pancakes

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 - increasingdifficulty

Pages: 1 ... 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 ... 74
1451
What seems REALLY odd to me is 10,000 views on a small site like that.

I think the numbers are simply incorrect, or the site has been crawled by search engines that count as views. I don't believe you've had 10,000 real human views and 3,200 real human preview downloads.

1452
Microstock Services / Re: Site traffic tracking
« on: January 11, 2017, 07:02 »
No such site is accurate since they are usually require people to install some form of browser extension. What you get is a very rough estimate of how many people who don't know how to use a mouse visit the sites.

1453
True, but Chipotle is also a much, much bigger company than Lindahls (70 times higher revenue).

1454
They settled. He got around $190,000.

1455
Do you seriously think you have to lose your job, get kicked out of your apartment etc. for it to be considered damages?

She was made the face of Chipotle without consent - that's the damage! Just because she didn't lose her job it doesn't make it right. And regarding the enormous amount, sure it's ridiculous, but the only thing that these companies understand is money. You can only hurt them with money. It's the one and only way to prevent unethical behavior.

Some (most) people don't want to be models and seen in advertising. Saying they should just be given a model payment is just ridiculous and an insult...

---

Extreme example: A company has placed a GPS tag on you without you knowing and they are using the (anonymous) data to create an app to predict movements. 10 years later you find out and all they offer is 10 years worth standard salary for a voluntary test person... That is not how things work.

---

Here's another good example of using a picture in advertising without consent: http://petapixel.com/2010/04/10/greek-man-sues-swedish-company-over-turkish-yogurt/

Thankfully, the man was awarded more than a model fee...

1456
Well since
I'm not so oldie in this i cant target big things for the moment. So let's say a $500 monthly would be great. Yea it would be great but is it attainable Today, let's say several agencies combined? Share your experience.

$500? Absolutely. I think people here are more talking $5,000 being a reasonable goal to be able to do this a bit more seriously.

1457
In a fair world I'd agree id award her model fees at best......

In what way is that fair? If the only punishment for doing stuff without permission would be to pay what it would cost to get permission no one in the entire world would pay for anything...

Anyway, of course she won't get $2 billion - you always aim incredibly high to get headlines and a nice settlement. She could get $1 million or so.

1458
Pond5 / Re: Pond5 offering HD and 4K clips for $4
« on: January 05, 2017, 17:18 »
Recently I've been thinking that It's a world market for example in Haiti $4 = over 24 in their $$,

What do you mean?

1459
General - Top Sites / Re: Search Algorithms: How Do They Work?
« on: January 04, 2017, 13:46 »
Every stock photo company is going to use the same algorithm for search results.

Absolutely not.

1460
The answer for filming is only one: ND filters.

1461
Does Payoneer really let you withdraw US dollars? I've been looking for an alternative to PayPal (I lose way too much per year compared to if my bank would do the conversion at 0.5%)...

1462
Is there any good budget camera which shoots 4k in slow motion? Maybe 90-250 fps should do.

Red Raven shoots 120fps at 4.5k

$10,000... I guess the term "budget" is relative.  ;D

1463
Shoot 24 / 23.976.

Plus, by shooing 6 fewer frames per second gives each frame about 20% more bandwidth (when shooting at a constant bit rate).

I agree with you, and I do 90% 23.976, but this statement doesn't automatically mean better quality. Only if you're using intra-frame codecs (like ProRes). If you're shooting in the more common h264 (inter-frame codec) there will be more movement between each frame in 24p, and since inter-frame codecs compare frames that 20% extra bitrate could just about make up for the increased change from the previous frame. Or in the case of very fast movements, decrease the quality.

For aerials, for example, it can make sense to film in 29.97p since everything in the frame is moving constantly.

Nitpicking here, but just to be clear.  ;D

1464
General Stock Discussion / Re: Shutterstock Pay Day.
« on: December 09, 2016, 09:08 »
Not had it yet. I reckon today is the day. Although I'm in the far right of the world at the moment, so that means Friday!

Chatham Islands?

1465
Shutterstock.com / Re: Goodbye Shutterstock
« on: December 08, 2016, 15:53 »
Even music!

Haha, "Even music"?

Music runs circles around image sales (in $$$) I assure you.  ;D

Anything that takes time and skill will be worth much more. Great studio photography takes great skill and time, but it definitely is possible to get lucky with images if you happen to own a camera. This is not the case with advanced footage (like well-done hyper lapses for example) and music. There aren't any "lucky" people posting that kind of material. You HAVE to put the time and the skill in, and if you do, you don't have that much competition.

1466
Photo Critique / Re: What do you think of my portfolio on SS ?
« on: December 08, 2016, 15:46 »
Yes, way too many (almost) duplicates. This will only hurt your chances.

If you have an idea that would get 100 sales, those sales might now be spread out over 10 almost identical images, and they would all eventually disappear in search.

If you only kept the very best of those images, that one would get 100 sales and rise to the top of the search results and live a lot longer.

1467
General - Stock Video / Re: 4K with Canon lenses
« on: December 08, 2016, 15:42 »
Thanks Increasingdifficulty :-)

We are pretty new to video. Only been doing it for 3 monts time or so. I dont have enough data yet to compare framerates, I can say that we shot the last shoot in 25, just to try it out.

The reason we go for the 23.98 is for two reasons.

1)  I talked to some TV/Broadcast people, who said the mainly worked in that framerate. Thats the clients we try to target as they will buy the more expensive quality.

2) I like the 23.98 look better than 30 fps look because it looks more real. At least to my eye :-)

We do sell the 23.98 clips, that I can say.

Good reasons. I sell plenty of 23.98 clips too, but I suppose it's only natural to wonder, "what if?". Would I have sold even more using 25p, 29.97p? Questions that haunt me at night...  ;D

1468
General - Stock Video / Re: 4K with Canon lenses
« on: December 07, 2016, 12:35 »
No quality loss with the standard adapter as there is no glass.

However, there is quality IMPROVEMENT with the speed booster version (opposite of teleconverter = more light and more of the lens squeezed in over the sensor).

The classic combo for the GH4 is a Metabones Speed Booster with the Sigma 18-35 1.8 Art. This reduces the crop factor (0.71x = 13-25 equiv. on a GH4 body) and makes the lens function as a 1.2 aperture lens would on the GH4 body. You gain (or rather, get BACK what you've lost on the small sensor) one stop of light.

Original crop factor for 4k filming on the GH4 is 2.3x, so with the speed booster it is reduced to 1.633.

1469
General - Stock Video / Re: 4K with Canon lenses
« on: December 07, 2016, 11:36 »
Thanks everyone good information.  As far as price these cameras are all similar, the URSA is about $3,000 which is not even close to the cost of a RED or Arri.   I have a few more follow ups:  Considering the GH4 or GH5 are the improvements worth the wait?  Does the metabones adapter work well, any issues to know about first?  With the URSA I see it shoots in CinemaDNG Raw (265mbps), how is that for editing?  I've done some 4k editing with XAVC S (I think 100mbps) and I know my computer can handle that pretty well.

1. Yes, the Metabones adapters work well but are expensive for an adapter... Auto-focus will be slower and not as good as a native lens or a Canon lens on a Canon body but it works. If you will just use it for filming I suppose auto-focus isn't that important. Issues: The lenses stick out a bit longer meaning the GH4 will often be a bit front heavy, especially with Sigma Art lenses (the 18-35 1.8 is really popular to pair with the GH4).

2. CinemaDNG Raw is not 265mbps, it's 265 MEGABYTES (MB) per second which is 8 times more (over 2gbps). It's an incredibly high bitrate and without a big SSD drive you stand no chance.

But you can of course record directly in 10-bit ProRes (HQ) at around 800mbps which is really really nice. Needless to say, the quality of the URSA will be better than the GH4, but it's quite a bit bigger.

You can record 10-bit with the GH4 with an extra device that's quite expensive (Atomos Shogun for example, extra $2,000). The GH4's internal 4k records at 100mbit/sec bitrate. That's 12.5MB per second.

It seems that the GH5 will be able to shoot 10-bit internally which is a big deal. Editing 10-bit ProRes is a different world compared to 8-bit footage from the GH4 (even if that footage can be very, very good).

So, if you want the GH4 to get close to the functionality of the URSA you would have to spend at least $2,400 extra (adapter + 10-bit recorder). If you don't need a camera right now, the GH5 would probably be worth the wait since it seems to be able to handle 10-bit 4:2:2 4k internally. And 4k 60p.

1470
General - Stock Video / Re: 4K with Canon lenses
« on: December 07, 2016, 06:05 »
Were shooting a RED Raven + Canon 50mm L 1,2 & 16-35mm L 2.8. Never miss anything in that setup  :)

Nice setup and portfolio langstrup. Just quickly slightly off-topic (another thread going): I notice you have everything at 23.98 fps. So do I, but lately I've been wondering where the most sales are. What was your reasoning to go with 23.98 and I suppose sales are good? Always hard to compare of course when you don't have the same clips up in different frame rates...

1471
General - Stock Video / Re: 4K with Canon lenses
« on: December 07, 2016, 04:35 »
As with most cameras, it depends on:

1. Budget.
2. Size/portability requirements.
3. What you film the most.

Naturally, the URSA mini (or Red/Arri) will be the BEST in terms of quality, but not for portability and price. How is single frame stuff (time lapses) with the URSA? I've never tried...

This is what I currently use (with Canon lenses): Panasonic GH4 with Metabones adapter and a Canon 5D mk III. I mainly film wildlife, nature and cityscapes (time lapses) and I need to be able to carry my gear while walking in difficult terrain for 5 hours (along with motorized slider, various lenses, two tripods etc.).

For filming, I almost always use the GH4. For time lapse, standard photography and low light filming I use the 5D.

The GH4 is miles ahead of the 5D mk III (and IV) when it comes to handling while filming. Just not having a foldout screen means you have to lie in the mud if you film wildlife since you usually want to get down to eye level of smaller animals. That's a big deal-breaker for me... It's a pain when I do time lapses as well (often odd angles like straight up in the sky) but the difference in RAW quality from the 5D is enough to stand it.

The GH4 produces extremely good 4k footage with plenty of light up to ISO 800. After that it's not as fun anymore and the 5D will have to work. I film in RAW HD with Magic Lantern (kind of a pain but quality is great).

I use a 600mm lens with the GH4 (1380mm equivalent!!!) which is really awesome when filming wildlife. Heat and air density becomes more of a problem than filling the frame...

1472
I think it really only matters with footage of people that's supposed to be in real time. That's when we would notice that something might be off if the speed changes.

Any timelapse or slow motion footage could easily be slowed down or sped up to fit another frame rate without looking or feeling strange at all since it's not real time anyway.

1473
Yes, in the submission guidelines they say that any progressive frame rate will be converted to 23.98p.

I often film in 29.97p with a 1/50th shutter and then slow it down to 80% and deliver 23.976p. It's a decent way to get dreamy looking 4k footage with a camera that can't shoot 4k60p.

1474
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.

Yes, this is what's called a 3:2 pulldown and it's used for every film you see on TV in the US. They are all filmed at 24 frames per second but when viewed on television they blend in 6 extra frames to make it 29.97. Most high-end commercials are also filmed at 24 frames per second (or 23.976) but displayed as 29.97 when showed on TV.

The same films when shown on a PAL (25) system will usually be sped up 4% along with the audio (the audio will retain its original pitch however).

If you convert 29.97 to 23.98 or 25 by just removing frames you will get a stutter effect which may or may not look too pleasing. We are, however, very used to seeing 24 frames pulled down to 29.97 because it's how films have been displayed for so long.

Anyway, I have yet to decipher what sells the most as all frame rates seem to do well. Of course, there are more 29.97 clips out there because of all the American producers with NTSC cameras so in total, 29.97 has more sales. But perhaps not per clip.

I have read countless forums on this very topic, and I still haven't found a clear answer to what sells best in the stock footage world. Some of the world's top producers use 23.976, some use 25, and others use 29.97. Just check the P5 bestsellers. VIAFilms and AILA are mostly 23.976.

1475
General Stock Discussion / Re: How was your November?
« on: December 01, 2016, 12:44 »
usually who writes BME lately is just because he/she has 300/400 pics and 15$ per month :D

...or that they work hard on every aspect of stock (new opportunities, SEO, subject, quality etc.) and continue to improve.  ;)

Pages: 1 ... 54 55 56 57 58 [59] 60 61 62 63 64 ... 74

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors