A lot of you have probably heard of stock footage. But should you be using it?
Well, it depends.
It can save a lot of time and money to get those specific shots like wild life and cities across the globe (unless your client is willing to pay you to travel - DO THAT INSTEAD)
However, stock footage can also be inconsistent with your style of shooting and camera - frame rates, codec, etc.
Sometimes your client may want to take a shortcut by using stock footage. Yes, there’s tons of footage out there, just ensure that it works for your story.
Some Pros & Cons:
Pros:
You can get assets from places/countries you don't have access to
It’s royalty free - if you have a subscription
It can save you time and money
Cons:
It can be limiting, what you see is what you get
Can be difficult to match with your original footage
It’s not original and available to the public
Storyblocks are our go-to. You can choose a month to month subscription and cancel any time. You also get access to many assets like motion templates, titles and sound effects.
Artgrid is amazing, a little pricey but you can get really high quality footage shot in RAW and LOG, so you can easily match it to your footage.
Shutterstock and Pond5. You buy individual clips which also get expensive, but the library is massive and the quality is usually really good.
If you need help deciding whether or not to use stock footage, or choosing a site, pop me a mail on jo@howlingmedia.co.za and I will help you figure that out!
Comments