Why isn’t everybody uploading H.264 codec?

May be the best is just upload the original from your camera! Just cut the front and the end away, that is it.
peace of mind... ;)

Your camera shoots 4k in mov?

Well the reality is that the market is very small for 4K still. So maybe later on uploading 4K ....

NO, my camera shoot 4K in mp4, P5 accepting mp4, just I can't get rid of the sound.

I some of the productions I've seen using obvious stock footage, this issue is a non-issue, as they don't bother to try to make it match. However, if you try to modify content rendered in a super-compressed codec more than just a little, things get ugly, and they get ugly fast. What I saw when I tried the h.264 renders is that the color does simply vanish more than does with ProRes HQ. If I was truly militant, I'd upload ProRes 444(4)? but what I've seen in sales is that generally even "crappy" or lesser clips can sell very well, despite the less-than-stellar camera, technique, or render codec. I do know when I do two-stage renders, I need to render the first stage in a solid intermediate codec so I can do what I like with the second phase. I do this a lot. Had I used a "lesser", or bandwidth-cheaper codec, I just cannot get away with some of the things I've done, and would end up in the hangman's noose for pixelization, banding, and artifacts. Not saying I'm perfect, or even better than anyone...far from it..but I'm better now than I was not long ago, and once you see what there is to be seen, it's real hard going back. Not that it sells any more or less, that I've seen. But I hate looking back on older stuff and saying "WTF was I doing?" So as we learn, and more advances in the technology come into play, we need to learn more, and adapt.

I ask myself if professional buyers don't know that (most of?) our cameras shoot 4k in mp4. What may they think when knowing that mp4 files are converted to whatever mov and increase the file-size for a professional look while the clip can't become better than the original record, .... except additional stabilisation?

@Beckhusen, that was my original argument. Perception is a funny thing. I think it's Dreamstime, that sells for a large premium, TIFF files, BUT the TIFF files are generated from the jpegs they have on their servers. Who, that manipulates images, can't convert a jpeg to a TIFF? If I extract 422 off the HDMI port or something like that, then convert it all to H.264 I'd be doing myself a disservice, but starting with H.264, doing no transcoding and then uploading H.264 seems to be the best bang for everyone's buck. Unless of course it isn't, which has me thinking is circles. Shoot and be happy.

Just say in your description "this is the original codes h264 or mp4 from camera", that is it.

Following the comments of the experts that know, this is the way I try to shoot. K.I.S.S. camera on tripod, count to 15, turn on and off with remote, upload mp4 as from the camera. The remote is for zooming, the tripod set to tilt as required, pan carefully by hand. Of coarse all this falls apart when trying to get a shot of the tiger leaping into the air at you.

Slimm,

I suggest you KISS the water of your stream, so it run smoothly as you want before you start shooting... ;)
Tiger is too dangerous for all, besides they are kept in zoo, be sure you are outside its cage.