|
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 - smcbuki
26
« on: January 23, 2021, 11:05 »
Yeah, I have already read that. Thanks.
Shutterstock and 123RF are handling it fine, but Adobe not so.
And I just checked, .jpg also contains metadata, except keywords are separated by semicolons, and that's no problem because Adobe accepts semicolons as well as commas.
27
« on: January 22, 2021, 16:50 »
Thanks for the reply!
I export .jpg from the same Illustrator project, so I assume it has the same metadata as the .eps file. Both files are zipped and uploaded, but still nothing.
I'll check if Illustrator saves metadata into .jpg when exporting.
Thanks for the idea!
28
« on: January 22, 2021, 02:05 »
I am using Adobe Illustrator and I always edit file info of my vectors. Shutterstock and 123RF pull all metadata, but Adobe Stock pulls out just a title and then he just suggests keywords.
How can I resolve this?
It's not really big trouble for me to copy/paste keywords from SS or 123, but I'm thinking of adding more agencies (Alamy, Dreamstime, Vectorstock...) and I understand things get more complicated if you don't use metadata.
29
« on: February 25, 2018, 10:02 »
When I try to register at iStock I get this line of text: "If you have already submitted an application and have any questions please contact us at [email protected]. Please note that we are not accepting new applications at this time." It's like that for weeks, maybe months. What am I supposed to do? Wait? Give up on iStock? Any ideas?
30
« on: February 06, 2018, 23:51 »
Hi all!
[This is similar topic to KB's recent topic, but this one is only about optical flow and it's impact on video quality.]
I'd like to make a slow motion clip, but my camera does only 1080 60p. I import my footage into FCPX and conform clip to 24p. I get 2.5x slow motion. Let's say I want 3x or 4x slow motion. Should I use optical flow? How is it going to impact video quality? Will it be good enough for stock? What's your experience?
Sent from my F5 using Tapatalk
There is no one answer to this. Except "it depends".
You need to try it on a clip to clip basis.
Generally, if there isn't a lot of movement between frames, and not too many details (like leaves), it will work well. If there is a lot of movement or small details, you will get artefacts.
To answer your question "should I use optical flow": yes. Or a third party alternative like Twixtor, which is essentially optical flow with more options, like masking.
Frame blending usually looks pretty ugly, but can work sometimes.
---
You can only ever fake something convincingly to a certain extent.
To sum up: it will only look nice if the motion is already slow and even, and you want to make it super slow.
Thank you for your answer. Yes, I guess it depends from the actual footage. From what I saw on YT, people use it for "near freeze" effect. They take just couple of frames and slow them down like 100x. The result looks interesting, but it's not what i need. I was wondering if I could slow down footage where I pour various liquids (milk, wine...), but I guess results will be very bad since there is a lot of movement. I'll give it a shot, but I don't think it is going to work. Sent from my F5 using Tapatalk
31
« on: February 04, 2018, 06:31 »
Hi all!
[This is similar topic to KB's recent topic, but this one is only about optical flow and it's impact on video quality.]
I'd like to make a slow motion clip, but my camera does only 1080 60p. I import my footage into FCPX and conform clip to 24p. I get 2.5x slow motion. Let's say I want 3x or 4x slow motion. Should I use optical flow? How is it going to impact video quality? Will it be good enough for stock? What's your experience?
Sent from my F5 using Tapatalk
32
« on: January 05, 2018, 08:12 »
Unless I'm missing something, I'm not getting the impression that this guy was in on the scam. He just seems to be very naive. I mean the following statement proves that...
"When you start your own business it is like your son, raise it on your hands and see it grow up in front of your eyes, you should think like all people to get an e-marketer. The future is going to them?"
I think I'll pass on that one, based on the results! Or if I did get one... I'll seek out a marketer myself, qualify them, check case studies, testimonials, check those testimonials are real by real people and real companies, check the address isn't some virtual mailbox or a shed in the middle of nowhere etc etc. I'm not going to accept the services of somebody who comes out of the blue.
It's the same reason I don't have cupboards full of penis pumps and Viagra... I don't accept every offer that comes into my mailbox. If you're not from an officially recognised guild of penis pump craftsmen, you're not getting my business.
You made my day.  +1000 Sent from my F5 using Tapatalk
33
« on: December 25, 2017, 15:13 »
Mohamad, if you are using e-marketer services and he is so successful at selling your images, why don't you do all the sales from your own website? I mean, why would you want to give more than half of your money to an agency? If you made $800 over SS, then you could make almost $2000 playing solo.
Sent from my F5 using Tapatalk
34
« on: October 11, 2017, 14:55 »
Now I see that Shutterstock prefers REC 709.
Can someone, please, clarify all this YUV, RGB, REC 709...
35
« on: October 11, 2017, 14:44 »
Hi,
When I play my finished video clip in VLC and when I look at video info, it says ProRes 422 YUV.
I submit all my photos in RGB and I was wondering if this is important when doing stock footage.
Please take a look at my media info and check if everything is fine.
Thanks!
36
« on: October 04, 2017, 17:36 »
Hi all,
What kind of monitor do you use to edit and grade recorded material?
Do you calibrate your display (using additional equipment - Spyder, etc.)?
Can you recommend a budget UHD monitor (<$500)?
What about UHD TV?
37
« on: October 04, 2017, 00:51 »
I just wanted to check in and say I opted for GX80. I got it for 580 euros with kit lens. Quite a bargain for excellent 4k camera. Now, there's some cash left for those nice Leica lenses.  I bought GX80 because I didn't need weather sealing of G80 (950 euros, kit), nor did I need that fully articulating screen. Sony a6300 costs about 1200 euros, kit. Almost twice as much. I'm really satisfied with this little camera.
38
« on: August 02, 2017, 11:27 »
I think $1000-$2000.
Everyone here is right - your videos are cannibalizing each other on the market.
39
« on: June 26, 2017, 17:08 »
Sony: Bigger sensors = better high ISO performance and slightly creamier stills. Better autofocus. Slightly better dynamic range.
Panasonic: Better at everything else. No overheating. Much longer battery life. Better handling, better functions. Better screen (foldout screen is not to be understimated).
The Panasonics just work with very few problems.
The Sonys can yield slightly better image quality in challenging light situations (in good light the difference might not be visible at all) but they have lots of working problems with overheating and short battery life etc.
---
I should say I am currently a Panasonic user but have gone over the differences MANY times wondering if a switch to Sony is worth it. I really, really wanted the a7S II to be the perfect camera but it just isn't...
I film mostly out in nature, and I can think of many situations where better ISO performance would've saved shots. BUT, almost EVERY single shot is easier with a good screen, good battery life, no overheating in the tropics, and quick handling of useful settings etc.
The screen alone is a game changer for me. Very often I want the camera as low as possible in tricky spots filming animals, and without a good foldout screen I simply wouldn't even see where to focus.
Filming with my Canon 5D mk III is kind of a PITA even though it creates absolutely beautiful RAW HD footage. But it's just a pain to film with because of the fixed screen and clumsy handling.
---
I'm also buying a new camera now, and it will be the GH5. 4k 60p is a game changer as it means cinematic dolly and tracking shots with a gimbal. Being able to slow 4k down to 40% means that the camera move will be slow enough for that cinematic feel. No need for a slider/dolly/crane in many situations.
A6500 can do slow motion and G85 can't. I'm still not sure if I need it.
40
« on: June 25, 2017, 20:17 »
Thank you all for your opinions on this topic.
I have already watched many YouTube videos where these two are compared, but I still cannot decide. I guess I'm closer to choosing Sony...
41
« on: June 24, 2017, 10:43 »
Hi,
I'd like to start doing stock footage and I have this dilemma...
So, G80/85 vs A6300. Which one is better and what are pros and cons for each one.
In my country, G80/85 with 12-60 lens is the same price as a6300 body - 900 euros and that happens to be my entire budget for camera body.
I have a nice collection of vintage lenses and several adapters for NEX and EOS.
Also, do you think I should start with 1080p until I purchase my new camera? I have NEX 5, Sony HX300 and Canon 100d/SL1. Canon 100d has Cinestyle flat profile and it's really good for video (with good light).
Are you recording in 4k or in 1080p? Are 4k videos good sellers or do you make them just for future proofing?
Thanks!
42
« on: July 11, 2016, 19:19 »
Many agencies that offer image exclusivity have a pretty strong policy on similars to avoid just the sort of thing you're hoping to do - get the higher return without much restriction
You need to check the similars policy at each agency , but in general the answer is that you can't do that
Thanks!
43
« on: July 09, 2016, 11:12 »
S Stock don't do exclusive
Ok. Then 500px.
44
« on: July 09, 2016, 10:51 »
Hi,
I have two different photos of same food setup. One is narrower and lower angle and the other is wider and higher angle.
Can I submit first one to Fotolia exclusively and other one to Shutterstock, also exclusively?
Thanks,
V.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
