pancakes

MicrostockGroup Sponsors


Author Topic: New dimension for EPS files (4 megapixels)  (Read 15117 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

H2O

« Reply #150 on: June 05, 2019, 03:50 »
+3
I am beginning to believe that this maybe a deliberate policy to restrict the number of EPS uploads to Shutterstock, maybe they are not interested in anything but photography.

It is a change that really is so out of the ball park and utterly nonsensical, that maybe the owner and his team have taken what they think is a strategic decision to do away with Vector Illustrations and this is just the first phase in stopping illustrators from uploading.

If you look on the Shutterstock Forum there is no one answering any of the questions.

Maybe they want to reduce the numer of vector uploads, true; but not to eradicate it, no reason to lose part of the cake.

Today the total numer of images uploaded to SS per week is: 1,366,429; i remember to see this numer above 2.000.000 before the 4MP rule...

I have looked through the vector uploads and most of them are low standard icons or just complete rubbish illustrations, it looks like the serious illustrators are staying away.

What Shutterstock are going to end up with is massive file downloads of poor quality vectors, if your download take a couple of hours they will lose most of the emerging World Market, these Countries do not have the resources to download these 100MB files and lets face it even in the rest of the World how many Agencies and Designers are going to want to wait 5 or 15minutes to download a vast file.

The technical people and the senior managers who came up with this idea, really are a bit thick and this could pan out across the whole site, who knows what new and exciting announcements they are about to make.

It may well be that they have someone who is in a position of authority who is intent on running the company into the ground, (Some people can be like this) as this latest vector 'innovation' will take a time to have a influence on their sales and by then this person could well have moved on or into another department, leaving everyone else to pick up the pieces.

This could well be the beginning of the end for Shutterstock.


H2O

« Reply #151 on: June 06, 2019, 11:54 »
+5
On the Shutterstock Forum it looks like Shutterstock are either in denial or ignoring their contributors.

« Reply #152 on: June 07, 2019, 01:52 »
0

« Reply #153 on: June 12, 2019, 17:40 »
+8
I can't be alone in this. I got an email yesterday from Shutterstock that basically said, "Hey, you haven't contributed for awhile, why don't you upload some stuff? Please?"

So if you have, like me, decided to stop uploading your vectors until they reverse the ridiculous decision to make them gigantic files, it seems to be working.


« Reply #154 on: June 12, 2019, 22:59 »
0
I also received such a letter.
 
  What's new?
Working on anything exciting? We'd love to see your latest content! Upload your recent work so that our customers around the globe can see it and you can start earning from it.
 
Upload my content


In other words, we do not understand what is happening, we are still the number one in the world, we even have rooms for yoga and computer shooting in our skyscraper. And medical treatment in America is very expensive, especially the treatment of the mind. Therefore, we are not treated, and sent you this letter.
 
 
 

« Reply #155 on: June 14, 2019, 07:11 »
+6
I also got this letter with the "Let's see what you're working on". I wanted to answer with "working in the garden" but I am not sure they are interested in my veggies  ;D

I wish they'd change it back.

Noedelhap

  • www.colincramm.com

« Reply #156 on: June 14, 2019, 07:37 »
+4
I also got this letter with the "Let's see what you're working on". I wanted to answer with "working in the garden" but I am not sure they are interested in my veggies  ;D

I wish they'd change it back.

They would be interested in your veggies if you show them a cabbage with a 1 meter diameter and at least 50 leaves.

k_t_g

  • Happy Thanks Giving!
« Reply #157 on: June 14, 2019, 16:34 »
0
I am beginning to believe that this maybe a deliberate policy to restrict the number of EPS uploads to Shutterstock, maybe they are not interested in anything but photography.

It is a change that really is so out of the ball park and utterly nonsensical, that maybe the owner and his team have taken what they think is a strategic decision to do away with Vector Illustrations and this is just the first phase in stopping illustrators from uploading.

If you look on the Shutterstock Forum there is no one answering any of the questions.

Maybe they want to reduce the numer of vector uploads, true; but not to eradicate it, no reason to lose part of the cake.

Today the total numer of images uploaded to SS per week is: 1,366,429; i remember to see this numer above 2.000.000 before the 4MP rule...
Kind of a dumb reason considering there are more photos being uploaded. Why not limit those?
At least you can rearrange vectors and other uses.  ???

« Reply #158 on: June 14, 2019, 19:02 »
+1
I can't be alone in this. I got an email yesterday from Shutterstock that basically said, "Hey, you haven't contributed for awhile, why don't you upload some stuff? Please?"

So if you have, like me, decided to stop uploading your vectors until they reverse the ridiculous decision to make them gigantic files, it seems to be working.

Haha, really? I haven't uploaded for a while since the 4MP thing, but I did not receive this email yet.

« Reply #159 on: June 15, 2019, 10:36 »
0
Instead of changing to the 4Megapixel setup, I would have prefer that shutterstock accept more recent illustrator saved version

k_t_g

  • Happy Thanks Giving!
« Reply #160 on: June 23, 2019, 23:53 »
0
I was doing a bit of snooping and such and I found this bit of info.

Has this worked for anyone?
It won't work for me because ironically this is only for Illustrator programs that are more recent.  ::)

Found here;https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/en_US/kbat02/000006575] [url]https://www.shutterstock.com/contributorsupport/articles/en_US/kbat02/000006575[/url]

Regarding Pixels/Points/Picas/Inches:
Below is a translation of what 4 MP means in each measurement. Keep in mind, these values differ based on your computer's DPI/PPI settings, but at 72 DPI/PPI (which is the current standard), those values would be:

4 million pixels = 4 million points = 27,562 picas = 771.62 square inches

EPS files must be a minimum of 4 MP, but no greater than 25MP. With EPS files, this requirement applies to the size of the bounding box around your artwork, not your artboard. In the example below the artboard is the white square behind the yellow stars. The bounding box is the automatically generated blue outlined box around the actual artwork.

So, even if your artboard is 4 MP or above, but the bounding box around your artwork is under 4 MP, you will receive an error.
In order to fix this issue, please increase the dimensions of your artwork to be 4 MP or higher.

In Adobe Illustrator:
1. Select your entire artwork.
2. In the Transform panel, expand your artwork to be at least 4 MP. In CC 2018 and newer, this panel is nested under the Properties tab.
3. Adjust your artboard accordingly, so that your artwork doesn't exceed it.

k_t_g

  • Happy Thanks Giving!
« Reply #161 on: June 24, 2019, 16:22 »
0
Oh never mind. Apparently it was not my program that was throwing me off it was the not so good instructions.

I got it to work.

So in case anyone is interested, here's what I did.

I'm using Illustrator 10.
I open one of my Illustrator projects.
Saved an experimental version of that project as an EPS.

Then I selected everything on my artboard. In other words all objects.
Then I opened the Transform pallet. Its located in my windows menu but the newer Illustrator programs have it at the top of your work space.

Then go into the Transform options menu which is the little arrow on the side of the box and choose/check Transform both.

Then in the Width x Height part increase your size.
I had this in the pixel measurement.

Then go to your Artboard located in document set up and adjust the size to be a bit bigger because you still need a bit of space otherwise you'll still have issues with parts out of the artboard.  Again I did this in pixel measurement.

Upload as usual.

Should work now.

« Reply #162 on: July 09, 2019, 16:41 »
+1
So you're telling us that in order to get our vectors approved they have to be somewhere around 770 square inches? what? I refuse to do this. That's insane. I'll restate the obvious again: if they want to make large jpegs from our vector files THAT'S WHAT VECOR FILES DO. They are infinitely exportable to whatever size you want. If they are unable to figure out how to do what other sites have done for years then Shutterstock is truly going downhill.



Oh never mind. Apparently it was not my program that was throwing me off it was the not so good instructions.

I got it to work.

So in case anyone is interested, here's what I did.

I'm using Illustrator 10.
I open one of my Illustrator projects.
Saved an experimental version of that project as an EPS.

Then I selected everything on my artboard. In other words all objects.
Then I opened the Transform pallet. Its located in my windows menu but the newer Illustrator programs have it at the top of your work space.

Then go into the Transform options menu which is the little arrow on the side of the box and choose/check Transform both.

Then in the Width x Height part increase your size.
I had this in the pixel measurement.

Then go to your Artboard located in document set up and adjust the size to be a bit bigger because you still need a bit of space otherwise you'll still have issues with parts out of the artboard.  Again I did this in pixel measurement.

Upload as usual.

Should work now.

« Reply #163 on: July 10, 2019, 10:09 »
0
Basically 4 megapixels = 2000px x 2000px, or 4000px x 1000px.

In any case, I worked for a time testing and paying a Illustrator script programmer to devellop a custom script to open the EPS files, change it to the desired megapixels (and added options like UNLOCK ALL LAYERS, CONVERT ALL PATHS TO OUTLINE, REMOVE ALL RASTER OBJECTS, ADD A WHITE BORDER AROUND THE IMAGE).

The script will then open the source EPS folder, and save as EPS 10 in the destination folder and do all the resizing and other ticked open.

---------------------------------------------

I have also worked for years with another script I paid to devellop to open the EPS file in photoshop at the desired size and add a white border (or not) and save as JPG.

Both script completely automates the process. I never really talked about it since it's a good secret of the trade, but since the 4mp I had issues on my side and won't mind giving people a hand.

If I would offer those 2 scripts for a reasonably low price (ex: 9-10$) would anyone be interested? If so I will check to find a site that sells software and share a link here. To share it I would like at least to get my investment back in what I paid to devellop those 2 scripts and do all the add-ons and customization.

Thanks!

« Reply #164 on: July 10, 2019, 15:27 »
0
So, here's the thing: before throwing in the towel I actually tried this. I did the following with some of my files as a test:

-opened them in Illustrator and selected the entire drawing
-went to the Transform palette and made the shortest side 2000px (which would made the longer side more than 2000px)
-expanded the page size so the art didn't overlap it
-saved it as an eps

Shutterstock STILL rejected them.

Then I thought maybe making the one side just 2000px was cutting it too close and made them 2200px.

STILL rejected.

I just give up.


H2O

« Reply #165 on: July 11, 2019, 09:41 »
+1
Shutterstock are doing this because they are attempting to standardise their Jpeg's, the whole reason for doing this is completely dubious as all they needed to do was to get the Contributors to upload a Jpeg to a required minimum size.

The problem that they now have is, they have someone who I guess must be fairly high up in the Company who is a total idiot and has no idea of how Vectors work.

This person having pushed through all the back end coding to make this work; spending a fortune on a 'Site upgrade' had no alternative but to throw the switch and take it live, even after on their own Forum they have had thousands of people complaining about it.

Its really that simple.

Of course the upshot of all this for buyers is a serious problem of low quietly vectors that are massive in size, taking hours to download in most of the World.

The second problem is they have someone in the Company who is a idiot.

All the other Micro sites have to be laughing at this and hoping that they don't get a job application from the  culprit.

« Reply #166 on: August 26, 2019, 06:48 »
0
This issue is still going on and I'm wondering if anyone has found a way around?

I just tried to submit a vector with dimensions of 12" x18" where the artwork goes to the edge of the artboard and it was rejected for being less than 4mp. I contacted support and got the canned response of check the reason for refection article. I pointed out:

Quote
When you rasterize my vector at 72ppi the result is an image just over 1 megapixel because 12" @ 72ppi x 18" @ 72ppi is only 864px x 1296px but when you rasterize at 300ppi (proper high resolution) it gives an image that's 19 megapixels or 3600px x 5400px. Vector files have no pixels, pixels are introduced when you rasterize, so they can be scaled to any size sharply meaning you are rasterizing incorrectly. Please fix this. I know I'm not the only one affected.

Have not gotten a response and don't expect a useful one but I believe that's the problem. They are rasterizing at the lowest resolution.

EDIT: I got another canned response with instructions on how to upload taken directly from the site. Shutterstock has outsourced their contributor support to India so the email came from Pulkit and he/she has no idea what I'm talking about. I haven't given up. If I keep responding with facts it may get kicked up to an actual Shutterstock official. The entire site is a joke.
« Last Edit: August 26, 2019, 10:57 by memakephoto »


« Reply #167 on: August 26, 2019, 13:01 »
+1
This issue is still going on and I'm wondering if anyone has found a way around?

I just tried to submit a vector with dimensions of 12" x18" where the artwork goes to the edge of the artboard and it was rejected for being less than 4mp. I contacted support and got the canned response of check the reason for refection article. I pointed out:

Quote
When you rasterize my vector at 72ppi the result is an image just over 1 megapixel because 12" @ 72ppi x 18" @ 72ppi is only 864px x 1296px but when you rasterize at 300ppi (proper high resolution) it gives an image that's 19 megapixels or 3600px x 5400px. Vector files have no pixels, pixels are introduced when you rasterize, so they can be scaled to any size sharply meaning you are rasterizing incorrectly. Please fix this. I know I'm not the only one affected.

Have not gotten a response and don't expect a useful one but I believe that's the problem. They are rasterizing at the lowest resolution.

EDIT: I got another canned response with instructions on how to upload taken directly from the site. Shutterstock has outsourced their contributor support to India so the email came from Pulkit and he/she has no idea what I'm talking about. I haven't given up. If I keep responding with facts it may get kicked up to an actual Shutterstock official. The entire site is a joke.

12x18" is just around 864x1296 or 1119744 pixels or around 1.1 MP. How do I know? Draw a 12x18" rectangle and then change units from inches to pixels.

What are you using? If it's Illustrator, just change the unit to pixel then do the math.

My artboard is 2464 x 1632 px (with artwork fills up the area), never have a problem.

« Reply #168 on: August 26, 2019, 13:15 »
0
This issue is still going on and I'm wondering if anyone has found a way around?

I just tried to submit a vector with dimensions of 12" x18" where the artwork goes to the edge of the artboard and it was rejected for being less than 4mp. I contacted support and got the canned response of check the reason for refection article. I pointed out:

Quote
When you rasterize my vector at 72ppi the result is an image just over 1 megapixel because 12" @ 72ppi x 18" @ 72ppi is only 864px x 1296px but when you rasterize at 300ppi (proper high resolution) it gives an image that's 19 megapixels or 3600px x 5400px. Vector files have no pixels, pixels are introduced when you rasterize, so they can be scaled to any size sharply meaning you are rasterizing incorrectly. Please fix this. I know I'm not the only one affected.

Have not gotten a response and don't expect a useful one but I believe that's the problem. They are rasterizing at the lowest resolution.

EDIT: I got another canned response with instructions on how to upload taken directly from the site. Shutterstock has outsourced their contributor support to India so the email came from Pulkit and he/she has no idea what I'm talking about. I haven't given up. If I keep responding with facts it may get kicked up to an actual Shutterstock official. The entire site is a joke.

12x18" is just around 864x1296 or 1119744 pixels or around 1.1 MP. How do I know? Draw a 12x18" rectangle and then change units from inches to pixels.

What are you using? If it's Illustrator, just change the unit to pixel then do the math.

My artboard is 2464 x 1632 px (with artwork fills up the area), never have a problem.

Yes...I know. If you bothered to read my post you would see I already did the math. Here let me make it easier for you:

Quote
When you rasterize my vector at 72ppi the result is an image just over 1 megapixel because 12" @ 72ppi x 18" @ 72ppi is only 864px x 1296px but when you rasterize at 300ppi (proper high resolution) it gives an image that's 19 megapixels or 3600px x 5400px. Vector files have no pixels, pixels are introduced when you rasterize, so they can be scaled to any size sharply meaning you are rasterizing incorrectly. Please fix this. I know I'm not the only one affected.

There, I pasted it again so you don't have to look for it. If they do the rasterizing, that would mean converting to bitmap from vector, at 72dpi, and let me make that clear, that's low resolution suitable for screen display, then my image would be 1.1MP meaning 1119744 pixels. BUT...try and keep up now, they don't have to rasterize at low res they SHOULD rasterize at 300dpi/ppi which would make the image 19MP. See the difference?

I shouldn't have to screw with pixels on a vector image at all. Vector is resolution independent and a 12x18" VECTOR file is perfectly fine for use. If I make it larger it becomes less useful and cumbersome. If it's not too much trouble, try reading the other posts in this thread, they're all pretty much complaining about having to upload huge images to pass this stupid 4MP requirement which is only a problem because they are converting WRONG.

« Reply #169 on: August 26, 2019, 17:22 »
+4
Flywing gave you the correct answer. I can certainly understand that changes to your workflow are inconvenient, but that's no reason to take your frustration out on someone who has no control of Shutterstock policy and tried to be helpful. 

What you are describing isn't a bug, it's just the way the upload system currently works even if you think it's wrong. There's nothing you can do to get around it except make your artboards bigger as described in both the support article and Flywing's answer above.


 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
46 Replies
11963 Views
Last post February 12, 2008, 09:02
by kosmikkreeper
1 Replies
3098 Views
Last post August 19, 2010, 06:59
by dirkr
3 Replies
2684 Views
Last post December 19, 2012, 02:03
by Poncke
2 Replies
1605 Views
Last post November 14, 2014, 15:59
by stefanocarocci
13 Replies
3993 Views
Last post April 24, 2017, 16:15
by pancaketom

Sponsors

Microstock Poll Results