|
|
Welcome, Anonymous (Profile, Private Messages)
Having trouble signing into the forums? Please [ logout ] and log back in.
 Log in
| Author |
Message |
edgelore
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 316
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 2:34 pm
|  |
anybody seen this rejection reason before? i'm completely puzzled because i had a couple batches where half of the clips were accepted, and the other half were rejected for this reason. all clips in all batches were encoded using the same script and were the exact same codec, speed, frame rate, etc. they were all "regular speed" clips. nothing weird. i double checked the clips i uploaded.
i'm sure the answer is going to be just re-upload and resubmit, but i thought i'd ask here first before doing just that and/or contacting support. this was the first time i had ever seen this reason and it makes no sense.
thanks! |
|
dapoopta
Joined: 28 Nov 2007
Posts: 2298
Location: 10,000 shutter clicks away from PRO
|
|
Posted: Sun Nov 01, 2009 7:46 pm
| |
What type of content was the video? Like people, nature, etc?
Sometimes my videos look sped up, depending on the footage type. Like if someone is moving in a weird way, it can give the effect of sped up. |
|
edgelore
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 316
|
|
Posted: Mon Nov 02, 2009 1:34 am
| |
mostly people, mostly action, although there was also a landscape or two as well. i get what you're saying... but these clips don't look sped up or slowed down (at least to me anyway). we'll see what happens when i resubmit with a note to the reviewer. |
|
chatterbox
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1068
Location: Ireland
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 5:58 pm
| |
| edgelore wrote: | anybody seen this rejection reason before? i'm completely puzzled because i had a couple batches where half of the clips were accepted, and the other half were rejected for this reason. all clips in all batches were encoded using the same script and were the exact same codec, speed, frame rate, etc. they were all "regular speed" clips. nothing weird. i double checked the clips i uploaded.
i'm sure the answer is going to be just re-upload and resubmit, but i thought i'd ask here first before doing just that and/or contacting support. this was the first time i had ever seen this reason and it makes no sense.
thanks! |
Can I ask you a question please? (bear with me as I'm very new at this.)
When you said:all clips in all batches were encoded using the same script and were the exact same codec, speed, frame rate, etc. they were all "regular speed" clips. nothing weird. i double checked the clips i uploaded.
What does encoded and codec mean? Thanks for your help in advance. :) |
|
eternalspline
Joined: 19 Jan 2007
Posts: 129
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 6:41 pm
| |
When you make a quick time there are codex that are forms of compression. The site has specific ones they want you to use Like MotionJepg B. If you understand images it's basically allot like the difference in JPEG and TARGA or GIFF or PNG... |
|
edgelore
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 316
|
|
Posted: Tue Nov 03, 2009 10:56 pm
| |
| eternalspline wrote: | | When you make a quick time there are codex that are forms of compression. The site has specific ones they want you to use Like MotionJepg B. If you understand images it's basically allot like the difference in JPEG and TARGA or GIFF or PNG... |
good explanation... let me expand on it a little, because this might be helpful to other newcomers (as i was myself before and learned some of this eventually from different places)...
in video it's a little different. not only do you have the compression scheme (codec) like MJPEG which is best for interlaced footage like 1080i or Photo JPEG which is best for progressive footage like 1080p, but you also have the container. .AVI, .MOV, etc. are the containers. a .MOV quicktime file can be encoded with MJPEG or Photo JPEG (or even other codecs). So it starts to get a little confusing... especially if you have audio track(s) because those are encoded separately and can also have various codecs used .MP3, .AAC, etc. there are a few primary standards and most sites will specify which codecs and containers they will accept.
i know SS used to accept AVI but i don't think they still do. when you pull the raw video off your camera you have to process (encode) the files to submit them. there are a lot of tools (even free ones) to do this.
i hope that helps, chatterbox. |
|
chatterbox
Joined: 05 May 2008
Posts: 1068
Location: Ireland
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 3:33 am
| |
Hallo eternalspline and edgelore...
Thanks so much for all the info. It's getting clearer to me day by day... but I think I'll take advise from a very nice person (eternalspline) to do loads more reading and learning on the subject before I give it a go. Will stick to my illustrations for now, but in the future I'll aim to do footage as well.
Thanks again everyone for being so patient and explaining things clearly. Much appreciated.
Celia |
|
csproductions
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 46
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:10 pm
| |
| edgelore wrote: | anybody seen this rejection reason before? i'm completely puzzled because i had a couple batches where half of the clips were accepted, and the other half were rejected for this reason. all clips in all batches were encoded using the same script and were the exact same codec, speed, frame rate, etc. they were all "regular speed" clips. nothing weird. i double checked the clips i uploaded.
i'm sure the answer is going to be just re-upload and resubmit, but i thought i'd ask here first before doing just that and/or contacting support. this was the first time i had ever seen this reason and it makes no sense.
thanks! |
It's nonsense like this that prompted my decision to stop uploading to SS because my time is too valuable to waste. It's more productive for me to upload to other sites where I don't encounter this kind of irrational and erratic behavior on the part of inspectors. I keep an eye on the forums here looking for signs that it may have changed, but apparently it hasn't. |
|
edgelore
Joined: 05 Jan 2007
Posts: 316
|
|
Posted: Wed Nov 04, 2009 10:37 pm
| |
| csproductions wrote: |
It's nonsense like this that prompted my decision to stop uploading to SS because my time is too valuable to waste. It's more productive for me to upload to other sites where I don't encounter this kind of irrational and erratic behavior on the part of inspectors. I keep an eye on the forums here looking for signs that it may have changed, but apparently it hasn't. |
i know what you mean it is frustrating. i'm not sure where the issue is, but it isn't fun. still, at this point it's worth it to me to keep submitting here, but it's moved down a couple places in the order of priority sites i submit to (both in terms of revenue and hassle). still a great place, but if they could work these kinks out it would be WAY better.
incidentally, to bring the thread full circle, i re-uploaded the exact same clips (no changes, no re-encoding) that i had sent the first time with a note to the reviewer and every single one of them was accepted this round. for what it's worth. your mileage may vary. ad nauseum. etc. etc. |
|
csproductions
Joined: 26 Sep 2007
Posts: 46
Location: Orlando, Florida, USA
|
|
Posted: Fri Nov 13, 2009 11:40 am
| |
| edgelore wrote: | i know what you mean it is frustrating. i'm not sure where the issue is, but it isn't fun. still, at this point it's worth it to me to keep submitting here, but it's moved down a couple places in the order of priority sites i submit to (both in terms of revenue and hassle). still a great place, but if they could work these kinks out it would be WAY better.
incidentally, to bring the thread full circle, i re-uploaded the exact same clips (no changes, no re-encoding) that i had sent the first time with a note to the reviewer and every single one of them was accepted this round. for what it's worth. your mileage may vary. ad nauseum. etc. etc. |
Hmmmm, very interesting. I'll probably resume uploading to SS at some point when I've run out of other things to do, but it will be lowest on the priority list because it's wiser for me to invest my time on those sites where I get a much greater return on that investment. So far, I've never resubmitted anything because of the time factor. |
|
| |
|
  |
Page 1 of 1
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
|
Shutterstock Forum for Submitters
|
