Jump to content

aminkorea

Members
  • Content Count

    147
  • Joined

  • Last visited

1 Follower

About aminkorea

  • Rank
    Member

Recent Profile Visitors

635 profile views
  1. Anytime you post an image on line you are taking a chance that someone will download it and use it without you knowledge. That being said, the is a SS critique forum at https://forums.submit.shutterstock.com/forum/40-critique-forum/ I don't know how helpful it will be but you can try using it to get help.
  2. There is no problem submitting photos of people in public, BUT, they must be submitted as Editorial. Whether it is ethical is a question for your own conscience. Here's a link that explains how to submit editorial images. https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/en_US/kbat02/How-do-I-submit-editorial-content?l=en_US&fs=Search&pn=1
  3. Just turned of my portfolio of 12,000 images. Moving to AS, I only wish they accepted editorial as my port consist of 3000 editorial images.
  4. You may want to reconsider iStock. I and a lot of others left them due to sub 1 cent (.049 cent) payouts.
  5. And these asswipes want us to work for pennies. What a joke.
  6. Yes, I will definitely make some changes to the description. Thanks for the input.
  7. No nothing about objectionable content. The rejection was: Missing Artwork Property Release: An artwork property release is required for this submission but was not provided. Content containing works of art, such as paintings and drawings, require a property release from the artist of the work. Which is ridiculous since this is not a work of art. It's a boulder that was dug out of the ground and is displayed in a rock garden with many more unusual, shaped boulders. if the reviewer had read the description he/she would have known that.
  8. Before I tell you the rejection reason, would anyone like to take a guess. Here's the description, which I am sure the reviewer did not read. Large white boulder shaped like phallus in front of white picket fence in public park.
  9. I don't understand how they got accepted as photos. Anytime I have submitted illustrations as photos they were kicked back and I was told to submit them as illustrations.
  10. Hey Doug. Stop being a dick. Not everyone has the where with all to invest in uber expensive gear, nor are we all privileged enough to own and/or work for a professional video development company. I don't expect Phil, myself, or anyone else is ready to throw out their gear and go out and buy the type of gear you use simply because you don't like the gear we use.. We do what we can with what we can afford. Your opinions are both demeaning and arrogant. For future reference, don't bother posting on any of my threads. You will just be ignored.
  11. That was rather harsh, but i guess we are all entitled to our own opinions.
  12. Doug. I do all my videos using my Nikon D500, which is one of the best DX format cameras Nikon has ever made.(IMHO) I usually only use software to edit the length of the clip, and remove grain. I also have a copy of Corel's Video Studio pro, but I find After Effects does a better job. On this particular clip I was in a very sunny environment and had a difficult time getting the exposure right, so I had to adjust for that and try to remove a bit of grain.
  13. Thanks for the comments. I have resolve but have no clue how to do anything with it. It seems more complicated that AF. I did a little more work in AF and figured out what caused the problem. I started by removing each effect I used one at a time. When I removed the Remove grain option, the ghosting went away. I will be the first to admit that I have a lot to learn when it comes to processing videos for stock. But I am trying to learn and get better. I guess the next challenge is learning Resolve. Thanks again.
  14. Phil. Yes, AF = After Effects. I never shoot in interlaced, always progressive. My camera was set to shoot at 23.976 FPS, but I don't now remember what the shutter speed was and it isn't recorded in the EXIF.
×
×
  • Create New...