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 - grejak

Pages: [1] 2
1
Off Topic / Re: What is your dream car?
« on: January 03, 2020, 15:44 »
tesla X or model S can't really decide :)

2
Pond5 / Re: Pond5 sales
« on: December 29, 2019, 10:18 »
Been wondering the same. i have about 4 video sells in whole year of 500 clips and 2700 photos. All the other agencies are selling better than pond5. no idea what am i doing wrong since i was listening to other people that pond5 is great earner for them.

3
Pond5 / Re: What is your download/views ratio on Pond5?
« on: December 29, 2019, 10:17 »
November...

May i ask where do you see views on pond5?

4
General Stock Discussion / more or less clips from one shooting?
« on: November 20, 2019, 12:53 »
So i have a dilema, i usually shoot some similar shots but different in some way, but i just don't know if there is a point of uploading 4-7 clips that are a bit different but with same content? How do you choose clips that will upload? Does it effect on the sells? Is it better to be more picky? Thanks

5
Pond5 / How to price your shots?
« on: November 20, 2019, 12:52 »
I believe this has been debated before but i will ask again, how do you price your shots? I use stocksubmitter and i get automatic prices i guess pond5 chooses them? But how do you price your clips?

6
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 17, 2019, 08:05 »
You're right, it's only 96 pixels, but you should always give the customer the best quality possible.  And even upping 96 pixels does degrade the quality a little.  It would be a bad habit to get into.

But, even if you did, I doubt anyone would know.  If you do up it, up it proportionally.  Don't just "stretch" the horizontal to reach 4096.

If anything, upload native 4000x2160 and let the customer upsize it if they want.  But, some agencies might not like the non-standard 4000 pixel horizontal resolution.

I do well with 4K.  So far this month, I sold 16 of them.  But HD probably makes up about 90% of my downloads.  I even had 2 SD sales this month, so resolution really isn't the key factor when a buyer decides what clip to get -- it's content.
 

Great thanks for info ! How do you upscale it correctly? Just zoom in and lose some pixels on top? also thanks for the info about sells this means that people can still use 2048x1920. thanks !

7
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 17, 2019, 05:30 »
I always shoot 4096 whenever I can. A buyer can always "downsize" to 3840, but a buyer who needs/wants 4096 probably wouldn't buy a 3840 clip.

Most agencies downsize 4096 to HD while keeping the proportions, so a 4096x2160 clip will be 2048x1080 in HD, which is also totally acceptable (and considered "2K").  Even then, the buyer can easily drop it into a "normal" 1920x1080 timeline.  Some agencies crop 4096 to a standard 1920x1080, which is fine, but I like giving the buyer the option to have 2048.

And no, don't upscale 4000x2160 to 4096x2160.  If you can't shoot 4096, then upload as 4000, or crop to 3840 yourself.

Great ! i was thinking the same as you. And yeah i've noticed that most agencies drop a 4096 clip to 2048 for HD. And how are the sells do you sell many 4k videos if it's not a secret?
Why shouldn't i upscale? Isn't it just a small difference, i know people that have alexa and shoot in 3k and just upscale it to 4k. Because 4000x2160 seems unasable for me. they can't use it for 4096 so i just better crop it to UHD

8
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 18:07 »
Recently i have upgraded my camera gear just for stock, and i have noticed that when i upload 4096 resolution the buyers get option for full HD in bigger resolution than 1920x1080. my question is, is it worth uploading 4096 or stick to UHD? Thanks

You probably want to upload your footage as UHD. All of the stock sites will take your UHD footage and scale it down to make HD (and sometime web) options for people to download if they don't want to buy the full 4K versions. Most sites do not make HD versions based on 4096 footage. I personally shoot 4096 and crop it to UHD. That gives me some flexibility to slightly reframe the shot if I want.

but why do you crop it from 4096 to UHD why just not upload the full size?

9
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 18:06 »
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.

yeah but at the moment i am using davinci resolve in which i can't export in prores 422 but i can use media encoder later on. so what do you suggest i export in davinci on windows?

10
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 10:12 »
Is it logical to shoot in 4096x2160 in 24p then? Or can i just export it in 23,976?

For the buyer, 23.976 or 24 matters exactly zero (0), since a clip without audio can be played at 23.976, 24, or even 25 without any noticable difference. It is 1 click (OK, maybe 2 or 3) in any software.

If you provide 23.976, and their project is 24, it means they will play your clip 0.1% faster. This is how it's done every day in Europe (and the rest of the PAL world) with 24p movies. They all play back at 25p (4% faster).

great so the fps don't matter that much but what about resolution, what's your opinion 4096 or UHD?

11
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 10:10 »
Then one suggestion would be you rec with Apple ProRes 422 HQ codec at 3840x2160.
Check if this is at 23,976 but since the codec is fixed it will use a crazy high bitrate.
Will your computer be able to process that? It is still broadcast quality with no visible loss.
It goes to 880 Mbps or you need to read and search how you can work and edit with proxy files.
I work as a Broadcast TV editor and can confirm that most TV studios deliver series or movies for TV in that format and codec.

Well i can edit RAW 4000x2160. i can try if i can work with 422 HQ. But i work on windows. so i export with dnxdh codec and then change it to 422 HQ on media encoder 2019? But with 422 i get only 10bit picture, there would be option to record on 4444 but * this does that a lot of space even more than RAW

12
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 08:22 »
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.

Is it logical to shoot in 4096x2160 in 24p then? Or can i just export it in 23,976? Also forgot to mention my camera only shoots in 4000x2160 which is weird format. is it okay to upscale to 4096. Thank you so much for this help, trying to get the best possible out of this camera it wasnt cheap ! Also the image quality indeed is awesome and i am learning everyday how to grade it even better ! It was an amazing upgrade.

13
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 08:00 »
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.


May i ask you what is the difference between 24fps and 23,976 thanks for the help !

23.976 = 24 - 1%
The frame rate standard has been slightly adjusted, long ago, when NTSC was launched.
Engineers noticed that color was interfering with the black and white information. The reduction of the framerate by 1% was tolerated by the existing black and white TV systems and addressed the interference.

Similarly, 29.97fps = 30fps - 1%

thanks ! I am shooting on blackmagic URSA 4k V2, i believe it's shooting in 24p what do you suggest?

14
General - Top Sites / Re: 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 07:12 »
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.


May i ask you what is the difference between 24fps and 23,976 thanks for the help !

15
General - Top Sites / 4096 x 2160p vs 3840x2160
« on: November 16, 2019, 06:16 »
Recently i have upgraded my camera gear just for stock, and i have noticed that when i upload 4096 resolution the buyers get option for full HD in bigger resolution than 1920x1080. my question is, is it worth uploading 4096 or stick to UHD? Thanks

16
General - Stock Video / H265 vs H264
« on: August 11, 2019, 12:45 »
Hello, i've been doing some research on this two codecs, and i couldn't really decide which one is better for stock. Any suggestions much appreciated !

17
Hello, i've been trying to figuring it out how to upload my videos to istock, since i am a windows user. Thanks !

18
iStockPhoto.com / Exporting video for Istock from windows
« on: January 28, 2019, 16:46 »
I recently started with uploading video clips to agencies and only on istock they require mov format, i used to export my video clips h.264 format i know that they accept 422 apple pro res codec but since i am on windows i could only export it with quicktime to make a mov file, still no luck i couldn't upload it. Anyone has solution for this? How do you export videos for istock? Thanks

19
I'm using 5Dmk3 and SL2/200D.

Thanks again!

20
Video Equipment / Sofware / Technique / All-I or IPB Compression
« on: January 18, 2019, 15:56 »
I have two Canon DSLRs and one shoots All-I and the other cheaper one is IPB only, but its smaller and more practical :)

Does it matter which one you chose for stock footage? I know that all-i is better quality but in the end, does it matter?

Thanks!

21
Pond5 / Pricing set
« on: January 15, 2019, 04:48 »
Hey, was wondering what pricing do you set for photos and videos? Always the same or depending on the shot? Thanks

22
Newbie Discussion / When did earnings for you start seriously?
« on: January 09, 2019, 15:57 »
I am just interested as new stock uploader, when do photos start to sell after you upload them? I got some sells but i am talking about bigger numbers, i am also uploading daily and around 200 photos monthly :) Hopefully someone else shares his/hers experience

23
General - Stock Video / Re: Frames per second for agencies
« on: January 08, 2019, 12:52 »
The general correct answer is that content sells, not frames per second or codecs, or even resolution.

A heavily compressed 27 fps clip of Elvis alive and well in 2019 at a 4:3 aspect ratio (640x480) will sell a thousand times more than your backyard RAW, 60p, 8k clip.

i couldn't agree more, i am just trying to maximize the quality with content

24
General - Stock Video / Frames per second for agencies
« on: January 08, 2019, 12:29 »
I generally upload to many agencies, i have noticed that there is mixed FPS all over the footage some have 30 fps some 24 fps. I have been mostly shooting at 24 frames, is there a correct way of doing it for stock or any particular agency? Thanks

25
Ah okay i get it ! So under my profile i have 267 photos but under licensing i have 43, does that mean 43 were accepted to Getty?
If you see them in "core collection", yes (they also have a premium collection I don't know how that work). I have the same  number next to licensing but not sure if that's how it actually works; I just started with 500px recently. Maybe anyone can confirm if that's enough?

hmm i cant find core collection, i've been reading that you actually get an email if photo gets accepted to Gety. Hopefully someone with more experience with 500px shows up, i am interested in this

Pages: [1] 2

Sponsors

Mega Bundle of 5,900+ Professional Lightroom Presets

Microstock Poll Results

Sponsors

3100 Posing Cards Bundle