Shutterstock Photographer Forum :: View topic

birkley · Joined: 21 Dec 2011 Posts: 2

Quicktime files(made in Sony Vegas) play back jerky on my computers but are fine. My PC's have trouble playing hi definition mov files back smoothly in the Quicktime player but are smooth if I play the mov files with the free VLC media player . . . suggest you try that.

odesigns · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:19 am

Might just be your PC can't play a 1080 PhotoJPEG clip smoothly.

Doesn't necessarily mean your clip is bad.

joolselliott · Joined: 10 Jan 2012 Posts: 16

Well, I do have a new PC and it's only a month old.

I've just downloaded VLC Player. It looks fine from the start but as it goes in the jitters seem to return :(

odesigns · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 11:00 am

PhotoJPEG is quite a hefty codec. Perhaps your hard drive just can't keep up. That's usually the bottle neck on systems. Not the processor.

Don't fret over it.

You could try to export a 720p version and see if it'll play as a test.

mateimiruna · Joined: 20 Dec 2005 Posts: 731

Photojpeg is not a recommended play format. It is just for portability. There is nothing wrong if the Photojpeg file plays slowly.

Also, if you have problems with Quicktime, go to Preferences and enable „use legacy codecs”

joolselliott · Joined: 10 Jan 2012 Posts: 16

I've enabled the legacy codecs and it's still the same.

What worries me is uploading something and it's a load of rubbish quality wise and won't pass the QC.

joolselliott · Joined: 10 Jan 2012 Posts: 16

OK, I've just done as Odesigns suggested and created a 720 version. It is markedly better than the full size one.

So, is it just a case of my PC not being able to handle the file quick enough and the quality will be more than acceptable for Shutterstock?

odesigns · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 2:37 pm

Yes, it should be.

joolselliott · Joined: 10 Jan 2012 Posts: 16

Thanks. i'm redoing it now and then going to upload. Hoping that it now works.

odesigns · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 3:11 pm

Worst case scenario: it gets rejected, but at least you'd have a reason why in the rejection.

Got to start somewhere.

You could always just contribute 720. There's nothing wrong with that resolution.

I'm tempted to downsize all my DSLR 1080 clips to 720 before submitting, since in the downsize process, it just ends up looking "sharper".

DSLR clips just tend to look "soft". Plus, you get stuck with dreaded moire problem under certain circumstances.

If I shoot something with my HPX-170, then shoot the exact same scene with my Canon EOS, the HPX's footage looks better. But with the DSLR, you get all the low-light abilities and shallow DOF goodness.

It's a toss-up sometimes.

joolselliott · Joined: 10 Jan 2012 Posts: 16

This is true!

It's just finished uploading and in my queue. All I have to do now is get it past QC:)

rinder99 · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 7:30 pm

One of the very reasons I went to a beefed up Mac was for video.

Rekindle · Posted: Mon May 07, 2012 8:52 pm

Like was said maybe hard drive too slow. I have a bunch of external hard drives but use them only for storage after processing. When processing They are too slow so I process everything to the faster internal HD and then transfer to the externals after uploading to the agencies.

rinder99 · Posted: Tue May 08, 2012 12:22 am

+1. Doing footage really brings my respect for those in the movie industry that have file sizes that us mortals couldn't even dream about processing.Wanna talk about 64 GB of ram on G5 machines to do 4K stuff. Were children compared to these guys.15 sec stock clips are a no brainer.