David Blum

Apologies, but I believe my info is correct. Try again with a preview of 3,000 - 4,000 pixels at its widest point. I bet you'll be successful, barring any other technical problems with the files. Good luck! 🙂

Ha. Good point! My guess is SS is concerned mainly with large (commissioned?) pieces of public street art more than random tagging. But like the law, they enforce their rules across the board, even in instances that appear unfair or even kinda silly sometimes. 🙂

If you make your .jpg previews 3,000 - 4,000 pixels at their widest point, SS will automatically offer them for sale as .jpgs alongside the vectors. Maybe save your .jpg previews in that range, and it should work. 🙂

Maybe cars, buildings, company logos, etc. in editorial images can blend in to the scene and be seen more easily as secondary to the whole. Street art may command more attention and appear more of a primary focus, which makes images appear to feature the art as opposed to the environment. Just a theory. SS also likely responds strongly to subjects that cause it more legal headaches, so maybe it has had problems in the past. Also, artists make their $ from artwork and may be more likely to pursue a company (and photographer) they believe to be making $ off their art, as opposed to an automaker or architect whose primary $ comes from customers buying cars or buildings, not photos of them. Just guessing. 🙂

Change “that” to “what” to make it grammatically correct, and don’t forget your reference image for the athlete silhouette. Other than that, nothing wrong with submitting both colors. They won’t accept more than a few color variations though. Good luck! 🙂

If the image was submitted as a vector no trademarked logos (Skype, Facebook, Twitter) can be included - even as editorial. 🙂

I believe it was a reviewer's mistake, not preferential treatment, that allowed those FIFA images past. Not only SS, but the contributor can face litigation from FIFA. The contributor has signed and clicked past several statements claiming ownership of everything submitted. And nice illustration! I think Russia and football/soccer are fine, but my guess is things get touchy with Russia, football and 2018 because it starts to obviously become a reference to FIFA championships. And FIFA likely owns that font and the little icons in the background. Nice job, and good luck! 🙂

The file wouldn't open on SS's end. As the rejection says, check that there's nothing wrong with the file and send it again. Good luck.

You're welcome. I love your port. Your patterns and color choices are spot on, clearly thought out and well-designed for tiling. You totally get it.

Nice illustration! The review was in error, I think, as the reviewer may not have noticed the "Editorial" designation ticked. The larger issue, though, is proving you didn't refer to someone else's photo in drawing this. If drawn completely from memory, resubmit with "no reference used" ticked (good luck ). If drawn from your own photo, resubmit with your photo as reference and a release stating the photo is yours. (Are you credentialled to photograph a congressional hearing - the only time I recall Zuckerberg in a suit?) If drawn from someone else's photo ... we can't do that. Short take: It's very difficult to get illustrations of living famous people accepted, even as editorial, unless the image is highly stylized or from your own reference materials. Good luck!

SS editorial is a great resource for event, politician and celebrity stock, but not breaking news. That's never been its target. In tabloid and magazine editorial for years and used SS extensively, but it's not where colleagues or I would look for very recent event coverage.

Hi dinadankersdesign: Dabbling contributor here, but have purchased hundreds of SS vectors, so maybe this helps? Short take: it doesn't matter. As a buyer, I can't see how the pattern was constructed until after the purchase. If I want to edit a cut pattern, I manually snap a few duped tiles together, group or merge cropped elements and edit away. Patterns cropped with clip paths are slightly easier to edit, but no big deal. The main frustration with patterns that are cut is things not lining up. If done well, it's not an issue, but if even one tiny point extends at an edge farther than the others, auto-tiling will create a visible line between tiles. Clip paths always create clean, sharp cuts ... so there's that. Just one customer's opinion, but it really doesn't matter to me. As far as repeat business from customers pleased with how an artist's files are constructed ... really hate to say this, but I've never known anyone to "follow" an artist's work. Have supervised many ADs (print mags & online designers) and everyone just searches for the topic they need as opposed to checking out favorite artists - unless it's a specific style they're after. Your concern for the customer is excellent, though. Wish all artists were as mindful of this as you.

Unless it's editorial, it's generic. That's stock. Generic model, generic boat, generic setting, generic season. As a buyer, I don't have a problem here. If I want identifiable specifics, I buy editorial or I don't use stock. Just my opinion.

Not sure what country you’re in, but if your keyboard has any non-English characters, things can look fine on your end but appear as garble to SS (and buyers). Just a thought.

The file transfer rejection includes wording to check the file. Every time I've received this reject there was a problem with my file not opening (oops). Maybe the file transfer was fine, but the file itself got corrupted? Or maybe their system glitched and didn't link the preview and file as expected. I think that reject may be used as a general "technical problem" reject that may be either the submitter's or SS's "fault." Either way, the system or reviewer is unable to proceed because of it. Doubt it's anything more than the usual unexplained glitches that are bound to occur with any system receiving hundreds of thousands of incoming images 24/7 from across the planet. 🙂