|
|
Welcome, Anonymous (Profile, Private Messages)
Having trouble signing into the forums? Please [ logout ] and log back in.
 Log in
| Author |
Message |
epixx
Joined: 02 Mar 2006
Posts: 327
Location: Samut Prakan, Thailand
|
Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:13 pm
|  |
| badboo wrote: | I am confused - people are talking here about $7000 equipment.
Let me repeat from what I have read in the images forum where rinder99 wrote, that no matter how good your equipment is you still need to have the ability to "see the light" and know how to work whatever equipment you have (besides the talent you should possess).
I know footage is a different area but from what I have seen in the footage gelleries - I am sorry but - I can't distinguish HD or 3CCD footage from point and shot photocamera flicks.
Yeah the resolution may be wayyyy better with a semi-pro camera but colorwise and focuswise there is often not that much of a difference.
I am not a pro whatesoever but my impression was that if you handle a 3CCD well you will definetely see a difference in color and saturation compared to a "regular" one sensor handycam shot. I am kind of missing out on that. Maybe someone can post some links to nice colorful clips.
A lot can be improved and in almost every case all the time things can be shot better but we gotta start somewhere. Things like using a tripod and NOT using a point and shot photo camera may be a good start.
I'd love to get a nice 3 CCD cam but honestly, when is it going to pay off? $7000 I will have to sell a lot of clips to make it worthwhile not to speak of the time I am spending shooting.
Anybody else with me or do we have some hotshots taking on a second mortgage for the sake of uploading HD footage waiting if the clips will sell or not...?
Everyone good luck and make this thing take off so we can have a good time here! |
Since I'm in the process of doing this investment some time during the next 3-6 months, here are my comments:
While the technical standards of many of the contributions so far is rather limited, that is not going to last forever. Look at what has happened to microstock in general. It used to be the amateurs' playground, but is now to a large extent being taken over by pro's and advanced amateurs.
When more experienced video photographers, who mostly have access to quality equipment already, see this oportunity, the quality level is bound to rise.
As for myself, having limited experience with this kind of imaging, I will probably not invest 7,000 or more to start with, but try to find a good compromise.
However, as with most compromises, there are limitations, and I will try to stretch as far as possible, since I would hate to have to upgrade after 12 months, probably losing more on resale than I earned on using the equipment.
As usual, the person behind the camera is the most important key to success here, but using quality equipment doesn't hurt either. |
|
badboo
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Posts: 361
Location: Miami
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 22, 2006 10:25 pm
| |
This new venture of selling footage on Shutterstock is a nice playground for people who already have footage at hand.
As a starter, why would I invest even $2000 or $3000 for a camera if I don't even have the slightest clue that this footage site is actually making it - still there is a chance that this may fail as much as I want it to work - obviously :) But that's the reality.
Of course the quality of images on Shutterstock or any other microstock site was relatively low at their beginning but time and technology move on that's why I was a bit disappointed to see a lot of dull, unfocused and cheaply shot clips here. No doubt that the archive has to build up significantly and quickly but what has been said before: "Guidelines for quality and high approval rates" won't hurt either!!!
It saves everyone shooting-time, editing-time and lots of trouble-shooting time if you own a PC - lol. |
|
varius
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 5593
Location: Bietigheim - Bissingen, Germany
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:46 am
| |
| badboo wrote: | As a starter, why would I invest even $2000 or $3000 for a camera if I don't even have the slightest clue that this footage site is actually making it - still there is a chance that this may fail as much as I want it to work - obviously :) But that's the reality.
|
You can get a decent 3CCD MiniDV camcorder for less than $2000 and a good sturdy tripod with camera head for less than $100. It's not that bad after all.
As for why... If you see this as a hobby, you'll have to decide if you want to invest that kind of money in you hobby (and not in this site). If you want to see this as part of your profession, you should do what every decent craftsman does: Buy good and reliable, but not overly fancy tools and care for them, 'couse they are what your income depends on.
Obviously it's a risk, no doubt. But it's business. There's always risk in business, especially in new business. Besides, should this site fail, there are others accepting footage. Not in the microstock area, as far as I'm aware of, but there are. And they have quality standards way beyond what SS asks for now. So, if you invest much, there's still the fallback plan.
| badboo wrote: |
"Guidelines for quality and high approval rates" won't hurt either!!! |
AMEN! |
|
katemirov
Joined: 06 Mar 2006
Posts: 32
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 8:53 am
| |
| badboo wrote: | | I am confused - people are talking here about $7000 equipment. |
Actually quite a bit less, except for some fancy stuff mentiones by Francois.
| badboo wrote: | | Let me repeat from what I have read in the images forum where rinder99 wrote, that no matter how good your equipment is you still need to have the ability to "see the light" and know how to work whatever equipment you have (besides the talent you should possess). |
Yes sure. In fact, you need both :) Otherwise poor quality equipment will destroy the results of your effort.
| badboo wrote: | | I know footage is a different area but from what I have seen in the footage gelleries - I am sorry but - I can't distinguish HD or 3CCD footage from point and shot photocamera flicks. |
It may be not always that easy to notice looking at small previews, however you the photographer may evaluate footage quality based on much the same criteria as still images. For commercial-grade clips you need good exposure, meaning no lost shadows nor blown highlights; there must be no camera shake, main subject must be well framed and in focus, etc.
| badboo wrote: | | Yeah the resolution may be wayyyy better with a semi-pro camera but colorwise and focuswise there is often not that much of a difference. |
Comparing with photography, resolution of video is much lower, hence easier to implemnt in camera. Therefore virtually every camera from pro to kid's toy in terms of resolution produces the same output (save for HD). Then the difference lies in lens and sensor's quality, again much the same as in photography.
| badboo wrote: | | I am not a pro whatesoever but my impression was that if you handle a 3CCD well you will definetely see a difference in color and saturation compared to a "regular" one sensor handycam shot. I am kind of missing out on that. Maybe someone can post some links to nice colorful clips. |
In fact at current level of technology 3CCD is already not always better. Keep in mind that single 1/3" sensor is more sensitive than 3 smaller (like 1/6") sensors and has better DR. Split prism also adds some distortions so IMO currently similarly priced single CCD cameras are about the same as their 3CCD counterpatrs, the difference is very small and is often just mattter of personal preference.
| badboo wrote: | | I'd love to get a nice 3 CCD cam but honestly, when is it going to pay off? $7000 I will have to sell a lot of clips to make it worthwhile not to speak of the time I am spending shooting. |
Hardly anyone is going to purchase his/her first camera with sole intention to sell stock footage. Normally those who enter this route already have something to start with, and the cameras are purchased considering various applications.
| badboo wrote: | | Anybody else with me or do we have some hotshots taking on a second mortgage for the sake of uploading HD footage waiting if the clips will sell or not...? |
It would be quite stupid to invest significant amount of money in so venture business. Only makes sense if you know what to do with the camera if no or very few clips will be sold here.
| badboo wrote: | | Everyone good luck and make this thing take off so we can have a good time here! |
Good luck to you too :)
Dmitry |
|
badboo
Joined: 10 Jun 2005
Posts: 361
Location: Miami
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 2:23 pm
| |
Thanks |
|
dubassy
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 106
|
|
varius
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 5593
Location: Bietigheim - Bissingen, Germany
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 23, 2006 5:01 pm
| |
Time lapse clips... Yep, done a few (not yet submitted). Takes quite a bit of time to do and I'm not sure it's too good for the shutter if you overdo it. But it sure is great for some clips. I really like the one you shot from the boat. Good work there. |
|
dubassy
Joined: 27 Jan 2006
Posts: 106
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 4:04 am
| |
yep i'm sure my 350d shutter will give up any time around now - have taken over 100 000 clicks with it. but its lasted a good 18 months so far for stills and video, so if i have to buy another one, thats not too bad..... |
|
varius
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 5593
Location: Bietigheim - Bissingen, Germany
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 24, 2006 8:38 am
| |
Don't worry too much. My trusty 10D has done some 250.000 shots and she shows no sign of age. :) |
|
fa63yyc
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 812
Location: Calgary, Canada
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 11:59 am
| |
| badboo wrote: | This new venture of selling footage on Shutterstock is a nice playground for people who already have footage at hand.
As a starter, why would I invest even $2000 or $3000 for a camera if I don't even have the slightest clue that this footage site is actually making it - still there is a chance that this may fail as much as I want it to work - obviously :) But that's the reality.
Of course the quality of images on Shutterstock or any other microstock site was relatively low at their beginning but time and technology move on that's why I was a bit disappointed to see a lot of dull, unfocused and cheaply shot clips here. No doubt that the archive has to build up significantly and quickly but what has been said before: "Guidelines for quality and high approval rates" won't hurt either!!!
It saves everyone shooting-time, editing-time and lots of trouble-shooting time if you own a PC - lol. |
Excellent point, I've been shooting for 20 years, the 120+ clips I've already submitted to SS in the last 10 days is only the tip of the iceberg. If you are considering an expensive outlay of equipment just to begin this, you may want to be more certain of the outcome. I'm not trying to dissuade anyone from jumping on board, but it is an expensive business. I've gone through so many cameras and edit suites since 1986, 9 video cameras and 4 edit suites, all told probably around $250,000 worth of equipment over those years. Granted I produced hundreds of projects for my clients, the stock footage was material either never used but retained by me or material I had shot for stock purposes.
I plan on evaluating the progress of SS and my clips in 12 months time. I would like to have 2000-5000 clips by then. Sales? I’m not sure, but 5% a month should be a reasonable sales expectation provided SS has plenty of exposure and a decent, say 100,000 clip library.
Even 10 years ago I had not given any thought to an online stock video house. SS may end up appealing more to long time shooter. Of course those newer shooters that see the appeal of shooting stock will succeed as well, provided they examine the market and their home base which always afford unique stock clips.
Ultimately, the high quality shots will sell and sell often. If its average it will eventually drop off the field. I would suggest we all concentrate on as best a quality as we each can afford, look for the unique or even the everyday shot. I think the outcome will be positive for all. Someone already said it... "It's not the camera, but the person behind it"
my two-bits,
Francois |
|
varius
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 5593
Location: Bietigheim - Bissingen, Germany
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 12:29 pm
| |
| fa63yyc wrote: |
I plan on evaluating the progress of SS and my clips in 12 months time. I would like to have 2000-5000 clips by then. Sales? I’m not sure, but 5% a month should be a reasonable sales expectation provided SS has plenty of exposure and a decent, say 100,000 clip library.
|
2000-5000? Thats an upload of 10-15 PER DAY! Given clip size in MB of my just uploading HD clips, it takes me about 20 hours to upload 8 clips. Even if I could produce the clips that fast, there's no way I could upload that many...
I really need a faster connection...
| fa63yyc wrote: |
I would suggest we all concentrate on as best a quality as we each can afford, look for the unique or even the everyday shot. |
I'd like to second that motion. ;-) |
|
fa63yyc
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 812
Location: Calgary, Canada
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 3:21 pm
| |
Yeah, I know it sounds like a crazy number (5000 clips), but I am sitting on 2200 tape library all databased. I had forgotten some of the footage I had shot, sure looks interesting after all these years. Wait until you the scuba footage west coast of British Columbia: shipwrecks, sharks, wolf eels and other interesting critters. Aerial footage in Canada and Europe. Motorsports, military, oil patch, industry, nature... like I said lots! even if there is only 10 clips per tape that is about 22,000 clips conservatively, and about 4 years of uploads!
Francois |
|
varius
Joined: 19 Mar 2006
Posts: 5593
Location: Bietigheim - Bissingen, Germany
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 4:03 pm
| |
We really need DVD mail in submission... |
|
fa63yyc
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 812
Location: Calgary, Canada
|
|
Posted: Sun Jun 25, 2006 5:50 pm
| |
Me thinks you're right... |
|
rolffimages
Joined: 20 Jul 2005
Posts: 1581
Location: Just to the left
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 26, 2006 10:50 am
| |
| varius wrote: | | We really need DVD mail in submission... |
That would be helpful. |
|
| |
|
  |
Page 3 of 3
|
All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Page Previous 1, 2, 3
|
Shutterstock Forum for Contributors
|
