Vector files seem to generate DARK jpegs

[DrStrik9]

I hope this post isn't redundant. I did a search, but found nothing, so here goes ...

I've only submitted two files so far; the first one was approved for sale. The Jpeg automatically generated (with the Adobe Stock logo in front) is around 40% DARKER than accurate gamma values, making the darker values in the image all squished toward black, losing finer details.

Is this a known issue? The "vector expert" is out of town for awhile, so I'm waiting to get some intelligence on this.

My questions:

1. Is there a way to submit an ACCURATE jpeg with the submission of the vector file?

2. Is there a way to submit an accurate jpeg that REPLACES the horribly dark one in the search, after the original file has been submitted?

3. Out of curiosity, does this also happen with raster images (photos)?

Please see the attached image showing the difference between a normal AI export and the dark one generated by the cataloguing process.

Thanks for any advice on finding a way around this problem.  :+)

[Abambo]

Interesting problem:

to 1: what is the colour profile assigned to your file? Do say the Adobe submission requirements something on this?

to 2: No. My understanding is that the image is generated automatically from the vector image. It would be impossible to assure that the image submited shows a good representation of your vector art. Adobe, may be, could have the possibility to do a manual intervention.

to 3: no not to mine. But I submit my images through Lightroom and Ligthroom makes for me what ever is required to get the image correctly converted.

[DrStrik9]

Color profile is good old sRGB. A very helpful person at Adobe Contrib Support recommended this, and it already was set up this way. But a profile all by itself could not account for this nearly 40% increase in gamma value, unless Adobe is using a wildly different profile in their generation of the jpeg than what they recommend to contributors (which would make little sense, or so it seems by my example).

They also asked if my monitor is calibrated. It is. But an export from AI has nothing to do with the monitor.

So on this first submission, it seems I'm stuck with this dark image, with no way to change it. I will ask the "vector expert" when they return from Berlin about manually replacing the image that so falsely represents the art.

I still need to find out how to get Adobe Stock to bypass their automated jpeg generator, and use one I provide, if this is even possible.

[Abambo]

Well never forget that fotolia created this service, and they may have put less effort in colours. So that was my first guess with sRGB, as it is evident that colour profiles are considered as dark magic by some (including me in my early years) and are nit well understood. As I have generally a good perception of how « things » are, I have no formal education on colour profiles. As an engineer I, however, have a good feeling with the concept. But I know that a lot of people including highly talented and formally trained artists have no clue about colour treatment inside of computers.

I agree with you that the calibration of the workflow has little to none effect to a difference of this magnitude.

What vector expert? This is of personal interest, but if you do not want post publicly, you can always give a PM. If you are under NDA, just ignore this request.

It would greatly estonish me, if you would find a way to create the previews on you iwn, because that would create a bunch of different problems. I would, however like to have one of the vector contributors to jump on this thread. It would be very helpful.

I also hesitate a lot to call poor MatHayward​ in the discussion, but I feel that his expert advice would be of great value here.

[DrStrik9]

Well, this is what I was told by a very on-the-spot helpful person at contributor support. No NDA, and I think it's no secret that they have someone who is termed the "vector expert." That person is in Europe at the moment, but was forwarded my email query on the unacceptable darkness of the automatically generated jpeg, ruining the look of my vector file.

You raise a good point on the Fotolia origin of the jpeg "machine." As seems to be my curse in life, I may be the clanging symbol who motivates change where it is typically needed.  :+)

Time for a rework of the jpeg machine, it seems. -- Unless there's an established workaround already that we just don't know about yet.

[DrStrik9]

On profiles, I typically work in Adobe RGB (1998) (North America Prepress 2) because it has a wider gamut and does better if you go to print (CMYK) than sRGB. sRGB is desired for web work, but I do as little of that as possible.  :+)

[MatHayward · Accepted solution]

Yes, it is possible to provide your own jpg. Add the jpg file (sRGB color profile) and your vector file into a .zip folder and upload the .zip. The system will display the jpg you created. Please note that the jpg preview you create must be at least 15MP.

Additional details can be found here: Requirements for contributing vector art to Adobe Stock

-Mat

[DrStrik9]

Thanks, Mat!  Good news.

So is it possible to do this after having already submitted the vector file not knowing this?  I would very much like to replace the horribly dark jpeg that is currently misrepresenting my art.

Thanks again.

[MatHayward]

You are welcome to replace the file. To do so, delete the file you do not like and resubmit the .zip file. It is important to note, the new file will be reviewed. There are no guarantees the result of the review will be the same as the file may be rejected.

Kind regards,

Mat Hayward

[DrStrik9]

Thanks for your kind response, MatHayward.

Yeah, that's kind of what I thought -- the possibility of the same approved file being rejected after a deletion and second submission. But the super-dark jpeg will probably cause fewer sales since it obscures around 40% of the darker values in the original with something very close to BLACK, so it's worth the risk I guess. Live and learn.  :+)

Best,

Michael