Allow Vector Alphabets

There is a thread in the critique forum regarding a vector rejection for this content:


based on the template rejection:


which arises from the rule in the Illustrator's manual stating not to:


and a forum posting that states:


Questioning the rationale behind this rule, I'd like to imagine that it was put into place to 1. protect the copyright of font designers from someone trying to upload a full set of Helvetica or something and 2. stop contributors from making a Comic Sans "Merry Christmas" over a red gradient and uploading that, like some of the craptacular stuff we see on certain subscription sites.

Those two goals are perfectly understandable, although I think that now, this rule has morphed into something unreasonable. The smallest bit of text is now deemed inappropriate, even if it is a mere element to the content. We can say "Well, it would be more useful without the text", but that is a poor argument, because the point of a vector is that it is easy to turn on and off parts. We don't say a Stop sign raster would be more useful without "Stop".

Even more frustrating is the notion that illustrated alphabets, as presented above, are not allowed, regardless of the time invested or creativity involved, due to the rule about "text". "Text" is/can be defined as "The original words of something written or printed, as opposed to a paraphrase, translation, revision, or condensation.". If we are going purely from definition, an alphabet does not fall under "text", so it would be easy to allow our illustrated alphabet, and not "Merry Christmas".

Our argument above about "thousands of hand drawn font sets" does not present a clear reason for disallowing the alphabet, as there are thousands of ribbons, buttons, icon sets, etc. already on the site. Not to mention thousands of raster alphabet and letter images.

Also, the notion of "Creating a font" is off base, as these are graphic elements. They are not being presented as a font, downloadable in any font form like Truetype. There is no need to worry about this or that as it relates to a font, just because these illustrative elements happen to be letters and not buttons.

Why allow them? Market share! Designers have indicated a real need for these types of elements, to emphasize paragraphs, for book design, and most importantly, for scrapbooking, digital or otherwise. Scrapbooking is a huge market with enthusiastic buyers, yet here we are denying them what could arguably be the most important element on a page aside from the images.

I think this policy should be revisited, and for those worried about the "floodgates" opening to the "text on background", it is easy enough to define the limits as "letters A-Z" and "numbers 0-9".

(Edited on 2009-08-20 07:47:17 by sjlocke)

I certainly support this proposal.

Also: there are more than a few vectors right now which use significant amounts of text in languages which do not use the Roman alphabet. I know it's fashionable to think of Hanzi or Kanji as pretty, artsy scribbles, but that doesn't make them so.


I feel that whatever the decided position of iStock on this text stuff, it should be universally applied to all languages and reflect the global community that we truly are.

"I certainly support this proposal"





Me too.

If the policy is not changed, I think those old files, the ones that are 50-100% text, should be taken down. Just as some files were removed when the intellectual property standards evolved, these text-heavy files should go. It's confusing to newer contributors, and gives the advantage to the artists who uploaded the older files. If it's not acceptable now, it shouldn't be grandfathered in. If a file containing a logo slipped through by accident, it would not be allowed to remain in the collection, so why not remove these older files that no longer meet the standards?

But I do agree with sjlocke, and I'd sure like to see a consistent policy applied. Nobody seems to be able to articulate the where the line is, and whenever the topic comes up in the forums (which is about once a week), it's usually met with a vague answer and/or the standard "inspectors are human and make mistakes." The fact remains that there are new files in the collection that are nearly 100% text/letterforms. If there's a policy against text, and a file is accepted that is 100% text, that's not just a gray area. And if it is a "mistake," then deactivate it.

That said, however, if you look at some of these text-heavy files, they sell quite well. Some contributors have two versions of a file, one with text and one without, and more often than not, the file with text has more downloads.

Just my XX¢

My other business is in scrapbooking and I assure you digital scrapbookers would buy resizable graphic alphabet files like crazy. They like to make themed alphabet books with a large monogram on each page and have a hard time finding anything suitable that isn't just an ordinary letter typed in a font. (They work in 300 dpi on 12x12 pages.) They also put large titles on each of their pages, and most want new themes for every page they make.

I agree with sjlocke as well. I do think that obviously stringent criteria must be met, ie. the rule about A-Z, 0-9, and they have to be illustrated and not just based on some text, not just plain letters even. I am not even talking about designing a font like what we would find on say, Veer.com for example. I am talking about illustrated swash capitals like the image posted above, that have obviously been hand drawn and meticulously crafted, and do not look anything like a font, but are illustrated letters that could be used in a children's book, on a paragraph of copy, or in a scrapbook.


Just my two cents!

what programs do they use for layout? I work with a lot of people who use only Microsoft (Publisher and Word). So I thought it would be helpful to include a .wmf file with all of my vector artwork - it's vector/editable within Pub & Word. Of course, not as easy as AI to manipulate, but at least you can break the file apart and make independent pieces without background.


and, I imagine you aready know, I fully support the suggestion.

//
Most of them use either Photoshop Elements or Paint Shop Pro, not layout programs. Some of them have Photoshop. Very, very few use Illustrator/Freehand/Corel or InDesign/Quark. The most useful extra file for these folks would probably be a .png on a transparent background, because, for obscure reasons, its a file format they trust to be appropriate for their needs.

good to know, thanks! I'm not familiar w/ either PS Elements or PSP. Do they open an .eps file like Photoshop? In other words, if there is no background in the .eps file, does it open up w/out bg?

I don't have a copy of PSP (my business caters to the Adobe crowd, making actions for them to use). PSE opens them just like Photoshop does (with the same pick a size dialog.)



To stay on topic, if alphabets were allowed here in the future, putting each letter seperately in the zip file would be useful to any kind of user (though tedious for the artist).

I totally support the acceptance of 'hand drawn" alphabets or letters with design elements. I have several that I would LOVE to be able to submit as I too think they would sell.

Why not let the customer decide if they want to buy alphabets. I see them as "illustrative elements" as well. There are not fonts if they don't come in a font format.

(Edited on 2009-08-21 12:50:06 by GeofferyHolman)

Elloquent opening sjlocke, bravo.


Here's some of what I wrote in the other thread before you started this one:


Maybe the rules could be changed to allow uploading only the full alphabet sequentially A - Z, and or numbers 1-10, hand drawn vectorised not bezier font perfection, they would have to be obviously much more than just font letters and numbers. I'm thinking on the lines of the illuminated capitals drawn by medieval scribes beginning each page or paragraph of their writing. This way each letter becomes its own design element in its own right. More than a mere letter.

Seeing as my phrases were so eloquently used in the OP's statement. I'd like to state for the record that I stand by my original statement in the other thread. defining limits is never so cut & dry with the inspection process as it stands. Just delete all existing text based vectors on the site and move on IMO....

The Illustrator's training manual say "Do Not Attempt to sell fonts or dingbats as stock if you are not the copyright holder" which to me implies that if you are indeed the copyright holder that it would be OK. If it's not, iStock should remove that statement entirely.


Also in the training manual, the example of the proper use of text has the "Dog" on the dog house with "Half Time" partially hidden. Both uses of text are essential to the concept of the drawing. And yet, just this month, there were critique forum posts here and here about vector images rejected for use of text that was of the same degree of importance to the concept of the image and not any more of a primary element to the drawing as the one in the training manual.


Whether iStock loosens the rules regarding the use of text or not, at the very least they need to clarify the guidelines and have all of the inspectors working from the same set of rules.

I agree with this post. When I was new to iStock I needed an ornamental letter and could not find any. I had to go elsewhere but in the end made my own from scratch.

Here here! I am in full support of this proposal.

Me too.

Of course these should be accepted as there is clear shortage of this kind of content.

If icon sets sell so well, why not sell illustrated letter sets too? If the quality of every single object in the set, is such that it could be approved as a stand-alone illustration to the collection, then the hole set should be approved.

I have thought that no fonts/dingbats rule has been more about copyright issues than a general rule against letters.