Just trimming and exporting. Any program.

But as soon as you said blur tracking you really should get into After Effects right away if you want to keep doing this.

As much as I want to say "yes" to this as an Adobe person, After Effects is definitely not the right tool for a self described newbie.  Lots of great tools out there and have been mentioned.  If you stick with it (and I hope you do), then take a good look at Premiere Pro and yes, After Effects for some clean up, tracking and object removal.

Dennis

Does anyone successfully use iMovie to edit clips?  Or is there another editor that's not as complicated as Premier or FCP?  Doesn't seem Ineed all those bells and whistles.

Thank you.

Premiere Pro can be simplified tremendously in the UI.  You can check this out if you wish. https://helpx.adobe.com/premiere-pro/using/workspaces.html

If you have a Creative Cloud subscription, another possible option is Premiere Rush, though it won't have some of the options and export capabilities of Premiere Pro.

Hey everyone, have been shooting for some years with the Sony NEX6 for stock footage and images. Guess its outdated now as i see more 4K clips with coming out and i get more rolling shutter rejections.

My choices are the new sony a6600 or the trusty sony A7III. The a6600 has the eye focus in video, no video duration limit and some cool new video features. While the a7III for a slightly higher price is a full frame with crazy good low light capabilities.

What would you advise, which to get.

It depends on
1) your budget
2) what your focus is (images, video or both)
3) how comfortable are you with non-auto functionality of any camera

I think video duration limit doesn't matter as stock rarely needs 60 seconds and current cameras can go much longer than that.

Simplistic answer: If you're doing both images and video and can afford it, get the A7III.  If you're budget conscious and/or if you're more focused on video, then the a6600 should do great.

Hope this helps,
Dennis

Hi everyone,

Just wondering if I missed something ... I am about to upload some older footage to Adobestock. Out of curiosity I searched their content and found already the clips online! With me as the author and the source Adobestock/Pond5.

I can't remember of any partnership between these two. And I can't remember agreeing to share my files on both sites.

I didn't contact Adobe Stock yet, thought maybe someone here can give me a clue.

Thanks in advance,

Rob

Hi Rob,

As already pointed out, Pond5 has a Global Partner Program which includes Adobe Stock as a partner.  This creates a win-win for stock customers, the artists (you!) and companies like Adobe and Pond5. 

Ultimately, Adobe wants to allow the artist to be successful in the way they feel is best for them.  So, if you upload to several agencies at once (pretty typical) including Pond5 and Adobe, the content you submit to Adobe will be from you.

In your case, you were uploading older content to Stock which came through Pond5 already.  You can keep it like that if you'd like and we'll all be fine.

If you wanted to keep your libraries separate through submission, you can reach out to Pond5 and work with them who would send us a take down request and then you can upload.

Again, whatever works best for you. 

Hope this helps a bit.

Dennis

Quote from: wds on August 08, 2019, 21:11

Good news, but disappointing at the same time. Why only illustrative editorial?

Also, >25000 downloads is asking an awful lot for folks that weren't around in the heyday of microstock when there were a lot more downloads.

"We will expand this access in the future. For now, if you are not ranked at Emerald or above though you feel you have a strong Illustrative Editorial collection already established you may write to us for consideration via the contact us link at the bottom of the contributor portal. Be sure to include a link to your existing work."

-Mat

Please note, this is only for images at present.  We are (sadly) not accepting editorial footage quite yet. 

Quote from: Ozone on August 07, 2019, 16:53

Footage+matte. The clips will be twice as long, but "alphable" when downloaded in any resolution. You can't do anything about the way stock resize and recompress your content.

I've used that method in the past. Haven't uploaded animations in a few years and was hoping that footage with alphas would be full supported by now.

Hi Forrest,

It's something that we've discussed internally a number of times.  Briefly, here's what I see as current issues: a codec that is modestly sized and supports alpha channel, a filter to include alpha channel in searches (currently not on Adobe Stock), method for previewing a file with an alpha channel.  Each of these could be expanded upon but I would be digressing. ;-)

We will definitely add something in the future and I appreciate your input and feedback. For the time being, I agree with the former reply.

Thanks,
Dennis

So, im artis illustrator and im looking for good camera for non-MS related project (video marketing project).

So, sadly; i dont know anything about taking photos or recording

The recomendation i get is to buy a Canon-EOS-M50 because it is the camera that brokes with the amateur quality of pics/video, and anything better that this one will be a high jump on price (as the one who recomend me this camera told me).

The problem is that i can see iPhone and other Hi-Tech mobiles taking amazing quality videos and pics.

It is worth buying this camera?

This is an endless topic where you will get 10 opinions from every 5 people   

I agree that glass still makes the biggest difference, the other thing is your budget: Everybody has one.

In the absence of that, I'd recommend two ideas:
For camera - any mirrorless camera is great.  Canon is good.  I have Canon glass to this day but had to switch to a Sony body because Canon didn't innovate fast enough.  I would argue this sony is great for a modest budget: https://www.sony.com/electronics/interchangeable-lens-cameras/ilce-6500-body-kit Many YouTubers are using this camera and making a ton of money with it.  Why not Stock people?

For iphone/android, I love Filmic Pro: https://www.filmicpro.com/

You'll get a ton more opinions.  Best advices is define your parameters and what you really hope to get out of any piece of gear.  Then do your research and shop for the best price.  You'll always be happy with what you get then.

Hope this helps,
Dennis

We had a short term issue that affected uploading photos for a short time in some areas and it is now fixed.  Glad to see we have contributors on top of it! 

Cheers,
Dennis

A) Why not update Adobe Stock so contributors can upload both graded and ungraded at the same time and have those two files linked together as one, so the buyer can see both versions when they click into the landing page for that video. This would reduce search clutter and increase options, win/win.

As I alluded to in my post, we've had many discussions about these sorts of ideas.  I'd like to think that this will be an option some day, but until then, I think our current offering is addressing most customers needs.  Besides, I think there are some other ways to do this that are even cooler than what you're describing.    Nope, I won't tell...

B) Obviously a warning should have been sent out first by Adobe Stock. Just because someone is breaking a policy doesn't mean they understood they were blocking a policy. Adobe spends a lot of time building out and maintaining a stock marketplace, and contributors spend a lot of time creating sellable content. Each party benefits from the other. Many years ago, I too was breaking a (different) policy of a stock website, I didn't know any better at the time, I was sent an email warning, my account was suspended for a week. I wrote back and apologized for my ignorance and I haven't had a problem since. In addition, it isn't as if policies at stock websites don't evolve over time, they do. Anyway blocking without sending a warning is too heavy handed, it gives Adobe Stock a bad reputation. iStockphoto developed a bad reputation a long time ago, and many contributors actively worked to drive sales to other stock websites.

Fair point and we'll try to improve our communication in an ongoing fashion.  This is part of why I'm viewing these boards even on vacation.  A lot of our communication though does just that - provides some amount of warning or information that contributors will find helpful.  We're not perfect though and I get it.

Dennis

Hi there Rasika,

I think a support case came through that is probably yours.  I have responded to Adobe support and they will no doubt get back in touch with you but let me try to provide some guidelines for the future here as well.

in general, we want to provide you the contributor as much opportunity and creative expression as possible and provide the creative customer with a large and high quality library where they can easily find the perfect clip to add to their project.

As the content lead for motion, I have provided our moderation team guidelines for accepting similar clips.  In general, I have loosened those guidelines because a different take, magnification/zoom/focal length or other factors can result in a clip that a customer wants.  It's tricky though - there are always going to be grey areas and opinions on what constitutes a unique clip or not.

However, it doesn't make sense for us to have both an ungraded file and a graded file of the same clip.  Especially if the files are 8bit color where the idea of "raw" isn't really applicable.  Once you get to 10bit color or greater with cameras such as a RED, ARRI and some others, then the idea of a RAW version may be very appealing to some.  As Adobe Stock develops, we may be able to offer a customer a choice of a raw clip versus a graded one.  The team here certainly have discussed many ideas and we hope to bring them to our users in the future! 

Today, I like to suggest to contributors is to submit a lightly graded version of your clip.  This means that it isn't flat like a clip shot in log might be and it brings out the luma range (black to white) and lightly touch the color (based on your preference).  The end goal is that the novice buyer will see a beautiful clip and the experienced editor/buyer will see a clip that fits and provides enough latitude for them to push the color to whatever the need is.

I hope that this provides some guidance and if you (or others) have any questions please feel free to hit me up with them here.  Please note that I'm technically on holiday so my response to answer may be a bit slower than normal.

Thanks and happy shooting!
Dennis

Wow! Just wow.

How in hell does Adobe allow that???

It's a tough one to be sure - I hadn't seen this series until I reviewed this thread. 

Generally speaking, I've provided guidance that similar shots are acceptable within reason.  If there's a different take with the same enactment, a different focal length, an animation with a different colorization, etc.  I'll have to look deeper into this one as it may be a bit....extreme. 

I think I know how to fix this in the future.

Thanks for making me aware. 

Both of the above replies are very good.  I have 4 kids in college or high school so I was late to upgrading my camera (Kids expect to eat every day!  ) 

I recently purchased a Sony a7 III and a metabones adapter to keep using my Canon glass.  I've been happy with it.  That said, GH5, pocket camera, etc are all good choices.

What's your budget and what kind of shooting were you thinking of doing? what other gear may you need to get to support it?

Best,
Dennis

Quote from: Dennis Radeke on May 08, 2019, 13:23

If you're a contributor and looking to get into video acquisition, you'd be silly to purchase anything other than a 4k camera.  They're just dirt cheap. 

I've been shooting HD stock video with my 3 original Canon 7D cameras, which are really old now, and I know I need to upgrade soon. Also have a great collection of L lenses so don't want to change brand.

I've been waiting for the 7Diii but there's no sign of it yet. (I missed the 7Dii which is now discontinued.)

Can anybody recommend a Canon 4K camera that works well for wildlife? "Dirt cheap" would be nice but not expected. 

Thanks in advance for suggestions.

I was much in the same boat.  I've been (and continue to be) a loyal Canon user and happened to have the same 7d that you talk about.  Given my role, I knew it was time for a better camera with regards to video and waited for about 2 years in the hopes that Canon would release a mid-tier camera that didn't compromise on video that much.  If you want Canon and only Canon, I think the EOS-R is a good camera, mirrorless with decent but not spectacular 4k results. 

For myself, after much hand wringing, I decided to go for the Sony A7 III and the metabones V adapter.  If you're shooting manual, you're golden.  If you shoot P mode, it's not bad and the metabones v60 software does a pretty good job of giving you things like AF and so forth.  4k video is pristine and easy to get to.

Biggest change on the photo side will be that your lenses don't act the same because you switched to a full-frame sensor.  I used to work almost entirely with a EF28-70 macro and with the 1.6 crop factor could reach out enough to get a decent shot.  Now, I am strapping on the EF70-200 f/4 and wanting more distance!

In the end, any camera you get today is going to do a good job for both photo and in most cases video.  Just do your homework first.

Hope this helps,
Dennis