|
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 - bestravelvideo
1
« on: Yesterday at 11:08 »
Only limited cameras (aside the latest iPhones) record ProRres internally.
I think some from Panasonic and can't remember about other brands.
I record non ProRres, either 8-bit or 10-bit (depending on the camera I use) and then export that via Premiere in ProRes.
I probably failed to explain the following clearly, so let me try again:
No matter your original recording, when exported in ProRes it locks to a fixed bitrate and color depth at 10-bit 4:2:2.
You can't mess with it. It's always the same.
Only the size grows bigger, but again at fixed settings, depending on the framerate.
A 60 fps 4K ProRes is way bigger than a 4K 24 fps ProRes.
This is sometimes a problem if you upload long drone clips. It might go above the usual 4GB limit (limit the agencies impose, not the codec or windows), so you might have to export a shorter clip, less than 60 seconds (if ever you do so!)
The high end customer won't know if your original recording was ProRes or not, 8-bit or 10-bit.
What he cares is that (although the preview is always compressed) what he buys will not deteriorate in quality when he edits it.
Some add the ProRes detail in the description.
Now, even if a video is not ProRres, the editor can always buy it, first save your non-ProRes video in ProRres HQ and then edit it.
It's kind of the same like if he buys a Jpeg photo and firstly saves it as .TIFF to avoid extra quality loss and compression, then edit it (maybe even in 16-bit) and in the end export back as an 8-bit Jpeg.
Therefore, all the fuss about ProRes has to do with the quality and better handling in post-production.
2
« on: April 23, 2024, 03:05 »
My main work is as a senior (never liked the word!) editor in Broadcast TV.
If someone searches for ProRes, it is because he has his reasons.
No, they are not naive to think it's better quality.
They know how it goes.
Why are they searching for ProRes?
Because no matter the original file (8-bit 4:2:0 or 10-bit 4:2:2) the video is locked in a codec with no visible copy loss.
Apple says that ProRes HQ has that benefit, and then plain ProRes is ok.
Many never think that all videos are compressed (there are better compression codecs though) and since videos are compressed, every time you process them you get a slight loss of quality.
Here is how it could be:
We record (in any format) and that's the original file.
Then, we process and export for micro, which is the second copy.
After that, the buyer gets the file and edits it, which is the third copy.
In the end, he exports the finished product and that's the fourth copy.
There might be a fifth copy if someone who gets it wants to add subtitles, or export to another codec.
Therefore, a high-end customer will prefer ProRes if he has the option to choose from the same content.
Personally, I upload all my videos to ProRes because I have some high sales to the big three and I once (I might have said that in another post)
had a ProRes sale that earned me $603, which means the customer paid over 3 times more.
Final note: if I export an 8-bit to 10-bit (since I process my clips in post) even if that's just H.265 4:2:0 10-bit or ProRes that always locks to 4:2:2 10-bit I never see banding, which sometimes was the case with H.264.
But I will have to agree that these high sales are not frequent, and each one has to decide separately.
Exporting in ProRes means more time to upload and way more needed space to backup.
3
« on: March 26, 2024, 10:47 »
LOG is a profile, not a codec.
ProRes (in its variations) is a fixed codec, meaning you can't mess with bitrate. You just choose different implementations.
What codec do you shoot LOG with, using the iPhone's stock app?
Many people get confused because the free Blackmagic app lets you save LOG in different codecs.
LOG though, is supposed to be better than non-LOG, because (reports say - I don't know a way to test, other than my own eyes) LOG is closer to what the sensor gives and does not have the sharpening in video that the non-LOG has.
Many think that a sharpened video looks "better" and that a video with the sharpness set to zero or a negative one looks blurred.
Well, having worked for decades as a Broadcast TV video editor, I can safely say that all studios (after the Betacam years!) send us the series or movies in (yes HD usually, not 4K) ProRes HQ, via a secure server, and never but never has a series or movie a sharpened look.
In a nutshell, with my TV experience, ProRes HQ is great if you want to make more digital copies.
This means another copy for subtitling and possibly another copy reencoding for a lower bitrate so the video airs on TV.
Otherwise, ProRes (without HQ) as I said, according to Apple, is the lowest acceptable quality for non-visible copy loss.
Now, that's the theory and Broadcast use.
For stock, any video with 100 Mbps bitrate is just fine.
I have sold a video shot with a Samsung mobile for $700! I suppose the customer paid 3 times more to the agency!
Detail? the video was 8-bit 4:2:0 but uploaded in ProRes HQ.
I suppose you all now get my point.
There were about 12.000 videos available for the same content in Rome. (was editorial content)
From these 12.000 videos, about 1.000 were still videos (no panning) and only 100 were uploaded in ProRes HQ.
This means that the high-end customer was searching for ProRes HQ, because he knew he was going to re-edit it, and also knew he would have no visible loss.
The question for every contributor is:
Do you upload all your videos in ProRes HQ, waiting for such a big sale, or do you just send them in H.264 100 Mbps, to save time and space?
Each one will weigh this differently, depending on his knowledge and past sales.
4
« on: March 26, 2024, 04:40 »
With iPhone, my experience is with 14 Pro Max and ProRes HQ.
These are naturally big files but are great during the day, and mostly ok at night, unless there is a dark area.
Cityscapes and areas with bright lights are ok.
The only drawback is the highlights that you need to be careful with.
I haven't used the free Blackmagic app but there are a couple of benefits and people using it can say more.
With the Blackmagic app, you have access to many manual settings for video, like you do with the Samsung app.
Also, with the Blackmagic app there is the advantage you can select any codec you wish, not just ProRes HQ.
Just my suggestion to save space, shoot with "plain" ProRes, not HQ.
You can also shoot LT but this is a codec that Apple says loses in compression according to ProRes or ProRes HQ.
About Sony, I use an APS-C A 6400 and photos are better with the big camera.
In general, I shoot the creative content with the Sony and some editorial content with the mobile, but always in RAW.
Here's a big difference in video though:
Most Sony cameras (not the latest ones) only shoot H.264 8-bit 4:2:0 at 100 Mbps.
The ProRes video is HEVC 10-bit 4:2:2 at about 750 Mbps.
That's how the codec is locked anyway.
I would really like to know if the iPhone trully shoots 4:2:2 and not 4:2:0.
As I said, I know that's the ProRes codec, but I can't find the info anywhere.
Finally, I have an unlocked PC processor and in Adobe Premiere for example, H.264 video might sometime stutter in the timeline,
while the ProRes video never does and plays smoothly.
That's why we also prefer to edit with ProRes, makes our life easier in post production.
5
« on: March 20, 2024, 04:32 »
Yes, for years either with a Samsung or iPhone.
I mostly use the phones for editorials and they sell ok.
With the iPhone, the latest models are ok with the 48 Mpixels ProRaw.
With Samsung which only shoots 12 Megapixels Raw, I find the RAW better than the 50M Jpeg, even when I resize the 50M, scaled down to 12M.
A final note about Samsung: The Expert RAW are bad! I mean bad!
They force a terrible plastic denoising that renders the Expert RAW pics useless!
Also, although the question is about photos, in the video, the iPhone in ProRes is naturally better,
but here's a suggestion about Samsung.
Go to the advanced menu in the video settings and double the bitrate.
This in 24 fps will double to almost 100 Mbps and makes a huge difference.
Finally, try to shoot HDR10+ with Samsung and then process it as Rec.709.
Shooting with the Samsung in HDR10+ forces the phone to shoot in H265 10-bit 4:2:0 without the need for an external application.
P.S. I haven't used the latest Samsung that I think shoots 50m in RAW, but only in the big model.
6
« on: February 23, 2024, 04:28 »
Any idea if we can submit a 16:9 and 9:16 version of the same clip?
I asked via email Adobe months ago about that and they never bothered to answer, which is disappointing.
In any case, a 4K clip shot 16:9 fits at 90% of 9:16 in HD resolution.
8
« on: May 30, 2023, 03:00 »
I am pretty certain that this is not the first time someone is raising the question.
It's just that I now remembered it again after seeing my latest accepted creative videos.
I have some smooth pans on a tripod that start for example from the sea or a rock to end to a village or a destination on the Ionian islands.
The customer that searches for that destination will only see a thumbnail (I could call it a "dumbnail") that depicts nothing close to that and will naturally choose another one next to it.
The only way to have the thumbnail you want is to shoot still videos, with little action.
Pond 5 allows you to choose beforehand from some selected screenshots.
Shutterstock, after the video is accepted.
Pixta even allows you to choose a still from any second of your video, in 0.5 seconds segments.
I am not an expert on how this feature could be implemented, but I just think we lose a chance of promoting our content,
so it would be something not just welcome but a necessity for Adobe to implement.
After all, if they advertise us properly, we all win!
9
« on: May 17, 2023, 10:18 »
Yes, I have about 1.500 videos there and via the subscriptions, I earn $ 15 - 25 monthly.
They pay between 15-18 each month.
This is a monthly stable.
Single videos can still sell at your set price but for my portfolio, this only happens a couple of times a year.
11
« on: January 13, 2023, 08:09 »
Thanks for the reply.
No, I just described the fall landscape with the fallen leaves.
No area inclusion, either on the title or keywords and it's at a public park with no ticket entry.
The rejection itself is not important, the reason is.
Adobe probably has a kind of initial AI detection, judging from the note I might get some time on high ISO images, which if denoised get accepted.
Maybe this time the photo did not get past AI?
12
« on: January 13, 2023, 04:22 »
I have uploaded some 24 Megapixels photos of low-angle pics like the one I include in the example.
Once reviewed, they were all rejected as found that "it contains elements that appear to be protected by intellectual property (IP) laws"
The tree?
Will the leaves sue me for recognizing themselves?
I had more pics like this not accepted.
All photos were more than ok technically without any person, property, park, or angle visible.
If they did not want the pics, they could just say so.
But rejecting them for "intellectual property" just does not stand as a valid reason.
What do I do?
Do I just ignore it and go on, or ask Adobe to reply in more detail about the rejection?
It's a matter that could happen to any contributor, that's why I am bringing it to your attention,
not because my stock life will be saved with just another pic accepted.
13
« on: October 13, 2022, 03:06 »
They have pre-selected 1 in 70 of my clips for evaluation. From these, a couple has already sold and at least one is a good earner in all agencies. The rest have to do with not widely offered content and at least one is unique. For me personally, $8 is a very bad deal that does not do any justice to the offered content. I guess each one has to decide based on his content and numbers. Noone is trying to influence others, we are all just sharing our different opinions.
14
« on: May 09, 2022, 10:43 »
Me too.
I can login to Nimia, just to see that I also have no sales!
15
« on: April 28, 2022, 10:13 »
In my case the downscaling seems to hide imperfections, that is why I use it.
If I am to shoot 12 Megapixels, I naturally prefer the RAW.
Two more things:
I have to buy the S22 to know but on S21 you can download an external apk, Samsung Expert RAW, that does all the tricks like pixel bining.
The drawback is that it is meaningless to use it on a moving subject, as you have to hold the phone still more time.
Expert RAW is supposed to save 16-bit instead of 12-bit RAW, which is an advantage, even compared to to other phones.
Finallly, at night if using a small tripod, an easy way to take long exposures is as follows:
Use the manual settings (Pro mode) go to maybe ISO-100 and try a longer exposure (going up to 30 seconds).
The problem is that if you choose like 4 or more seconds you do not have a preview of the final result brightness.
This can be easily achieved by trusting the EVF, despite the lack of proper preview.
You try the setting of using more seconds untill you see the EVF going to zero, not going left or right (underexposed or burned).
Not an ideal suggestion, rather a practical one.
A technical detail about sensor sizes:
Samsung S22 Ultra:1/1.33"
Samsung S22: 1/1.56"
iPhone 13 Pro Max: 1/1.65"
Samsung S21: 1/1.76"
iPhone 13: 1/1.9"
Although these are many times smaller even compared to a 4/3 one, if we only see numbers, not final quaility, S22 Ultra has the biggest sensor.
The Xiamomi Mi 11 Ultra has a bit bigger sensor though, at 1/1.28".
16
« on: April 28, 2022, 02:24 »
I am using Samsung S21 and soon buying S22, but have also used two iPhone 13 Pro Max friends have for comparison.
In both the iPhone and the Samsung, RAW pics are way better than their Jpeg version.
Personally I find that Samsung has an advantage due to to its highest resolution, being 64 or 50 Megapixels (latest model), despite some suggesting it is interpolated.
I find it better to shoot in full resolution, which is only Jpeg and scale down than shoot RAW with the Samsung at 12 Megapixels.
What always works for me is to denoise with Topaz AI and then scale down to 12 or 8 Megapixels.
In Topaz, you have to play with the various profiles to get the best results.
DxO does not recognise the latest phones, so Deep Denoising does not work and Photoshop does not give a good denoising result.
This gets my daily outdoors pics accepted.
Otherwise, if not using the big resolution, as I already said always shoot RAW in the 12 Megapixels resolution and denoise.
Then inspect the finished pic at 200%, prior to uploading.
The Jpeg usually has much compression, compared to one derived from RAW.
17
« on: April 17, 2022, 06:42 »
I finished uploading 10 GB of editorial and non-editorial videos and they all dissapeared the very second I have sent them for inspection.
I only had this problem with videos, not photos.
I suppose there is no point in uploading new video content until we see or hear about a fix.
What sounds as trouble is that we might have to spend hours to upload GB of content again, as the ones we did are not visible.
Wouldn't it be just easier if they at least popped up a mesage indicating the problem at our contributor's page?
That is not so difficult to implement.
I am very tempted to comment if this is part of the "Exciting improvements are coming soon." but I will not!
18
« on: March 24, 2022, 16:52 »
But from now on, even Pond 5 exclusive will give us 60% of whatever they discount to the customer, after the recent announcement. Does this still make it worth being exclusive? You will never know what you might earn.
Στάλθηκε από το SM-G991B μου χρησιμοποιώντας Tapatalk
19
« on: March 15, 2022, 14:44 »
It's all very clear.
For non exclusive accounts, either you accept the terms or not.
For exclusive accounts, we have to know how will this 60% we get be calculated.
If it's 60% of our set price, then it's still ok for exclusive uploads.
If it's 60% of whatever Pond 5 decides, then exclusivity can be questioned already.
I will also have to write to Pond 5 support to find out I guess.
20
« on: March 15, 2022, 11:59 »
I have an exclusive and non-exclusive Pond 5 account.
Prior to this announcement, I had a sale on my exclusive account but the NLR was at about 2/3 of my set price.
I would like to know what happens now with the exclusive acccounts.
On 3b they mention that the Net Liscense revenue will be 60%, but I already had earned less, probably due to the agreement that they also sell exclusive content to third parties.
21
« on: March 09, 2022, 12:47 »
Thank you both for taking the time to reply.
22
« on: March 09, 2022, 12:24 »
English is not my mother language but my question was clear, I think.
I see the description.
I just do not understand what 16-500 or 40-500 mean.
Therefore, I wil have to repeat.
Can someone please tell me what will I earn per video in the above cases?
I do not want a link reference, I see it.
Under this range, 16-500 or 40-500, what do I earn per sinlge video?
23
« on: March 09, 2022, 12:04 »
Masybe I was reading the new earnings breakdown fast and my brain froze.
What do I earn per video in this case?
HD - 16-500 CREDIT PACK OR ON-DEMAND
4K - SUBSCRIPTION, 40-500 CREDIT PACK OR ON-DEMAND
24
« on: March 09, 2022, 11:24 »
Therefore, if I do the math correctly,
if a customer buys a credit pack for up to 500 video downloads,
I earn
$.0.056 for HD, or
$0.14 for 4K.
Do I shoot in 4K using an expensive camera with custom profiles, color correct, denoise, export in 4K ProRes for that amount?
On a personal note, it's more viable to only upload photos for a minimum of 0.33.
Unless photos sales also take the road to the subscription plan.
Even if someone buys a sinlge clip, that's $2.80 - $5.60 per clip now.
I suppose if one wants to keep on uploading videos, he just sends his content as is.
Shaken, uncorrected at H.264.
Since it's a game of numbers, some wil be rejected, some will be accepted.
That is what these prices lead us to do.
Treat them accordigly, low care for the low price they wil deserve.
25
« on: January 30, 2022, 04:59 »
At first I thought there's no point to add my opinion, as we all feel about the same with low sales, but then I changed my mind. I get a couple of video sales a week there. January 2020 started with sales in the range of 19 to 23 dollars. January 2021 with sales from 0.26 to 0.58. January 2022 with 1.05 to 1.49. In every of the last three years earnings per video got better for me after March, giving sales of $44 or $85. I also had a one time sale of $603.30. Yes, over 600 for editorial content. What's my point? My average per sold video dropped about $7 in the last years but the total increases. That's all I care, what I pocket, not the statistics. True, I don't like the sub dollar sales but if I opted out I would miss the 44 to 85 ones from customers that only shop from one agency. Now, If I only earned the 0.25 sales that would change things a lot!
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
