Author Topic: Istock illustrator test advice needed (Read 6713 times)

Lizard · « **on:** April 15, 2008, 16:43 »

I'm one image short to be approved there but the last 2 vector illustrations I sent them were rejected , so if I fail this time I will probably wait for months.
Apparently they don't want background etc , so I made an underwater illustration and Im not sure I should try and submit it or not.

I would appreciate any thoughts or advices cause I'm into vectors just for few months now.

If someone with more experience with illustrations has a minute and would like to do me a favor and check the vector file more closely I would be great , just PM me.

Thanks

Well Here is the image:

Sean Locke Photography · « **Reply #1 on:** April 15, 2008, 17:01 »

I think the main fish is pretty good, but the rests of it just looks like a bunch of stuff slapped together. There's no coherence. I wouldn't submit this one yet.

rjmiz · « **Reply #2 on:** April 15, 2008, 17:06 »

I wonder about it's potential to be a successful selling image on stock.

The MIZ

madelaide · « **Reply #3 on:** April 15, 2008, 17:36 »

This is much better than anything I have. If you have stuff like this and don't get accepted, I don't have any chance (I was rejected once, never tried again).

I think you could simplify it for the more important components - the big fish and the bait. So I would crop it above the two larger stars and to the left of the bait.

Regards,
Adelaide

bittersweet · « **Reply #4 on:** April 15, 2008, 17:55 »

The worm looks too stiff and like it's just balancing on the hook somehow. The fish and worm should be casting some kind of shadows, the sand looks too flat. The items that have been duplicated and flipped and/or rotated (the starfish, small fish, and spiny thing) look like items that have been duplicated and flipped and/or rotated. Try tweaking each one to make them a bit different from one another.

From what I can tell, the large fish looks pretty good. You're off to a good start, but like Sean said, you need to spend a bit more time on it.

Good luck!

Lizard · « **Reply #5 on:** April 15, 2008, 19:07 »

Thank you for all your comments , they have been more than helpful , and I guess I will be going back to work now , I will post the modified illustration soon I hope.

By the way bittersweet , I meant if someone wants to check the eps more closely file that he can PM me and I send it to him.

I think that is good thing if comments are on the forum , cause maybe in future someone will find them useful , I know i did when other people were were asking advices on various topics.

Thanks again to all of you

bittersweet · « **Reply #6 on:** April 15, 2008, 20:11 »

Quote from: Lizard on April 15, 2008, 19:07

By the way bittersweet , I meant if someone wants to check the eps more closely file that he can PM me and I send it to him.

Oh okay

If I can figure out how, I'll put my comments back then.

Lizard · « **Reply #7 on:** April 15, 2008, 21:53 »

Here is my second try. I gave more attention to the worm and the main fish , made completely new worm , gave some textures to the sand , shadow to the main fish...

Well I think sand looks better but I'm terrified to put 2 gradient textures on a gradient background without blending options and send that to IS reviewers.

Anyway here it is

domencolja · « **Reply #8 on:** April 18, 2008, 13:09 »

Man, I haven't been accepted (yet) and I know how frustrating it is to be kicked in the butt (been there four times, right now I'm waiting around 30 days more to get to the next chance - 3 months of waiting time overall). I too have 2 images accepted.

If I way you, I'd post this image and several others to the iStock forums. And as far as this one is concerned, I think the fish is awesome by itself. Give it a little more "punch" with some glossy effects, keep the water (and add shiny elements to the bubbles as well) and you're certainly in. I will not put my hand in the fire, of course, but it does seem like an image that shows your illustrator potentials.

p.s.: I've been told innumerable times that iStock does NOT look for commercial value on your test submissions. They just want to know if you're able to draw.

Good luck! (and don't loose your mind - I did)

jsnover · « **Reply #9 on:** April 18, 2008, 14:19 »

I think that you have a mixture of visual styles and you need to pick one and stick with it (per illustration). The style of the fish and the style of the worm are very different. The worm has no dimensional lines, outline or shading, but the fish does.

The fish has a shadow on the sand, but not the worm, starfish, treasure chest or urchins. The bubbles are 3d but the fishhook and chest are flat.

Perhaps you don't like skewering the worm, but he doesn't look right wrapped loosely around the fishhook - why wouldn't he just swim off?

Lizard · « **Reply #10 on:** April 18, 2008, 14:45 »

And than again , Im certainly out ha ha .

Rejected again, , thats not what we are looking for reason.

Well those who are trying to pass it know the problem , they reject all backgrounds and more stock oriented stuff for thats not unique enough and we have plenty of that reason , and advise you to try with more cartoonish stuff which requires some drawing , and then you get we dont need this kind of stuff.

If I got a rejection that this is not technically at their requirement level or something else I wouldn't care so much , but again the stupid reason ,we don't need that kind of illustrations at this time knowing that most of stock oriented vectors will be refused for we have enough of those.

I'm thinking of writing a mail to support , first time in 2 years , I never complained at any site about any rejection , but this time I would just like to get a more specific reason then their default one if I already have to wait 90 days till my next attempt.

Susan S. · « **Reply #11 on:** April 18, 2008, 19:20 »

I don't advise trying cartoonish stuff when applying for istock. I always recommend that what seems to get people through is to demonstrate that you can draw - by which I meant show that you can do things like stuff in perspective, shade with a consistent light direction ie a reasonably realistic render of a real object (even if taken from a photo).

Doing good cartoons can get you accepted - but it requires a lot of practice with old fashioned pen and paper and ink to get a good consistent style, otherwise it's all too easy to get varying elements that just look dropped together (as in this case) rather than a cohesive style. Which is why I don't do cartoons, as I don't have a consistent style together. I'm working on it, but it' s not good for publication yet.