Hi all,

As I mentioned in another post, I applied to upload vectors for iStock last week and got rejected. In case you are curious, these are the three things I gave them:

http://www.voomstock.com/details.php...sgid=&pid=1023
http://www.voomstock.com/details.php...sgid=&pid=1049 Note I also included two others in the file from different angles.
http://www.voomstock.com/details.php...sgid=&pid=1048

My rejection was a little vague, in that it didn't refer to the specific images aside from saying that at least one of them had unclosed paths (I think it must be the sign image, but I can't find any). The rest of the message just said I could resubmit with images more complex and/or interesting (trying not to take that too personally!)

So as I also mentioned before, not masterpieces. I've decided to put a lot more effort into this and reapply (unlike the photog, I don't have to wait 3 months for illustration resubmission). I am working on three images with which to resubmit, and would love some feedback on them so I don't humiliate myself.

Anyway, I just finished my first. It's based on a sketch I did over Christmas - each year we draw an image with markers and then pull them out the following year and have a laugh.

Here it is:


Detail:


Things I am proud of about this image:
- All the "transparency" in the globe is hand drawn - .eps files don't support transparent elements. So the various segments of the globe are all done by hand. I was pretty happy with the transparency illusion with the face behind the glass.
- The detail is, I think, pretty good - the wreath and tree and house etc. I definitely tried to pay attention to all the details, although I admit I got lazy with the lampposts and the rightmost window. Might revisit those before I submit.

Things I wonder about:
- The colors - what do you think?
- The overall composition - too much? Should the window be there in the background? Too little?
- Would you consider this either "interesting" or "complex" (both? neither?)?
- Is it hideous? I'm so tunnel visioned right now I can't tell.

Feedback appreciated!

__________________
istockphoto . BigStock . voomstock . FeaturePics
. blog

Kate I had a look at the ones you got on voomstock, the first two are really good and they dont look simple to me at all. As for the third one it does look a little plain and although Ive seen that sort of image sell well,maybe its not what IS are looking for. As for the one you posted here, I think it is really fantastic, I love the detail in the globe, it must have taken ages! You know I was looking at xmas cards the other day and it amazed me how simple some of the designs are but people buy them. I think this one will do really great for you.

__________________
www.ayeshawilsonphotoart.co.uk

Thank you! I often get to a point where I draw something and think it's good, and then a few weeks later take a look and wonder what the heck I was thinking... so I appreciate you taking a look and letting me know what you think!
This image incidentally took me almost two days of work - probably about 12 hours of concentrated work time. That might be because I am still learning how to work with Illustrator. Hopefully I will get faster with practice...
I think I might use this as our Christmas card next year, it's a nice tie in to our tradition of drawing something new each year.

__________________
istockphoto . BigStock . voomstock . FeaturePics
. blog

Hi Kate

One thing you need to work on is artistic focus. Technical sophistication doesn't matter. How much work you put into an image doesn't matter. What matters is the overall picture in the eyes of the viewer. As proud as you may be of it, a casual viewer won't care what it took to make that globe transparent. All they care about is what the overall picture says to them...how it makes them feel. And that depends a great deal on the artistic focus of the picture.

Great artists often use unsophisticated techniques deliberately to focus the eye on more important aspects of a picture, like blurring the background of a photo to make the subject look sharper. Technical simplicity itself becomes one of the most important aspects of the image's artistic complexity. Here is an excellent example of this concept. Note that there are a few strokes he is very careful with but the ones he just splashes on are just as important. It is critical to know where and how to focus your artistry because that strongly influences the overall image.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xddN-ysrFlk

It isn't the technique that matters, but what you do with it. When you look at almost any detail of this old book illustration by itself it doesn't seem very well drawn, but what matters is the overall picture. All those rough scribbles add up to a striking image. The overall simplicity of technique makes the picture stand out more.



I try to use this concept in every picture I make but I recently did an experiment in making a vector image that deliberately exaggerated the effect. My intent was to make a picture as technically simple as I could, while using artistic focus to create an overall image with impact on the viewer. The result is one of those artistic type images that don't work well as stock but it has been a big hit with reviewers and it illustrates the point.

http://www.verchi.com/photos/bird001s.jpg

Vanda Grigorovic would be a good artist to study. Her earlier pictures were all based on hand sketches but the last time I chatted with her she was working on doing it all on the computer. She is very good, but just about everything she does is very simple.

http://www.shutterstock.com/gallery-60528p1.html

Like me, Vanda doesn't usually upload in vector format. Here are a few more samples on my own vector work.

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1697954.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1928716.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1771836.html
http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1697948.html

hi,

Don't be offended with my opinion... it's just an observation.

Both are good... but... here it comes...

The first one, nice concepts.. but why hiding the cartoon figure behind the sphere.. i actually had to look twice to notice it is a cartoon figure.
Simply said... the snowman.?. man.?. dissapears behind the sphere, he, cartoon is not obvious to the picture... you actually have to look good to see it's a cartoon figure behind the sphere. there is no point of interest in the picture... bit messy actually.... busy.

Second one... also good concept... but a bit messy also, overlapping objects.... bit busy.

Buyers like simple concepts... something they don't have to edit for hours to get what they want. Something that grabs attention immediatlly....
The idea is good.... actually, i don't do vectors.... but i recognise a good one. Try to keep isolated objects, subjects of interest. That should do the trick for you.

Nothing personal... just my opinion.

Patrick.

__________________
My Bigstock
My pbase account
My Shutterstock
My Dreamstime
My Fotolia

Thanks both of you - it doesn't surprise me you picked up on me lacking artistic focus, as I've been lacking all kinds of focus (in my work and in my writing) of late.

By the way I didn't mean to imply that anyone but me cared about the technical hurdles of this picture, it was more just relating back to getting used to illustrator over the past few weeks. You're absolutely right, an image that takes five weeks can be unsellable and an image that takes ten minutes can be a best seller. My time in film and tv has certainly taught me that! Thanks for the reminder.

I will work on bringing more focus to this image. Any specific suggestions on that front are welcome!

__________________
istockphoto . BigStock . voomstock . FeaturePics
. blog

The most important focus point is always the eyes. followed closely by the facial details around the eyes. I spent much more time on the eyes in that bird and cat picture than on all the rest of the image combined. Notice I didn't even give the cat a mouth because it would have distracted from the expression in the eyes. You really need to work on facial features. This is probably your biggest stumbling block.

In items without faces you need to figure out what details to put in and which are better left out. Look at my Christmas vector and compare your trees to mine. Look at other Christmas tree illustrations to get a feel of how best to represent the concept of "tree". Sometimes just a simple highlighted edge can make all the difference.

Another thing you need to work on is building perspective and depth. That also helps with the artistic focus. And it isn't difficult. That is another factor that makes the cat and bird picture work. It has good perspective. This rainbow paint picture was actually the first vector illustration I did for stock. It was more of a warm up exercise using what is called "isometric" perspective. It is very basic and easy to learn. notice the simple white liine highlights on various elements of the picture. This is something Vanda is also very good at.

http://www.shutterstock.com/pic-1842627.html