| Author |
Message |
ktgraphics
Joined: 16 Jan 2008
Posts: 420
Location: Ont, Canada
|
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 2:49 pm
|  |
I would like to see more clear terminology.
Sometimes some of the rejections can be confusing, like this one for instance. "Illustrations must be under 25mp" to me that sounds like the reviewers would like a pic to be under 25mp which would look poor.
But what they really mean is they need you to reduce the percentage you already have.
Couldn't it just say "please reduce your mp count by 25 percent" instead? To me that's more clear to understand then the conventional.
Thanks for reading. |
|
endaerkened
Joined: 07 Mar 2009
Posts: 36
|
|
Posted: Fri May 08, 2009 6:20 pm
| |
| ktgraphics wrote: | I would like to see more clear terminology.
Sometimes some of the rejections can be confusing, like this one for instance. "Illustrations must be under 25mp" to me that sounds like the reviewers would like a pic to be under 25mp which would look poor.
But what they really mean is they need you to reduce the percentage you already have.
Couldn't it just say "please reduce your mp count by 25 percent" instead? To me that's more clear to understand then the conventional.
Thanks for reading. |
Hi,
I believe you misinterpret that; the meaning of "Illustrations must be under 25mp" is: accepted maximum size of illustration is 5.000 pixel X 5.000 pixel (a bit bigger than an A3 at 300dpi), so no percentage is involved, when they ask us to reduce the illustrations' size. You must downscale your illustration to have a dimension that looks like something of: 5000x4999. This only applies to jpegs, not to vectors. We got the same rejection reason when we tried to upload some bigger illustrations, since then we only upload at an A3 format. Don't ask us why they only accept so small illustrations, we couldn't figure it out, since photos are accepted at much larger sizes too, if I know it correctly. If the buyer wants to put it on a billboard of a 4x3 meters, and inflates the illustration, well, they will look quite ugly...
Best regards |
|
pharm
Joined: 09 Jul 2006
Posts: 6137
Location: Contemplating
|
|
Posted: Sat May 16, 2009 9:59 pm
| |
Good explanation above.
It's really not confusing at all. When they say "Illustrations must be under 25 MP", it means exactly that. |
|
ikinoto
Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 3
|
|
dkgilbey
Joined: 08 Jan 2005
Posts: 724
Location: Hampshire - UK
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 11:06 am
| |
The photo you refer to has been extrapolated by shutterstock (using some fractal software or other as they do with all images) the original file size would have been 5417x1849 - Large - so approx 20MP
Hope that helps... :-) |
|
ikinoto
Joined: 21 Aug 2009
Posts: 3
|
|
Posted: Tue Sep 22, 2009 3:48 pm
| |
Thank you! I had no idea about their extrapolation. |
|
jmci
Joined: 29 Oct 2006
Posts: 1380
Location: Northern Ireland
|
|
Posted: Thu Oct 08, 2009 5:55 am
| |
| endaerkened wrote: | | ktgraphics wrote: | I would like to see more clear terminology.
Sometimes some of the rejections can be confusing, like this one for instance. "Illustrations must be under 25mp" to me that sounds like the reviewers would like a pic to be under 25mp which would look poor.
But what they really mean is they need you to reduce the percentage you already have.
Couldn't it just say "please reduce your mp count by 25 percent" instead? To me that's more clear to understand then the conventional.
Thanks for reading. |
Hi,
I believe you misinterpret that; the meaning of "Illustrations must be under 25mp" is: accepted maximum size of illustration is 5.000 pixel X 5.000 pixel (a bit bigger than an A3 at 300dpi), so no percentage is involved, when they ask us to reduce the illustrations' size. You must downscale your illustration to have a dimension that looks like something of: 5000x4999. This only applies to jpegs, not to vectors. We got the same rejection reason when we tried to upload some bigger illustrations, since then we only upload at an A3 format. Don't ask us why they only accept so small illustrations, we couldn't figure it out, since photos are accepted at much larger sizes too, if I know it correctly. If the buyer wants to put it on a billboard of a 4x3 meters, and inflates the illustration, well, they will look quite ugly...
Best regards |
I don't think you've got it quite right - the 25mp rule only applies to vector illustrations, not jpgs. It makes sense to me - since a vector can be resized to anything the buyer wants, there's not much point in uploading a massive file.
There's no upper limit for jpgs, whether photos or illustrations. The only stipulation is that they must be 4mp or higher (unless you were already here when the lower limit was raised to that). |
|
| |
|
Log in
