Interesting (and pessimistic) article about KodakCoin:

https://www.finder.com.au/kodakcoin-is-a-failed-ico-rebranded-under-kodak-name

How is this stealing? You gave them permission to sell your videos, and they have the right to alter their prices or sell them through any iStock affiliated channel.

If you're really pissed off about it, you should delete all your videos from iStock. Easy as that.

Quote from: Noedelhap on April 17, 2018, 14:25

AfterCodecs for Windows lets you encode ProRes on a Windows machine. A free trial version is available and lets you render video for up to 500 frames.

And, who cares about video on Getty? Not worth the hassle.

Are you working with in on Adobe Media Encoder? how does it work?
And regarding Getty- The are indeed not my best selling agancy - but for a few hundreds of $ per month I still think they are worth the hassle...

You simply install the AfterCodecs.aex in the plugins/format folder and it will show up as another video format (including settings) in AE. No need to use AME (I don't know if that's even possible).

AfterCodecs for Windows lets you encode ProRes on a Windows machine. A free trial version is available and lets you render video for up to 500 frames.

And, who cares about video on Getty? Not worth the hassle.

I have sold a couple of 4k clips at VB (a couple of hundred clips in my portfolio there), but it's been more than a year since the last one.

They market to a crowd of buyers that want, and get, unlimited clips for $199. They aren't too keen on paying $199 for a single clip... Which makes perfect sense.

Would you rather buy your own GH5 or get 10 4k clips? In my opinion, pricing ALL 4k clips at $199 in 2018 is beyond ridiculous.

Let's say I need 50 clips for a 4k project. A nice $9,950. I could just buy TWO GH5s, pay someone to fly around and shoot for a week, including nice hotels, and still save money.

You could shoot and edit 50 high quality 4K clips in a week according to your or your client's needs? I think you're overestimating the amount of work that goes into shooting video. What about lighting conditions, weather, technical difficulties? Timelapses also take longer than expected. I think it would take you at least 3-4 weeks, depending on the subject matter of course.

$9,950 isn't cheap, but keep in mind you'd likely do this for a client (who would pay you for the assignment) or you'd get your investment back some other way.

Although I agree with you, there is one part I'd like to address:

Unheard of anywhere else on this planet.
Where else would a client ever have the opportunity to get a large group of experienced photographers to invest and shoot an assignment for them without any promise of anything upfront in return to the photographer? It doesn't exist.

Actually, it already exists elsewhere. Spec work is not invented by Getty. There are already lots of websites out there who do the exact same thing, often disguised as a 'contest'.

Spec work is probably the dumbest thing ever in our industry (whether it's photography, logo or graphic design) and any participant entering one of these contests shouldn't consider himself to be a professional photographer or graphic designer.

This line in particular made me barf:

"We understand that you are independent. However, as your business practices while working on content for Getty Images may reflect upon the integrity of us all, we want to remind you that how you conduct yourself when creating imagery is just as important as the imagery itself.  "

That's right, I'm independent so you have no say in how I do my business. Rest assured it's more ethical and fair than you have ever done, Getty. In fact, your practices reflect upon the integrity of us contributors, not the other way around.

.  And all this redundant uploading is waste of time. Couldn't we keep all our work on single a cloud server and give multiple agencies access to it?
(...)
I have no ideas to offer (...)

Actually that's a great idea. Upload to the cloud, allow access to specific agencies with a unique key and then it's up to the agencies to adapt their infrastructure to present the images from the cloud to their customers.

But this idea could only work with sufficient support from big agencies. I know ToonVectors uses Dropbox to sync uploaded files to their system. If more (and bigger) agencies would hook up to this idea,it could (and should) become an industry standard.

Synced as soon as possible, but I never use it. I use Fotolia for stats, more convenient than Adobe Stock.

Finally got back a canned reply to my email sent on Feb 2nd.

Cryptocurrency is currently far too unstable to be considered a payment option. The risk for the agencies would be too high, if you pay out say, 0.1 bitcoin to a contributor, that could be worth $1000 one day and $1500 the next day. A serious loss for agencies. Of course it could go down too, so the risk is shared, but why take the risk as a contributor?

However, Paypal fees are indeed brutal, so it'd be nice if agencies offered other currencies (EUR, GBP) and handle the conversion fees themselves.

I'm running into trouble when exporting an MP4 (H.264) video in AME.

Inside AE my project color profile is set to sRGB. But when I export it using AME, the colors end up much more saturated, so apparently AME doesn't take the color profile into consideration.

I did find a workaround on the Adobe forums: using an adjustment layer with a Color Profile Converter set to sRGB on top of my main comp, but it doesn't seem to have any effect on my final video. What could be wrong?