It is interesting to see a non English person replying using "!!" and capital letters, like "YOU".
This is a text forum and shouting cannot be heard.
I would please ask you (not YOU or !!-as you respond sir) to keep calm and maintain a civilised tone of reply.
Since you represent Zoonar please help me find out how I can be paid my less than 35 euros credit,
including details in how to close my Zoonar acount.

I went back just now to have a look at my Zoonar portfolio.
Let's give you an example.
I have a cherry blossom photo with blurred blue sky background that needs no model or property release.
A photo uploaded in 2016.
It mentions it will be checked for pixuremaxx and age photostock soon.
The photo has a title and keywords.
When will this be reviewed for other agencies?
Four years pending are not enough?
Is Zoonar so busy that has not still reviewed a pic form 2016? We will be in 2021 soon.
This goes on for all my pics.
Not a single creative one was ever sent to another agency.
Not rejected, pending for four years.
I could mention my cherry pic needs a model or property release, but that would be a joke.
All my landscape pics that neeed no release are still pending for 4 years.
I never got a time specific response as for the time taken.
I am still not reading a reply for the 4 four years it took and my pics are not reviewed.

Try carrying an ARRI ALEXA with capture drives on your shoulder climbing the Himalayas!
Who says a mobile phone records better video than a big camera?
You can�t zoom on a mobile.
Well, you can but video deteriorates even on models that have optical zoom.
You can�t save highlights like you do with manual knee setting on a big Sony camera for example.
Mobile phones are replacement cameras and you can rec in some kind of log, using Filmic Pro on Android & IOS or some other programs in Android only.
You always have a mobile with you and can use it (not in secret) to places where a big camera is not allowed.
People tend to react less when filmed in public with a mobile, than with a big camera.
It is somehow �accepted�.
Where do you see the recorded result with each equipment?
At your small laptop?
On a sub 500 euros 4K monitor?
On a 10 bit 4:4:4 critical reference monitor that costs more than your average car price?
Mobile phones by the big manufacturers in Android and IOS offer HDR and with 3rd party aps can record at higher bitrates, from 80 - 200 Mbps in 4K.
This gives a result close to the latest GoPro.
I own both an iPhone and a Samsung S 20.
Some notes about the S 20.
I find the S20 useless in 8K.
I can�t do a proper pan and sky appears with too much compression that I usually can�t even save in post with Neat Video.
On the other hand, it gives a great 4K 60 fps, stable, with smooth pan and no visible noise.
Is that because it crops heavily form the 8K sensor?
If someone knows, I would like to know.
For iPhone only supporters, yes, the iPhone also goes very good with Filmic Pro.
I just personally think that S20 goes better in 4K (not in 8K).
As for sales, I had some even enhanced sales in Pond 5 with material shot with a 4K Samsung mobile, probably because I was at the right place the right time and the content was less offered.

I saw when I was uploading regular pics today. Now that I am reading here the announcement, I guess it's a good time we find out if we are going to expand our sales on that field or not. It is one thing we asked about it all this time and another we test our strength on it. I suppose there is no change in the criteria if Adobe starts accepting illustrative editorial videos of products for example. Since  many of us are staying confined at home, we can make some good use of home studio like lights and equipment. Adobe can also cover a need of product videos in that manner, which could naturally result in both sides earning more.

Στάλθηκε από το SM-G980F μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk

I have used the mini for a couple of months.
Finished clips and photos were accepted and sold but I need to work hard to fix them.
I had three major problems with it.
- Lack of detail, regardless of resolution.
- Blurred parts in some dark areas. Not grain, noise, as you might expect with a camera but blurred or macroblocks at parts of the screen, which cannot be fixed in post.
- The biggest problem (if you open video with a lumetri scope you can see it) is that it has a difference in luminocity brightness every a couple of frames, that some report as a frame flicker problem.
   I could only fix that with neat video but it takes time and I use a latest generation i9, with 64 GB of RAM and a Cuda enabled Nvidia with 6 GB of memory.
Maybe try to find and download an original sample shot with the mini, see how you can edit it and then decide.
But for all the above, I would reccomend against it.
Plus, Shutterstock does not accept its max resolution, so you have to upload to a custom resolution only for them.

I am now using Mavic Air 2 now, which is much better.
It sometimes also gives blurred results when for example high winds shake a bush or a tree, but it is much better.
I have asked a friend to send me some evaluation samples shot with the Mavic 2 Pro and it seemed better, but I also had some sky banding problems with it on export.
Maybe I am overreacting but I want to make my life easier for stock so I think that if one has the money either goes for the Pro or at least Air 2, not the mini.
Or maybe one just waits to see if Mavic 3 will really have a large, Insire like sensor soon!

In the past I have had video rejections, when I pushed it to the limit with tricks like speed change etc.
In the last reviews that are also taking long time for me, I got rejections for noise.
That was for home shots in low ISO (up to 400 in my case is like zero noise for Sony A cameras), using a tripod and LED lights for still studio like shots.
I had even taken care to denoise with Neat Video any hint of noise in the background, just to be sure.
I have been a Broadcast TV editor for over 25 years.
I say that because many times I had the responsibility of doing (not spot but full-time view) quality control at a finished video, prior of sending it to the master control to play on air. That is a big responsibility if you are paid for it and needs to be spot on.
I mean to explain I follow all broadcast safe levels and details as many other contributors here do and I am certain there is no problem in at least these rejected videos of mine.
The ironic approach would be to say they want to protect us from low earnings so they just do not accept them!
But as many contributors say, we get more rejections that do not seem to be just.
True, I am not using broadcast equipment for stock, just a Sony A camera, but all the work years at TV help me know, see and decide If I am wrong or not.
That is why I find it hard to accept these rejections, if someone and not AI sees our videos at a tablet or mobile phone while we spend time on a calibrated 4K monitor, checking vector scopes and all details.

There must be someone, a team, that is responsible for the reviewing process and is accounted for all this. If there is a team that now reassigned the work, let�s assume that an initial screening is done by AI and then a human might see our photos-videos etc.
If he/she is working from a remote location in a distant country where we would need to change 3 flights and travel 23 hours to get there, chances are he is not having a big 4K calibrated monitor.
Let�s assume again this real, not AI, person sees a photo in a 15-inch laptop or a video on a PC with no decent video card. Even if he is an honest worker, he can�t see DOF properly or judge background noise or see a panning scene without stutter.
Why do we care about that? We don�t, because we need our work to be reviewed but we should care because we get rejections we don�t accept as valid ones.
Just now I had one of three videos accepted, with two rejected for focus (not valid) and noise (denoised with Neat video and not blurred or pixelated).
If they need slow apertures let�s just tell us that they do.
Let�s just tell us we should not need cinematic fast lenses and they need all focused focus and videos.
It�s simple. They could say, from now on � etc.
Also, they need to make clear what the rejection reason is.
If this person who sees that, has some preset buttons to press, let�s give him more options that make it clear.
Also, since they have such a big amount to review, they could simply add a tab with the option we add comments. That is always under the assumption that a person and not a machine reads them.
As things are, it is a continuous fight couples that are bored of each other have, with ironies and shouts.
If they want, they can do some small steps to improve reviews and keep the interest in the relation alive.
Do they?

I have sent a first batch of photos at Wirestock.
At the ones already sent to the agencies, I see some mistakes, although I had at the photo title the format: city/monument title.
At the details tab, I do not see any option to submit any note, I only see a notes tab prior to submission.
Does anyone know how do I tell them the correct name?
Finally, out of the ones submitted, will I see after some days which photos were accepted at which agency?

You can shoot 4096 and then crop to 3840.
It's like you scale down in photos. It will or might look a bit clearer, wit less noise.
Also, you can crop the edges a bit and still export in 3840 so that would not be digital zoom.
Another point is that in case you use warp stabilise you still benefit from that.
A video editor would know what to do with that resolution.
The rest might even not know the difference from different aspects or fit the video to a preset and still scale it to their preference.
All these might be more than needed for stock.
If you are using the camera for ads or other no-stock productions, better you stick to Cinema DNG and play with the colours in post.
Finally, if you are using Premiere, you can export on ProRes, already available from the previous version.
Plain ProRes (not HQ) is more than enough for stock. Just don't use LT.

.

What is important about your camera is that it has a global shutter and you can shoot DNG RAW video.
This is great if you know how to colour correct your material.
Such a video quality does magic in post production!
Your video can fit any broadcast need and passes the requirements for a documentary production.

With 4K DCI you get a bit more horizontal pixels which in theory, in numbers, is better.
You see your HD resolution change because the aspect ratio you record is 16:10, not 16:9.
This means that if someone needs to fit your video, regardless of resolution, to a UHD or HD project, he will probably crop some pixels. Maybe you need to shoot a bit wider to cover this possibility.
Almost the same is valid if you are using Super 35 mm mode.
Also, check if you record exactly 24 fps instead of 23,976.
Just a thought to conclude: Since 4K DCI is considered cinema mode and probably records at higher bitrate, you might benefit in stock from that if you shoot content that might fit a documentary or film production.

Friends call me paranoid but here�s what I do:
I never delete memory cards before I perform a series of backups.
First, a copy of shot photos and videos goes to internal drive of PC tower.
Then this goes for a brief time, once, to an external HDD but is then deleted.
After that, the unedited material is copied always twice or sometimes three times to single or double side Blu Ray disks, as data.
The same happens with edited material that goes to two or three new Blu Ray disks.
Aside that, the edited stuff is all uploaded to a web drive online and I extra pay for a fast transfer among FTPs.
The cost for Blu Ray disks is the same with buying an external disk but I prefer to spread the danger.
Naturally the Blu Ray data spins slower that the HDD and you have to change disks and use a Blu Ray drive, but the lack of movable mechanical parts promises the disks will last more than the drives.
For those that wish to avoid the hassle, I suggest they buy 2 external HDDs and every two years, that prices drop, buy a new with double capacity to perform a third backup of the two first.

P.S. At day work, we use the 6,25 TB data cartridges for backup but the cost for buing the hardware to backup and restore these is out of the question!