I've never used that software, but I would expect Photo Jpeg to be a lot bigger than mpeg. Different formats and different codecs, use different levels of compression, and when uploading to stock sites, less compression is usually the way to go.

My upload sizes vary quite a bit depending on the complexity of the scene, but for a 10 second clip in Photo Jpeg, I get clips from between 50MB and 350MB. I'd say most are around 150MB. For H.264 they come out at around 25 to 50% less than that. If I was exporting MP4 for Youtube or something, then they'd be about 5MB to 35MB.

I create, or at least finish, all my work in After Effects, so I use Adobe Media Encoder which comes with it.

Well the source material is the raw movies right out of my camera.. They are .mov files with h.264 codec.. I try to convert them to .mov files with photo jpeg codec for istockphoto.. But i can t reduce the files sizes while they are much smaller with h.264...

Well the source material is the raw movies right out of my camera.. They are .mov files with h.264 codec.. I try to convert them to .mov files with photo jpeg codec for istockphoto.. But i can t reduce the files sizes while they are much smaller with h.264...

OK, that's where the "problem" lies. h.264 is a delivery codec which saves chunks of data over a number of frames in order to be more "efficient" at throwing away as much data as possible while trying to preserve overall quality. For example a shot of a blue sky doesn't change much so information is passed along in chunks as opposed to every frame (depending on how often you set your keyframes - i.e. Variable Bit Rate).
PhotoJPEG is more an intermediary codec that saves data every frame (Constant Bit Rate), it's less efficient at throwing away data over spans of frames.
So I am not surprised that converting h.264 to PJPEG results in a larger file.
Just give the agencies what they want and don't worry too much about smaller file sizes.
Its a good thing that you are not trying to convert to ProRes - then your file sizes will really go through the roof...

Quote from: Benozaur on August 05, 2016, 05:39

So I am not surprised that converting h.264 to PJPEG results in a larger file.
Just give the agencies what they want and don't worry too much about smaller file sizes.
Its a good thing that you are not trying to convert to ProRes - then your file sizes will really go through the roof...

I'll say right off the start I'm not a fan of PhotoJpeg. FWIW- I took a short 7 second clip shot with H.264 on a GH4 with a original file size of 84MB and ran it through MPEG Streamclip. The ProRes 422 yielded a file size of 246 MB and the PhotoJpeg yielded a file size of 581 MB, more than twice that of ProRes 422. That's at 100% setting. I guess you can diddle with the Quality slider but why? With ProRes you only get one thing, max quality. Half a gig plus for 7 seconds of 1080P?? I also found that by the time you get the P-jpeg to a reasonable size, there really is a degradation of quality especially WRT banding in narrow graduations of colour or luminance. This is just me, I'd go for the 422 over Pjpeg.

True. I always encode pjpeg at 90-95% quality. However its still an 8bit codec so banding will occur and macro blocking will transfer from the h.264 source. However simply changing the codec doesn't add to the quality of your clip. Simply converting h.264 to ProRes adds nothing (apart from extra megabytes to your overall file).
Like I said earlier - if the agency wants pjpeg then give them what they want, if its a bigger file then so be it - it will live on their servers anyway.

Using Premierepro and converting to proress422HQ!