880. But if I chose those dimensions, that would mean that the height of the image would be greater than the original - going from 2160 to 2880. That sounds like an increase in pixels for the height. If that's the case, would that be the equivalent of upscaling to a certain extent which is probably frowned upon? I'm not sure if reducing the long side / the width (3840) to a lower value would be better as that is simply cropping rather than adding more pixels. So keeping the height the same but cropping the sides might possibly be better.

Are there some specific pixel dimensions for 4k 4:3 video that people could recommend?

I guess one way of working this out would be importing some SD 4:3 footage into an NLE program, capturing a frame grab and opening that frame grab in Photoshop. Then take a look at the image dimensions, change the height (in pixels) to 2160 and see what the width value says.

The only problem is I don't have access to my usual computer which has Photoshop and NLE software with frame grab capability.

Edit: Silly me. I just thought of using an online tool to do the conversion rather than going through all that trouble I mentioned above. Apparently, the pixel dimensions I should be using are 2880 x 2160.
« Last Edit: March 11, 2021, 22:26 by dragonblade »

« Reply #11 on: March 16, 2021, 21:14 »
0
This clip has been rejected again for exactly the same reason - the aspect ratio. And yep, I submitted the 4:3 version. Unbelievable.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
3 Replies
3916 Views
Last post December 05, 2008, 20:50
by stormchaser
9 Replies
5001 Views
Last post June 09, 2009, 17:53
by pieman
New rejection reason

Started by dbvirago Dreamstime.com

7 Replies
3455 Views
Last post January 15, 2015, 21:14
by Nikovsk
8 Replies
5064 Views
Last post March 30, 2016, 05:45
by HappyBunny
11 Replies
4902 Views
Last post June 16, 2016, 17:49
by superdone

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle