|
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 - Dennis Radeke
51
« on: May 08, 2019, 13:23 »
I look at this pretty pragmatically.  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 recently purchased a Sony A7 III (not so dirt cheap but affordable), so I can help understand the issues of contributors broadly. Having decent 4k acquisition was the number 1 requirement for me and should be for any aspiring or regular contributor. Most services like Adobe Stock, will make an HD derivative for you. While that is the version that is selling most these days, I do agree that 4k sales will continue to increase over time as there becomes more 4k OTT delivery and broader adoption of 4k TV sets and desire for content. For Adobe, we remain committed to the contributor community while attempting to expand and grow the market. That's threading the needle to be sure, but believe there can be a proper way to showcase content that is a win for customer, contributor and Adobe alike. To that end, I keep an eye on this forum to understand what's going on with contributors. As always, you can connect with me on LinkedIn and/or reach out if you have questions. Cheers, Dennis
52
« on: May 07, 2019, 14:55 »
For quite a while, I was wondering which frame rate was the most compatible with different international buyers' needs. Sometime back, I read that it's easier to convert 25fps to 30fps than the other way around. Plus I live in a PAL country. So it made sense to me to shoot stock footage at 25fps. And that's what Ive been doing so far until now.
However, recently an American video guy who works with stock footage a lot essentially tells me that what I read is wrong. According to him, it's a real nuisance when he gets hold of 25fps footage because it's hard to convert it to 30fps with acceptable results. Though I'm not too keen on adopting 30fps because I would also like to cater to all the PAL countries out there which outnumber the NTSC countries by a fair margin.
Ive read elsewhere that the cinema standard 24fps can be converted just as easily to 25fps and 30fps. Would everyone agree that this is true? If that's the case, I might shoot my stock footage at 24fps from now on.
From my perspective the answer to the subject line is simply: Yes. Most NLE's (starting with Premiere Pro) are able to handle any frame rate and seemlessly mix it into any timeline and handle the pull up/down, cadence issues that may have arisen in the past. We can geek out on the details, but 24 is a totally fine frame rate to use. For Adobe Stock, we support all of the typical frame rates and you can find details here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/video-requirements.htmlCheers, Dennis
53
« on: April 13, 2019, 07:14 »
Is your monitor calibrated? If not that could be the difference.
likely this. You need to have colorspaces match. Too often we think that they are when they're nowhere near.
54
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:58 »
I don't think a few people deleting a few thousand clips is anything for Adobe to be worried about.
Well, on the other hand, we really do care about making our contributors successful and would be delighted to have all contributors contribute directly, but want the market to have a choice. We believe Adobe Stock will continue to grow and evolve to become the #1 destination and that contributing directly will provide the best benefit to you and to our customers. Make sense? Thanks, Dennis
55
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:55 »
Will this apply to editorial videos available on P5? Or only commercial ones?
This would only be for commercial clips. Thanks, Dennis
56
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:52 »
57
« on: April 04, 2019, 12:47 »
...As a result, also all existing contributors had to accept the terms of use dated June 2018 upon login to the portal.
Kirsten,
Thank you for explaining the background of this login surprise for contributors. However benign the intentions were here, I think this highlights an area which would really benefit from improvement in contributor communications.
At least two other agencies - Shutterstock and Alamy - provide clear explanations of what changed whenever the upload agreement/contributor terms of use are updated. As these documents are long and dense, it is hard otherwise to figure out what the changes are. They also send contributors email, as well as information on the contributor web site prior to requiring acceptance of the new terms.
It really helps to build trust with contributors when the agencies communicate with us over pricing, licensing and upload/contract changes.
Examples, FYI
Shutterstock terms - note the helpful summaries of each section on the right
https://submit.shutterstock.com/legal/terms
SS summary of changes the last time they happened in 2015
https://www.shutterstock.com/blog/2015-contributor-terms-of-service-updates
Alamy's terms and their contract change record
https://www.alamy.com/terms/contributor.asp
https://www.alamy.com/terms/contributor-contract-changes.asp
Hi Jo Ann, That's some very solid feedback and I'm sure Kirsten has recorded it. This is similar to what we do when we update Creative Cloud. Thanks! Dennis
58
« on: April 03, 2019, 07:47 »
I can almost guarantee this is a reaction to Pond5. This is actually a positive step if they are noticing Pond5! Now everyone needs to pay 60%!
Sorry Jeff, but definitely not a reaction to Pond5 as you're thinking. Adobe Stock is very focused on delivering value to customer and contributor, we have a game plan and will continue to execute against it. Pond5 is a part of that as they are a partner. I'll try to see if I can get the background and report back if possible. Dennis
59
« on: March 18, 2019, 07:26 »
Thank you for taking us seriously!
Honestly, it's my pleasure. I firmly believe in trying to make everybody successful. There will always be a push and pull on this but if nothing else, please know that I and many others at Adobe are trying to think about contributors and enabling them for future success.
60
« on: March 11, 2019, 12:36 »
Hi all,
Just wanted to chime in again and say thank you for your responses. A lot of your thinking and suggestions makes a lot of sense. I will definitely be keeping this in mind and come back to review this thread again.
If any of you are headed to NAB, please be sure to stop by the Adobe booth and introduce yourself!
Dennis
61
« on: March 06, 2019, 09:14 »
Indeed. We are not talking about newsworthy stuff just non released people and property. Also trademarks. That sells a lot in SS...
Enviado desde mi ALP-L29 mediante Tapatalk
Thanks everyone for chiming in on this important topic. Love the feedback and do know that we're always evaluating what can be done to make our service and our contributors more successful. Out of curiosity, how many people here are talking about video vs photos? Thanks, Dennis
62
« on: February 19, 2019, 12:42 »
I started doing stock in Premiere but went to After Effects pretty soon since I ended there anyway with my clips. Mainly I do a lot of multilayer masking to emphasize parts of the image in a subtle way, just like in a darkroom in the old days.
Cutting goes pretty fast too, since I first overnight render 4K ProRes files plus 720p proxies from my H.264 encoded 4K camera files or 6K RAW timelapse still sequences.
Editing on the 720p proxy and then color correcting with Synthetic Aperture on the 4k or 6K file.
Still working on a 2012, i7 16GB MacMini and I can easily do 20 - 30 4K clips in an evening and let them render while I sleep.
Great workflow(!), but probably not one 99% of all Stock contributors would want to employ.
63
« on: February 14, 2019, 11:24 »
Gave Premiere a shot, it has its challenges but i love the fact that i can play my clips in a non RAM preview sort of way. Seems to render really fast as well. Guess I'll need to learn this a little better now
And there is a warp stabilizer effect to help create stabilized content when there is no tripod. ;-) Glad you found Premiere Pro accessible. Dennis
64
« on: February 06, 2019, 09:25 »
The other wrench is that I cant queue up clips in AME. I queue them up and AME randomly decides to output the same file for different jobs. Could be one, could be five. So I have to sit there and output them one by one in PP.
Best thing to do is trash your preferences and that should clean it up https://forums.adobe.com/thread/2126506
65
« on: February 05, 2019, 12:06 »
@Dennis Radeke,
there is a market for sure but outside stock video
I mean brand requests even in open to all freelancing sites.
Are they beta testing? Are they going low price?
Don't know.
But even in work or from what i have seen on internet,
requests are extremely specific, kind on demand
"Rotating product", "pesron holding product" etc.
There is a great amount of products that can be presented
n portrait mode due to their shape as a beer for example.
Silly example, but guess you got the point, no pricey shots,
just studio work, less graphics due to limited "dead space" etc.
People and brands as everyone want the best price, and less effort
Will they buy a native well framed vertical HD
vs
a most expensive 4K that need post process as cropping?
(Assuming both clips give the same final output.)
Thanks for the feedback - some good insight there. Dennis
66
« on: February 05, 2019, 12:05 »
I'm personally very interested in this question and while I have an opinion, what I'd really like to know is if anyone has invested the time and energy into vertical video and seen success.
As a long time veteran of stereoscopic 3d (Avatar), I know that some things sound like the future but don't end up realizing their potential.
is vertical video the next thing or merely a hot idea that people are talking about at the moment?
Thanks,
Dennis
Dennis, Are you referring to 3D video for Anaglyph viewing, say Red/Blue or something much more complicated like the full color movie Avatar? Is there any market in stock for 3D video, either type, or stills, that requires colored glasses to view?
Back on topic I hope some people experiment with vertical video and see what happens.
I was referring to 3d as an example of a mostly failed attempt for something to latch on to. Will vertical video be the same or break out as a successful content type? That's what I was after. Hope this helps, Dennis
67
« on: February 05, 2019, 11:49 »
My goal is to import a bunch of clips, cut their length, and do color correction.
I've use AE before for this, but the mere headache of importing a folder full of 4k and trying to make proxies for them so I can see them at speed has forced me over to Premiere, where at least the ingest function will do that automatically. I can't believe AE can't do something so basic.
This is because your use case is designed for Premiere Pro and not Ae. After Effects is primarily for two basic kinds of work 1) Motion Graphics design 2) Visual FX. Your workflow is definitely designed for Premiere Pro. Be sure to check out the Lumetri color workflow. Dennis
68
« on: February 03, 2019, 01:21 »
I'm personally very interested in this question and while I have an opinion, what I'd really like to know is if anyone has invested the time and energy into vertical video and seen success.
As a long time veteran of stereoscopic 3d (Avatar), I know that some things sound like the future but don't end up realizing their potential.
is vertical video the next thing or merely a hot idea that people are talking about at the moment?
Thanks,
Dennis
69
« on: February 03, 2019, 01:17 »
For the very fine and specific work, Ae is an unparalleled tool. "If you can think it, you can do it with After Effects." ;-)
While I do love what I can do with After Effects, my biggest concern is that it is so painfully slow. Any idea if the code will ever be updated? I realize this might never happen and would require writing a completely new application, but one can dream...
I speed up footage all the time, and with that comes adding motion blur. I export the same clip, with pretty much identical looking motion blur 20 times faster in FCP X. Yes, twenty times. That difference is just beyond reason.
Is AE just painfully unoptimized on Mac, and that's not a priority perhaps? Could be. But a 20x difference in export time is just beyond imagination.
Rant over. I love AE. But I do also have to finish clips faster than 2 hours sometimes.
Well, we could share a few beers and probably just scratch the surface of such a complex topic... There's no way I can adequately answer this either via a forum post or via in person. However, I will say this: 1) We've been working on speeding up an unspeedable application for the last several years and have made good progress. That's the key - Ae by design is "import anything, do anything to it, export any format." Because of that, it's impossible to make it 'real-time' like an NLE - simply impossible 2) Our investments into improving ram preview, speculative rendering, taking more effects to GPU, etc. have yielded fruit 3) You can count on us to continue to improve and speed up Ae. Now if only we wouldn't leave HD, no 4k, no 8k, ummmm... This is part of the problem too - frame sizes have exploded in the last 10-15 years with no end in sight. I know this is probably just lip service, but please know that we're sincerely always focused on trying to improve performance for a plurality of users. Hope this helps, Dennis
70
« on: January 30, 2019, 02:29 »
Dennis from Adobe here.  Prior to joining the Stock team, I worked with clients and primarily taught, evangelized and lectured on Premiere Pro and After Effects. No simple answer here, but both tools will work here. The challenge for Ae is sometimes perceived as complicated. For most people, if you're clipping and adding a grade or color correction to the clips, then I would use Premiere Pro. It's easier and more dedicated to the task. Lumetri inside of Premiere Pro is a very capable color grading tool that is intuitive. If you want to blur out stuff, Premiere Pro has a very capable tool to track and blur as well. For the very fine and specific work, Ae is an unparalleled tool. "If you can think it, you can do it with After Effects." ;-) Feel free to ask specific questions, though I am traveling abroad at the moment. Best, Dennis
72
« on: December 13, 2018, 15:59 »
Yes, do all the main stock video sites accept Prores?
Any nice articles on what the best settings should be for export?
Steve
Yes all the main sites accept Prores.
I find Prores 4444 give the best quality if you can maintain your file size under 3Gb (to be able to submit it to most sites). Otherwise Prores 422 (HQ) or 422 is also good.
I'm excited that Windows users can export ProRes from the latest version of Premiere Pro. As far as recommendations, I tend to shy away from 4444 because for Stock purposes, it doesn't provide material improvement to the clips. It also has an alpha channel included which will balloon the file size if you're not careful. ProRes422 HQ or similar is a very quality output that pretty much everybody including Adobe Stock will accept. Our video guidelines in part are here: https://helpx.adobe.com/stock/contributor/help/video-requirements.html Hope this helps, Dennis
73
« on: December 06, 2018, 09:17 »
Derek like so many other contributors on this forum know how to run a site better than SS,IS,GI and AS combined and are so sure of themselves they need to come here to express it. I doubt Derek will answer you as he is so busy consulting other agencies how to do it right and/or starting the next new big agency that will show the well established ones how to do it right.
Dennis, I am surprised you even tried to understand this cud.
First, I have to get into the habit of checking this forum on a regular basis and assimilate the tools so I can respond in a timely manner! Second, while some folks may not take the time to respond, others hopefully will. While Adobe (or any company) isn't perfect, I can say from personal experience that Adobe as a company cares about creatives and contributors and we're looking how to make Adobe Stock the best overall experience for both contributors and customers. I'm always open to hear! Thanks, Dennis
74
« on: November 08, 2018, 11:17 »
Request:
We need to be able to choose the video thumbnail.
Your auto thumbnail creation often picks the worst possible video frame.
Just look at your video pages. You often have a black thumbnail frame. Who is going to click on that?
I totally agree. I can't help but think Dennis will chime in as well and confirm the sentiment. This is a top request and I hope to see it implimented in the not-too-distant future.
-Mat
Oh boy do I agree! Yes, this has been something I have been pushing on. No timetable yet, but agree 100%. My example is a fireworks clip that I shot while on vacation. The thumbnail chosen was a black frame, as opposed to something that would have the color and vibrancy of the fireworks. Hang in there with me - I'm advocating for this! Dennis
75
« on: November 06, 2018, 17:03 »
Thanks for chiming in here Dennis.
Everyone...Dennis is now featuring a fancy verified badge and I can personally vouch for him as one of the good guys. Dennis is in charge of all things video at Adobe Stock and can be an extremely helpful resource for all of you videographers out there. Hit him up with any and all feedback and questions you've been chomping at the bit to get off your chest!
-Mat
Ah, I'm blushing Mat!  I do care about contributors and building a great marketplace that services customers and contributors alike. Now that I've got the "official" stamp, I hope to hear from more of you. Love to hear your ideas and fix your problems if I can. No doubt Mat is your point person but if you're passionate about video, I get you... Thanks for the welcome and look forward to more interaction! Best regards, Dennis PS - best way to see more about me is to connect with me on LinkedIn or Twitter. @dradadobe is the twitter handle.
|
Sponsors
Microstock Poll Results
Sponsors
|
Show Posts
