Jump to content

David Blum

Members
  • Content count

    132
  • Joined

  • Last visited

About David Blum

  • Rank
    Member

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Not Telling

Recent Profile Visitors

408 profile views
  1. David Blum

    Rejection; Reference Image Illustration.

    Thanks, but not smart - have just dealt with the same reject. Now teach me to draw trees that look like a photo! Haha.
  2. David Blum

    Rejection; Reference Image Illustration.

    Hi Vaniljefeldt: It looks as if you've done such a good job, SS believes a photo reference might have been used. If it was me, I would open a copy of the illustration in Photoshop and maybe zoom in a bit on the tree line to show brush strokes. I would write "Painted from imagination without any reference" right on the image and take a screenshot of that. If you upload that screenshot as a reference image, they might accept. You might even include "digital painting" or something like that in the title. Good luck. 🙂
  3. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Apologies. Should have written "I think." I don't know SS's code. Just noting info from submission guidelines (that the vector and jpg preview are linked based on file names) and the obvious (that uploaded file names are replaced with SS's numbering system, which appear with your images on the site). As for file name lengths, you would certainly know better than me. But it seems that a file name like "Mandala business card design template vector collection. Set of luxury golden ornaments for identity, web and prints with sample text.eps" might get shortened and cause problems with the linking of correct previews? Could be wrong. Just trying to help 2shoes get her nice vectors approved! 🙂
  4. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Good luck! Fingers crossed, but I bet that will work! 🙂
  5. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Aha. Thanks for the clarification.
  6. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    When your files are uploaded, SS automatically links the vector with the jpg preview based on the file names you provide. The files are then automatically renamed with a number based on SS's numbering system. (There have been other strings about contributors wanting SS to keep their original file names, which may be the strings another poster remembers. But those strings had nothing to do with mismatches.) Tens of thousands of contributors have their vectors properly linked and approved every day. SS has confirmed it is seeing different mandalas in your vectors than those shown in your previews. This is further comfirmed by the fact that some of your files are approved, while others have mismatched previews. It appears the problem is on your end, not Shutterstock's. Even your "short" file names are long sentences with spaces. Sentences are not file names. You cannot include spaces in file names or they will be truncated. Do this and you'll get approved ... - Don't use existing eps/jpg pairs on your computer. Start fresh with one of your mandala card vectors. - Name it "mandalacard1.eps" with no spaces or sentences. - In Illustrator, not an automated program, create a jpg from the vector. - Call them both up on the screen together to ensure they match. - Name the jpg "mandalacard1.jpg" just like the vector. Submit that, and it will be approved. 🙂
  7. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Final thought 🙂: SS's system may be having problems linking the correct vector to the correct preview if the file names are as long as the ones shown in your side-by-side example above. The file names shown appear to be very long sentences with periods and commas. Their system may be shortening your original uploaded file names and making them all the same because they are so long. The system might then have trouble linking the correct preview to the correct vector. My only other suggestion would be to reupload just the rejected ones. Make sure the vector and matching preview file names are identical (except for the .jpg/.eps) and use shorter file names with no commas, spaces and periods. Other than that, I don't know why SS is seeing a different preview for each vector than you are, but my guess is that they are. In my experience, SS wants to approve your images as much as you want them approved. Sorry for your trouble, but good luck.
  8. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Hi again 2shoes: I might know the problem? First off, Sohn Gottes ^^^ is correct 🙂 but I believe there is a separate "artboard" rejection for elements extending off the artboard (which can happen when working in vector programs other than Illustrator.) I could be wrong, but I don't think that's the problem here, since you're working in AI. Try this ... - Open one of the rejected vectors in AI. (It must be a REJECTED vector that you have already uploaded, not an approved one and not a template as shown in the examples above. Don't make a new example to test; use the EXACT vector that was rejected.) - Open the EXACT preview that you linked to this vector in PS. (Make sure you open the EXACT jpg preview that you already have uploaded with the EXACT same name, except for the .jpg file suffix.) My guess is that the mandalas are different! If that's the case, don't feel bad. It's an easy mistake to make, especially when submitting many similar business card illustrations where just the mandalas change. BTW: they're very nice! If you've already ruled out color shifting and artboard problems, I bet it's something obvious like this that's easy to overlook. My guess is that you accidentally linked the wrong previews to those rejected vectors. If the mandala in the vector is a different mandala from the one in the preview linked to that vector, they'll reject it for "mismatched jpg preview." Make sure to examine the EXACT rejected vector next to the EXACT jpg preview that you uploaded with the same name. I bet (hope) that's it! 🙂
  9. David Blum

    Mass rejections because of color dismatch

    Hi 2shoes: Your preview size is fine. Despite the color profiles used, my guess is that the preview and the vector will be called up side-by-side on the same screen and compared. If you've already done this and can see no dramatic color shifts, I would just resubmit. My guess is that the two might look different when viewed next to each other. I keep my onscreen Photoshop and Illustrator color profiles set to the defaults. Despite color profiles, bright lime greens can sometimes rasterize as olive, bright vivid blues can rasterize as dull blues, etc. Especially if the vector is rgb and the preview is cmyk. The opposite can happen too, with blues, oranges and greens rasterizing with more neon-looking versions of those colors if the vector is built cmyk and the preview is rgb. It can even happen when both are built in the same color space. To add to the fun, browsers and monitors can have their own color display profiles on SS's end independent from your settings in Illustrator and Photoshop. I would open the vector in your vector editing program, and your preview in Photoshop, at the same time on the same screen and compare the two. If all looks good, it could just be an error in the review. As a buyer, I don't even see rejection numbers (or haven't noticed them anyway). Good luck! 🙂
  10. David Blum

    Frustrating vector rejections help!!!

    Hi jai7678: Don't know if "hand drawn" means pen on paper, or a pen tool on a screen in a vector program (or both.) If the buildings are modern (built after 1900) submit them as editorial. If they were initially drawn on paper and scanned, attach a scan of your drawing as the reference you used for the vectors and attach them in the property release field. If they were drawn entirely in vector, with no paper drawing involved, check the box that indicates no reference was used. If the buildings date from before 1900, and no reference drawing on paper was used, resumit as commercial with the "no reference used" box checked. Good luck! 🙂
  11. David Blum

    Leave open path?

    Hi k_t_graphics: I was referring more to line icons, like the example posted. But for other stroked artwork, it doesn't matter to me. There's a check box in the scaling window that allows line widths to all scale up or down at the same percentage as everything else. I think it's labeled "scale stroke size" or something like that. I always leave that checked and never have to worry about it. 🙂
  12. David Blum

    Leave open path?

    Hi MVC: I think SS's rejection of open paths has evolved - along with rasterization algorithms and imagesetters maybe? In other words, since open filled paths (like an unconnected circle) no longer cause problems with imagesetters during printing or with the rasterization process when converting a vector to a rasterized format like jpeg, I think SS has cut back on rejecting for that. Old-timers may see it as poor construction (guilty), but I don't believe it's a rejectable offense anymore. It may remain in their submission guidelines, though, since it's a good practice to abide by. As a buyer, I like single-path construction like your example. It lets me easily adjust the width of the lines without having to expand or contract closed line paths, which can result in uneven shapes. Just my opinion. Good luck. 🙂
  13. David Blum

    what a joke this is...

    What's invisible and smells like carrots? Rabbit farts.
  14. The reviewer was probably trying to make sure you didn't use someone else's photo or artwork as a basis of your portraits. But as Linda noted, you can't attach references to editorial submissions. I think this is a review error. You can try just resubmitting and hope the next reviewer correctly approves them (assuming they aren't based on photos or other artwork). Short of that, you'll have to contact SS as Linda says. Good luck and nice job! 🙂
  15. David Blum

    photograph image size

    ^^^ Great explanation Chris! Resolution is like a single packed layer of marbles in a rectangular cookie pan, with each marble representing a pixel, and the pan representing the physical dimensions of the photo. The number of marbles stays the same if the pan is small or huge. If small, the marbles will be packed together (higher resolution - say, 300ppi, or pixels per inch), and Photoshop may even discard the marbles that won't fit. If the pan (the physical dimensions of the photo) is huge, the marbles will be all spread out (lower resolution - the 300ppi photo becomes a 30ppi photo). If you "add resolution" in Photoshop, it doesn't really add resolution. Photoshop will interpolate (guess) what color marble to add to restore a solid, single layer of marbles in the big pan to bring it back up to 300ppi. Interpolating resolution higher is a dicey move. Smooth edges become jaggy, sharp focus becomes soft, etc. As Chris noted, the buyer will adjust the physical dimensions of the photo. (When the physical dimensions go up, the resolution goes down.) As a contributor, I would just worry about the PIXEL count as described above. If you do adjust things in Photoshop, make sure the resolution and the physical dimensions fields are linked (with the little chain link icon) so you don't accidentally "interpolate" resolution higher or lower. Having been a magazine art director for many moons, discussing resolution with editors was rough. 😆 It's complicated! And "size" can be defined in different ways. I had a favorite cartoon stuck to my computer. An editor tells an art director, "Here's our next cover shot. I got it off the web." The AD says, "It won't work. It's only 10K." The editor screams, "Doesn't anyone here know how to use Photoshop!?" Ha. Good luck, Donna! 🙂
×