Lazur mentioned the site a few days ago, and today i read about it on some other forum, because a guy was looking for ways to find a good designer.

I had a quick look at the site. Basically designers compete to sell their designs, they made on the basis of a request by a customer of the service.

Anybody has an opinion on this site or maybe experience ?
Its seems slightly exploit-y to me...

It's good place to gain experience and get an idea of the market.
Yet there are way too many artists from Indonesia (while the site itself started out from Australia (?))
- possible reason: 1112 vs. 30791 -


Haven't been there myself that much lately.

Lazur URH wrote:Haven't been there myself that much lately.

You mean looking or offering your service ?

Lazur URH wrote:the market

This is pretty much the reason why i stopped making clothes. Its a nightmare and the cost for materials is a lot higher, in comparison to digital design.

Joined there as a designer months before registering here.
(Portfolio is full of old stuff; had improved a tad bit with a some things.)

Lazur URH wrote:(Portfolio is full of old stuff; had improved a tad bit with a some things.)

Are these designs you actually sold or offered or is it just your portfolio to promote your skills ?

Most of them didn't got paid.

(Won only 6,finalist of 19, entered 247.
44 got refunded.
Signed about 300 nda-s. Not sure how many of the contests I entered were private -those works cannot be added to the portfolio-)

Hm, i guess its pretty hard to stand out. So much what we're discussing here is really technical stuff, that is of no concern for clients who just want a job to get done.

I had another look at the site.

Especially at the clothing section, and what shocked me a bit was the fact, that most of the designs were purely visual, with no consideration of the feasability or cost.
Also the designers who won, always had the best programs at hand. So designers who came up with flat, traditional hand drawn sketches never seemed to win, but the flashy 3D stuff, from dedicated programs were in favor.
I guess its natural, but also a bit unfair.

Customers lack of imagination is a big problem in clothes design. People want to touch and try several choices if possible.

What i also noticed is that design description is very sparse.

Next: a lot of the stuff that i saw is the most obvious, trendy design (as in: seen a million times) that i can imagine.
I guess thats the real meaning of design, making it look pretty so it appeals to the customer, and make it in a way so the average person understands it and finds it "cool".
So design is really psychology ?
There was one job where somebody wanted a cool, edgy leggings-design. And what won was a ugly pixel-camo-design...


Im also wondering how designers handle fonts. Do you have to own a licence for the font you use in your proposed design ?

Espermaschine wrote:So design is really psychology ?

Yes.

That site is about what sells in 99%.
There are alot of cases where you could hardly fulfill the technical needs -then it serves as visual concept for the contest holder.

Fonts should be converted to paths in final delivered files /if won/ and the font's license "should be" bought if the font is necessary by the contest holder, as far as I know.

Had made only modified lettering from otf fonts or similar myself, don't think it is ethical/good with the copyrights to use a "flattened" lettering in a logotype for example.
Not sure, probably I'm wrong here because of most people using "fancy fonts" of "free for personal use only".

Lazur URH wrote:Had made only modified lettering from otf fonts or similar myself, don't think it is ethical/good with the copyrights to use a "flattened" lettering in a logotype for example.
Not sure, probably I'm wrong here because of most people using "fancy fonts" of "free for personal use only".

Not sure what you mean with flattened....
Converted to paths ?

There surely are a few useful 100% free fonts and with google fonts, there is even more, but i guess it all gets pretty samey.

Yes, converted to path.

Hm, it means again that the designers who have licences to essential fonts (e.g. Helvetica) have an advantage