I do not consider Meridith's previews "amazing". They are a cluttered mess with no rhyme or reason to placement of the elements - like she just turned a jar of stuff upside down on a page. You cannot see the backgrounds - which for me are more important that the elements. If I were out shopping in a gallery and her main previews were the only image, I would not even take a second look.
Now... Which of those kits would you choose to buy, if you were buying one of them? Based on the previews alone, definitely Jady Day Studio. Her preview is clearer, each element is properly layered and shadowed. Megan Mullens just looks like she threw those few elements on top of the papers and called it a preview. I don't like it at all.
I have a wondering about Miss Tinas cu stuff. If I was to buy one of her cu packages that includes the papers, elements, and the alphas and didn't change the colors that she has them sold in, is that considered ok? I would be adding my own textures and styles and bulking up the kit with my own cu items and adding some wordart/tabs/tags to make a complete kit.
I have seen too many kits out there now that designers are just doing that and reselling. Is that ok? Would you do that?
I have a wondering about Miss Tinas cu stuff. If I was to buy one of her cu packages that includes the papers, elements, and the alphas and didn't change the colors that she has them sold in, is that considered ok? I would be adding my own textures and styles and bulking up the kit with my own cu items and adding some wordart/tabs/tags to make a complete kit.
I have seen too many kits out there now that designers are just doing that and reselling. Is that ok? Would you do that?
^^^^^ Her TOU -->* You are NOT allowed to re-distribute the original products in their original form. This means you must do something to the items you use of mine. Such as apply a style, texture, attach something to them or attach them to something.
That being said - if you're buying her CU and only adding a texture - that's not "designing" that's "texturing".
Meg Mullens' kits looked cheap and rushed. Maybe if she stopped trying to pump out multiple kits every week, my opinion would change. I don't understand the hype at all. A step below her in cheap and rushed looking is Traci Reed.
I agree the kits are similar from Meg and Jady Day, but you all act like Jady Day was the first designer to ever make a blue jeans kit. Give me a break.
I don't see anything wrong with Meredith's previews, either. Like you're too lazy to click the additional image of just the papers to see them? Good Lord. I'd rather see all of the elements spread out and then look at the image of all the papers so I can see as much as possible in the kit.
Just happened upon an old DST thread, sorry it is in the DCR for those of you can't access, but was reading through it and I think I have worked out who has the hard on for Robin Gough. She sounds really defensive about a comment Robin made. Guess she thinks she needs to do payback! http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/showthread.php?t=273702 ----------------------------------- I think you might be on to something there. Courtneys Digiscrappin sounds awfully defensive ...
I don't "get" what Megan Mullens style is all about. I've looked through her store and I really don't like her stuff. I don't know why Robin chose her to be a designer at Sweet Shoppe when they had their designer call last year. I know lots of other designers who applied that would have been better fits with the store than Megan Mullens.
""""Her TOU -->* You are NOT allowed to re-distribute the original products in their original form. This means you must do something to the items you use of mine. Such as apply a style, texture, attach something to them or attach them to something.
That being said - if you're buying her CU and only adding a texture - that's not "designing" that's "texturing".
January 14, 2012 11:17 AM --------------------------------
I've bought lots of Miss Tina's CU in the past. I love her papers especially. You can really play around with the layers to create your own style. I always recolor them, add my own textures (that i've created myself). Does that make me a "texturizer", not a designer?
Are you one of these "designers" who claim to create 100% of your own kits? Do you use any styles or shapes or textures that you haven't scanned and extracted yourself? Do you create your own flowers at home with paper or pick them from your garden and extract those? Do you cast your own buttons and sew your own stitches? If you answered no to any of these, I guess you aren't a "designer" either.
Do you see how ridiculous your "designer" vs "texturizer" comment was? Loser!!!
Speaking of losers... Has anyone seen Amy Stoffels new release? It's hideous. Talk about something that looks rushed. It seems like she just threw some stuff together so she'd have something to release this week.
I think all of Amy's stuff is terrible. VERY oversaturated!
I don't see the problem with Meg Mullens or Traci Reed. Looking in their galleries, their CTs seem to have no problem making beautiful pages that don't look "cheap."
Jady's kit looks much better than Meg's. Just based off previews, I would buy Jady's. Meg's preview looks horrible. January 14, 2012 5:28 PM
In all fairness to Meg, I think SSD's new previews are HORRIBLE. And by horrible I mean positively awful. And I am not an SSD hater.
Looking at the example pages, I think both kits are nice from both designers. Jady's looks much fuller for the price, but that's only because she includes recolored elements (which I like when I'm scrapping).
I think the kits are similar, but Jady certainly doesn't have the blue jean kit market to herself.
I don't understand the Meredith Cardall hate, either. Her kits and previews look fine. I don't usually call the personal card, but I think someone is a little ticked off for personal reasons when it comes to SO lately.
I've bought lots of Miss Tina's CU in the past. I love her papers especially. You can really play around with the layers to create your own style. I always recolor them, add my own textures (that i've created myself). Does that make me a "texturizer", not a designer?
Are you one of these "designers" who claim to create 100% of your own kits? Do you use any styles or shapes or textures that you haven't scanned and extracted yourself? Do you create your own flowers at home with paper or pick them from your garden and extract those? Do you cast your own buttons and sew your own stitches? If you answered no to any of these, I guess you aren't a "designer" either.
Do you see how ridiculous your "designer" vs "texturizer" comment was? Loser!!!
^^^ I was referring to the inability of the person asking to choose even their own palette - sounds like someone is being awfully defensive!!
And in reference to your question - I would say approx 90% the stuff in my kits is my own creation - whether extraction/doodling/creating my own styles because I know how to use my programs/etc - and I'll tell you what - I used to be a CU-recolorer/texturizer - but since I stopped my sales (which were already good) have taken off. Who's the loser now?
I stumbled across her stuff over 2 years ago and bought a few things and thought she had some talent. Design talent is one thing but customer service and the way you present yourself in the community you choose to work in is a bigger, much more important skill to master. I've never personally had an issue with her but just the way she presents herself generally to the community really turns my stomach.
Her attitude and "mouth" are the sole reason I will never purchase another item from her.
I do not consider Meridith's previews "amazing". They are a cluttered mess with no rhyme or reason to placement of the elements - like she just turned a jar of stuff upside down on a page. You cannot see the backgrounds - which for me are more important that the elements. If I were out shopping in a gallery and her main previews were the only image, I would not even take a second look.
I don't see anything wrong with Meredith's previews, either. Like you're too lazy to click the additional image of just the papers to see them? Good Lord. I'd rather see all of the elements spread out and then look at the image of all the papers so I can see as much as possible in the kit.
----------------------------
You obviously don't give much care to first impressions. Each product has about 3 seconds to grab the customer's attention. I can tell you that unless I find a preview to be appealing on the first glance, I am not going to take MY precious time and waste time "hoping" the designer buried the best product preview somewhere. It has nothing to do with being lazy. It has everything to do with a designer nderstanding marketing. I love how it always the customer's fault for not taking time to fully checkout every designer. Yeah. That is why major brands spend so much money making sure they grab our attention immediately. I don't think any company asks you to please check out all our advertising ads to find the one that appeals to you.
Anyway - I am sure she is a lovely person and perhaps earns a great living. I just won't spend time trying to find the value underneath the sprawl.
Re: Jaguarwoman - gosh - the girl drives me bonkers with her holier-than-thou attitude. She goes on and on about doing her own stuff - but then in a thread about Dover she talks about how she uses it (or used it) and colored it in herself.
You obviously don't give much care to first impressions. Each product has about 3 seconds to grab the customer's attention. I can tell you that unless I find a preview to be appealing on the first glance, I am not going to take MY precious time and waste time "hoping" the designer buried the best product preview somewhere. It has nothing to do with being lazy. It has everything to do with a designer nderstanding marketing. I love how it always the customer's fault for not taking time to fully checkout every designer. Yeah. That is why major brands spend so much money making sure they grab our attention immediately. I don't think any company asks you to please check out all our advertising ads to find the one that appeals to you.
Anyway - I am sure she is a lovely person and perhaps earns a great living. I just won't spend time trying to find the value underneath the sprawl. January 15, 2012 9:53 AM
You must be one of those people that walk by a shop and just buy whatever is in the window without trying anything on. I mean, your time is so valuable and all.
Seriously. It's ONE CLICK. I don't care if you like her previews or not, but that is just LAZY.
Re: Jaguarwoman - gosh - the girl drives me bonkers with her holier-than-thou attitude. She goes on and on about doing her own stuff - but then in a thread about Dover she talks about how she uses it (or used it) and colored it in herself.
January 15, 2012 12:58 PM
Jaguarwoman is the reason the term "douche bag" exists.
I'm not a fan of Meredith's new previews ... I think it's amusing how inspired they are by Suzy Q's previews - which I also don't like. I don't agree with whomever commented on 'getting her colors under control' ... I actually like her colors, they are bright and fun but she always has some whites in there (unlike some people who just have all the brights - ugh)
I'm no Meredith or SO hater, actually I think I spend more money at SO than anywhere else.
You must be one of those people that walk by a shop and just buy whatever is in the window without trying anything on. I mean, your time is so valuable and all.
____________
Well, that's a pretty stupid analogy.
If I'm window shopping and see something that catches my eye...THEN I might go try it on. I keep on walking if it is ugly upon first glance. Same goes with previews here. If it catches my eye, then I will go on and click more.
A good preview is what sells a kit. I totally agree with that. The kit could be the most cutest, adorable, scrapable kit on the market today, but the wrong preview can really tank sales. I had a kit last year that only sold a few copies. The preview was ok but not great. I sat down at my computer and re-previewed it and sales went up dramatically. I mean from only a few sales up to around 155 kits sold in the first 2 weeks!!! I even had customers who had specifically said that they saw the original preview and wouldn't buy it. Once it was re-previewed and looked soooooooo much better, sales went through the roof. :)
I HATE previews that have everything on top of the patterned papers, and I'm surprised at how many here like them. I think Karla Dudley, Paislee Press, and One Little Bird all have excellent previews.
If you like that minimalist style of kit, then yes... those previews are great for that. It wouldn't really work for my style though. I've tried but they just don't work. (sigh)
I'm sure a store like SO would let a designer know if their previews weren't good enough. I know many top stores that will tell designers what to change on their previews so that their products sell better in that particular store. Like them or not, I'm sure that style of preview moves products at SO. SuzyQ is no lightweight and has a lot of fans. Most customers want to see as much as possible in a kit and aren't too "lazy" to click to see the papers.
A clustered style preview or a minimal style preview for a designer like Meredith or Suzy or most of the designers at SO and SSD just wouldn't work. Knowing which style showcases YOUR style of product is what sells kits. Not what people say is their personal preference or what happens to work for them.
That said, I think SSDs new previews are a little weird looking, too. I like the larger size and wish my store had that feature. But most of them look off-balance/top heavy.
That said, I think SSDs new previews are a little weird looking, too. I like the larger size and wish my store had that feature. But most of them look off-balance/top heavy.
January 16, 2012 3:13 PM -------------------------------------
I totally agree!!!!!If you look at some of Kristin CB's previous previews, they look very well layered and balanced. On the new previews, they just look out of place and kinda scrunched up in the middle.
I really like simple previews. Strips on the top and bottom with lots of previewing space. IE: Gotta Pixel, the old 9th and B, and SBB too. Those types of previews allow the designer to properly showcase the kit without the preview packaging being the main focus. It looks good and functions well.
I actually like the new SSD previews. Papers are often what sells me on a kit, and I like being able to see unobscured views of the papers along the bottom, with the elements above it. It works for me. I'd bet I am very similar to most of their target customer base, too. My guess is it's working.
I hate cluttered previews. I want to see the papers beneath all the crap on top. I will use a few elements, but it's the papers that really matter when you print out your digi layout.
I rarely go over to DST anymore but I must say I'm surprised that the hot topics section isn't jumping with it nearing election time in the states. Of course there are only 3-4 of them talking at each other usually anyways.
There are several forums that provide a much better environment to discuss such things. A bunch of women (already petty enough over stupid things in the first place) discussing politics isn't best served in a digital scrapbook community. I stopped going in there a loooong time ago.
If I'm going to get in a messageboard battle with forum trolls over my political beliefs, I'd rather do it in a place where I don't have to pretend to be polite.
Doesn't DST have anything better to do with their time than be a fucking siggie Nazi? I was just cleaning out my e-mail from a few weeks ago and I have two warnings. "Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away?
Doesn't DST have anything better to do with their time than be a fucking siggie Nazi? I was just cleaning out my e-mail from a few weeks ago and I have two warnings. "Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away?
--------- Yup, mine was FIVE pixels too wide and they "warned" me.
I hate big siggies. Yeah. Hate. I'm terribly annoyed when people come to contribute the whole 2 words to the discussion but leave the damn 3-inch tall siggie of them for all to see. Please downsize. Why having it FIVE pixels bigger means so much to you anyway? It's not a penis for Pete's sake.
If there is a rule for maximum size and they let 5 extra pixels go, then someone will say "Hey, mine is only 5 pixels more than this other siggie", and then a third one will say the same and in the end, people will have siggies that do not follow DST rules, and then someone will come in here, bitching that the staff at DST are not doing their job. If you want to bitch at something, be consistent in your arguments (general "you" in here).
"Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away? ------------- Keep a large siggie, don't downsize and you will find out what they will do. I did. Then, you will come here, complaining again.
To everyone else, I agree w/ the PP who suggests not having a siggie. Or just keep what you have, but make it smaller. We can all still see it, trust me. The people who have 3x5" siggies crack me up. Do you really think we're all blind and can't see it if it's smaller? We can read the tiny journaling on your 600x600 layout, but you think we can't see your 600x600 5-letter name? Sheesh.
The people who have 3x5" siggies crack me up. Do you really think we're all blind and can't see it if it's smaller? We can read the tiny journaling on your 600x600 layout, but you think we can't see your 600x600 5-letter name? Sheesh. -------
I so agree! I also agree with the PP who mentioned posters saying a few words and having a humungous siggy. It drives me crackers. Mostly because I can't see what they said due to their overwhelming siggy!
I also don't get those scrappers who feel the need to mention who they previously guested for in their siggy. Who the heck cares?
I love Jady Days previews, her kits are amazing. Always great quality, I think she belongs more at a store like SSD rather than SO. Not a fan of a lot of the designers at SO anymore.
Not loving the new SSD previews, they do look unbalanced.
Speaking of SO, is anyone following the 'Rumble in the Orchard'??
I think the losers getting voted off would make it more interesting but I think it sort of shows of the strengths of the designers CT's and the versatility of the designs.
I disagree about Jady Day belonging at SSD. If she were at SSD, she would just blend in because there are so many designers there who have styles that are similar to hers. At least at SO there are lots of different styles, so each designer has the chance to stand out from the crowd.
I am sooooooooooooooooo sick of Captivated Visions!!!!!! Everything she makes looks the same. I've bought this up here before and was shit on about my opinion so I'm so glad to see that someone else thinks the same. :):):)
"I understand it's hand cut paper, but the drawn borders are very jagged. That would not look good."
Hmmm that's the point they are MEANT to look hand drawn and wonky lines are typical in hand drawn work. Get off being so perfectionist and calling everything that is natural poor quality.
Amen. Jacque Larsen is one of the most talented digi designers around. She's original and all of her pieces are hand made. I love her style and look forward to seeing what she puts out every week.
REALLY??? Wouldn't one think that Muggles is copyrighted in the book Harry Potter. The author came up with the name. I certainly wouldn't use this title knowing that the author came up with the word.
The word muggle was used long before Rowling used it and is defined as a "common person" or one without technical knowledge. Rowling was in fact sued by another author Stouffer over the use of the word muggle because she claimed to have invented the word in her book "The Legend of Rah and the Muggles." She did not win her suit obviously. So no, the word "Muggle" is not copyrighted by Rowling in any way. Perfectly legal to use.
BTW - Google is your friend, that took me very little time to find. Look before you type.
I was thinking about this, as an online industry and as designers, we are usually very sensitive to piracy and copyright concerns... yet how many of us use pirated software to make our designs? Of course everyone here willl say "Not I, of course I paid 900$ for MY copy of Photoshop", but being realistic, the Adobe Creative Suite IS the most pirated software out there, so the odds are that a big number of designers are using pirated software. Not only are a number of designers probably using pirated software, but a big number of the clients are probably ALSO using pirated software. Seriously, how many digi scrappers out there are using Photoshop, and how many would truly pay the $$$$ needed for a hobby. Right, not everyone pays for it. So taking that further, are you profiting from your customers piracy? It's been said that Adobe actually MAKES MONEY off of people pirating their software. Since Photoshop is SO PIRATED, it is way more popular than the Corel products or any other product out there, since it's used by so many people. So the piracy in fact cements Adobe's spot as the industry leader, not because their product is the best, but because it's the most widely used. Even small businesses pirate the software. So if Adobe makes more money because of piracy, what about you, digi scrap designer? Do you lose some money to filthy dirty pirates sharing your files? But how much extra did you make by having MORE clients because more people have the software needed to actually use your stuff?
I can honestly say that my copies of PSE and CS are legitimate. I had access to PSE through work, disc with code licensed for us to have on our home computers (I am not a designer so it is personal use) and thanks to the education discount I got CS for $200. Some of us are legit. Now don't ask me about my music files. . . . .
There is no way jaguar woman would say piracy is good for adobe. What a load of absolute crap. Sounds like justification to make someone feel better about pirating to me.
For what it is worth, I have several legitimate versions of PSE. I got several through buying peripherals. PSE is NOT expensive, there are plenty who would buy it. I also got a recent legitimate copy of PSE from the store I work for who has contacts at Adobe.
My last two versions of Adobe Photoshop are also legitimate. Yes, shock horror, I am a designer and I actually paid for them. I would not feel right about selling my designs made with pirated software.
In fact, ALL the software on my laptop and desktop is bought not pirated software.
So all you designers out there trying to justify using pirated software by saying it is good for adobe, (NOT!) pull your finger out of your butt and do the right thing. It is actually possible to pay for software and do the right thing. SHOCK HORROR!
I find it amusing that there are some people here who feel the need to tell a bunch of anons on an anon blog that they have legitimate software. Funniest thing I've read all day.
Who the heck cares if your software is legit? I don't and I'm guessing that most on here don't either.
There's also perfectly good free open source software like Gimp and Inkscape.
I don't doubt though that a lot are using pirated software. I don't have pirated software but I have to admit that my "legal" copy is the CS2 educational version, and as far as I know the CS2 educational version was not supposed to be used for commercial use. I think the CS5 version no longer has that restriction.
That was a common misconception. CS2 Education version could and can be used for commercial purposes. I have no idea how the rumor started, but it was either deliberate bullshit or someone was mistaken.
I was thinking about this, as an online industry and as designers, we are usually very sensitive to piracy and copyright concerns... yet how many of us use pirated software to make our designs? Of course everyone here willl say "Not I, of course I paid 900$ for MY copy of Photoshop", but being realistic, the Adobe Creative Suite IS the most pirated software out there, so the odds are that a big number of designers are using pirated software. Not only are a number of designers probably using pirated software, but a big number of the clients are probably ALSO using pirated software. Seriously, how many digi scrappers out there are using Photoshop, and how many would truly pay the $$$$ needed for a hobby. Right, not everyone pays for it. So taking that further, are you profiting from your customers piracy? It's been said that Adobe actually MAKES MONEY off of people pirating their software. Since Photoshop is SO PIRATED, it is way more popular than the Corel products or any other product out there, since it's used by so many people. So the piracy in fact cements Adobe's spot as the industry leader, not because their product is the best, but because it's the most widely used. Even small businesses pirate the software. So if Adobe makes more money because of piracy, what about you, digi scrap designer? Do you lose some money to filthy dirty pirates sharing your files? But how much extra did you make by having MORE clients because more people have the software needed to actually use your stuff?
------- You are assuming an awful lot. Or is this info just from personal experience? You are a filthy dirty pirate right? Using a illegal version of Photoshop or have. There are so many cheap options out there to design and scrap. Its ludicrous to think a "big number" of all of us are filthy dirty pirates. Please go take your rant elsewhere.
There is no way jaguar woman would say piracy is good for adobe. What a load of absolute crap. Sounds like justification to make someone feel better about pirating to me.
------ Really? How is that? Do explain. Your comment, like most, makes little sense.
I find it amusing that there are some people here who feel the need to tell a bunch of anons on an anon blog that they have legitimate software. Funniest thing I've read all day.
Who the heck cares if your software is legit? I don't and I'm guessing that most on here don't either. ----------------------------
I find it amusing that pirates tell us on a smack blog that most designers pirate their software... they know that exactly...how!?
If my customers use pirated software then that's on their conscience and I can't worry about that. I bought a copy of PSE when I started designing. My DH is working on his Master's so this year I upgraded to CS5 Educational. Most people know someone who is a student that can get them this discount.
Since CS5, the Student and Teacher Editions can be utilized for personal as well as commercial use, for all academic customers worldwide. And after graduation or completion of coursework, you can continue to use the software on your personal systems; there is no usage expiration.
I'm confused. Was that rant about you being pissed because you can't afford Adobe or was it because you have pirated and want to justify it by saying everyone else does too?
My Adobe is bought and paid for. I don't need some anon coming in here and disparaging the reputation of other designers just because they want software they can't afford. Take a xanax, your crazy is showing.
I agree - I hate that people automatically assume that all designers download their software illegally. No thank you. I have mine and any other software I have bought and paid for. If you can't afford PS, design in PSE. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite if you get upset about people pirating kits.
I started out with Gimp and PSE. Gimp is free and PSE came free with my tablet purchase. These worked wonderfully and allowed me to save to upgrade to PSCS2. From there, I upgraded to CS5.
You know what they say about people who ASSume shit.
My Adobe is bought and paid for. I don't need some anon coming in here and disparaging the reputation of other designers just because they want software they can't afford. Take a xanax, your crazy is showing. ------
I think your crazy is showing. Getting upset and defensive about what anons are disparaging? Get real.
Oh wow, can I joining the discussion too? Yes, I have the whole kit and kaboodle of CS because my nephew is very good at pirating. We have everything we could ever need. Oh gosh, I'm so sorry I wasn't silly enough to pay for it and then have to explain that decision on a smack blog! Yes, I know, you feel kinda dumb and have to justify it somewhere, don't you?
Seriously, what is with some of you having to explain that you have a legitimate copy? Like I asked before, who the heck cares, besides you?
You look desperate justifying yourself on here.
Do I really have pirated software, or did I buy it? You'll never know.
True, but isn't that just as bad as pirating to some extent? Someone is still lying about who is the student and who the software is for, aren't they? -------------- Not sure if it is that bad. I did purchase CS5 recently with my son's ID, but they only ask for the student's ID. They do not check if that student is you or related to you. If they did and you lied, that would be one thing, but they do NOT ask, so they surely know that everyone can make the purchase like that. Heck, they will allow you to purchase the academic version even if the child is in grade one! Do they really think that the 6 year old will be the one using it?
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites.
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites.
----- issues much? Also, what exactly does bitching about the products being similar and paying for the software have to with each other? If you just wanted to rant about hypocrites, do it. You didn't have to try to "lead up to it"
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites. ------
I don't see anyone saying they didn't pay for their software. Go and learn to read before having a tantrum. FYI, I'm not a Christian and I don't claim to be one either.
Not sure if it is that bad. I did purchase CS5 recently with my son's ID, but they only ask for the student's ID. They do not check if that student is you or related to you. If they did and you lied, that would be one thing, but they do NOT ask, so they surely know that everyone can make the purchase like that. Heck, they will allow you to purchase the academic version even if the child is in grade one! Do they really think that the 6 year old will be the one using it? ---------
It seems pretty stupid to have Education and Student versions when they don't ask for proper ID. What's the point?
You know they say a lie of omission is still a lie. Not an accusation, by any means, just pointing it out.
It's like saying that you, generic you, took someone else's pension check but they didn't ask for your ID when you cashed it, so technically, apparently, you didn't steal it. See what I mean? It's a thin line.
Not an original design idea out there anymore, I see? A week or two ago, I saw these chipboard word bubbles and arrows at TDC by Wishing Well: http://www.thedigichick.com/shop/Everyday-Life-Say-What-Word-Bits.html
I thought they were cute, but didn't buy them. Then today I get the SSD newsletter and am looking at their new releases and Jenn Barrette went and did the same thing: http://www.sweetshoppedesigns.com/sweetshoppe/product.php?productid=22782&cat=478&page=1
If you can't think of your own ideas you should prolly wait at least a week or two before you release a copy of something else. At least she made them a different color. *eyeroll*
Who says one copied the other? Maybe they both saw a scrapper using that idea, and they both started working on it but one released it earlier than the other. Ever thought of that? Why everything that is similar as to be "copied" from someone else? Can't they both be inspired by the same thing? Oh wait... that would not be smack-worthy then, would it?
Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos. They are all over Pinterest. So neither of them had the idea in the first place.
Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos. They are all over Pinterest. So neither of them had the idea in the first place.
-----
"Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos." ?????
No, those are basic word bubbles and arrows, found in Photoshop's basic shapes. It's not something that's specific to Project Life or any other scrapbooking project. Basic shapes are up for grabs for anyone who wants to use them in their designs.
I think the point the OP was trying to make (excuse me if I am offbase or get it wrong here) is that it's always interesting when one designer releases something that's almost exactly the same as another designer, a week later. We've said on this blog plenty of times that no idea is truly original. Not arguing that, b/c the idea itself might not have been original to either one of them, but I think the point being made was have some shame and don't release an almost identical product the very week after another designer releases it. I'm not saying I agree with that, but just that I think it was the original point.
"Making sure one does not release something very similar soon after" might be just an idealistic way to see this. If Designer A and Designer B both see something interesting (on Pinterest or other) and they both consider making something like that, are they supposed to search everywhere in case someone already released something similar so they can wait a bit longer "to be nice"? What if Designer C decides to jump in and release something similar one week after Designer A? Does that mean that now, Designer B has to wait a bit longer so that it does not look like she copied Designer A AND Designer C who "didn't wait her turn" so to speak? When you release a kit or a product or an element pack, do you check out everywhere in case something similar exists? And if you have that time to spare, and find something similar, do you really wait? Honestly!
I think that Pinterest can actually be a good thing to look at. If your target audience see something as interesting, they if you create that (or something in that style), then you might just sell them. Living under a rock and not looking anywhere for trends and novel ideas, and interest is making things harder to reach your market.
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time).
Once I started designing I had to stop following a lot of store newsletters and other designers' personal newsletters (and blogs) because it's paralyzing to get caught in that cycle of "Someone else made something similar". We're all existing in the same relatively small little world exposed to a lot of the same inspiration and influences from social media and the paper industry. I went through a period where I kept making products and then before I finished them I'd notice something very similar (or even just a little bit similar) from another designer in that week's newsletter and I'd trash the whole project just so someone wouldn't accuse me of copying them. You'd never get anything created if you worried about whether someone else did something similar. Ignorance is bliss to a certain extent. Plus, the customer deserves options anyway. If one designer makes something using a set of a dozen words, then another designer makes it using different ones, or with different colors - one customer may find Designer #2's items more useful for their needs.
I just looked at both of them and the worst part isn't that the products are similar. That part, as said already, can be explained by Pinterest. Many people have something similar pinned there. But Jenn picked the same name, Everyday, for her bubbles that was used by Wishing Well the week before. I know Everyday isn't copywrited or anything, but wow pick another title.
Kinda makes it seem like Jenn really hadn't seen the first set last week. Either that or she's super stupid or arrogant.
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time).
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time). --------
Blasted? No one blasted her. The convo is right at the top of this page and I don't see a single blast for her having a similar kit. I see some people bashing her for bad design and color choices, but not for the similar kit.
But Jenn picked the same name, Everyday, for her bubbles that was used by Wishing Well the week before. I know Everyday isn't copywrited or anything, but wow pick another title.
------
For instance? Everyday is a good description, that's what they are, everyday words. What should she have called them?
Not an original design idea out there anymore, I see? A week or two ago, I saw these chipboard word bubbles and arrows at TDC by Wishing Well: http://www.thedigichick.com/shop/Everyday-Life-Say-What-Word-Bits.html
I thought they were cute, but didn't buy them. Then today I get the SSD newsletter and am looking at their new releases and Jenn Barrette went and did the same thing: http://www.sweetshoppedesigns.com/sweetshoppe/product.php?productid=22782&cat=478&page=1
-----------
Well I guess neither of them should have made those word bubbles, considering that I saw them over two years ago by some other designer.
True, but isn't that just as bad as pirating to some extent? Someone is still lying about who is the student and who the software is for, aren't they? -------------------------------------
I have bought the software from adobe for my daughter and then changed the registration later to me, and guess what, adobe don't care. At least I have paid for software instead of stealing it. I think they would prefer you buy it at a discount than not at all.
"Making sure one does not release something very similar soon after" might be just an idealistic way to see this. If Designer A and Designer B both see something interesting (on Pinterest or other) and they both consider making something like that, are they supposed to search everywhere in case someone already released something similar so they can wait a bit longer "to be nice"? What if Designer C decides to jump in and release something similar one week after Designer A? Does that mean that now, Designer B has to wait a bit longer so that it does not look like she copied Designer A AND Designer C who "didn't wait her turn" so to speak? ----------
I went through a period where I kept making products and then before I finished them I'd notice something very similar (or even just a little bit similar) from another designer in that week's newsletter and I'd trash the whole project just so someone wouldn't accuse me of copying them. ------
Yep, me too, especially if the other designer was a name.
Kinda makes it seem like Jenn really hadn't seen the first set last week. -----
Why would she have seen them? They sell at different stores and I bet she has better things to do, like design, than cruise every digi store to see if someone has the same idea.
Speaking of SSD, hey Robin please figure out/fix whatever problems you're having with your new site and stop sending me 4 newsletters every Saturday. It's getting really fucking annoying. I'm on the verge of unsubscribing, and I actually like shopping there.
Why would Jenn Barrette even know who this nobody is to copy her? -----
Remember how someone here on the blog used to quote facebook fan numbers all of the time as an indicator of a store's tier standing? I used to think it was funny how much it ticked some of you off. So naturally when I read the above statement, I thoguht it would be interesting to compare the two designer's facebook numbers and Barrette's losing that race by over 1300 fans, not that I place a lot of importance on that, but I know some of you do and it's a substantial difference.
I think it's because Wishing Well gives away a TON of freebies. Nothing more.
---------
I follow her and she gives out about a freebie a month, I wish she gave out more. Is that a TON of freebies? Compared to a lot of other designers I follow, I don't think it is. Personally I think her follower number is so high because she still does the blog train.
I follow her and she gives out about a freebie a month, I wish she gave out more. Is that a TON of freebies? Compared to a lot of other designers I follow, I don't think it is. Personally I think her follower number is so high because she still does the blog train. January 22, 2012 10:43 AM
Last I knew, the blog train was once every 2 months. Hardly a TON.
LMAO that we are even having this discussion. We all know that neither of them are nobodys, and it's really unlikely that either of them copied the other. We must really be out of topics for this to have become a full scale discussion.
So call me bored but after mention of Happy Tits, I decided to look into her baby gaga drama again. I stumbled on this thread where Victorya says that Happy Tits claimed she left her daughter with her sister while she was out of the country getting treatment for CANCER. So apparently now she is a cancer survivor as well.
So call me bored but after mention of Happy Tits, I decided to look into her baby gaga drama again. I stumbled on this thread where Victorya says that Happy Tits claimed she left her daughter with her sister while she was out of the country getting treatment for CANCER. So apparently now she is a cancer survivor as well.
I'm a designer - and not overweight in the slightest. Guess that's what happens when I'm juggling working outside the home, playing with the kids, and designing! There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day.
As far as Tracy - she's a beautiful person inside and out - which is more than I can say for a lot of crappy people here. I'm very happy to know her as well as anyone can in this industry. As far as her moving store - good for her - I wish her all the best! I do hope she figures out who you are as she posted the comment about re-previewing on her personal page - if you don't like someone unfriend them. Don't be a anonymous bitch.
Good Lord. There are fat people, average people, and skinny people everywhere.
To make some comment inferring that designers are fat because they sit around at the computer all day instead of playing with their kids is just as ignorant as the initial comment.
The sad part is, I bet you're all teaching your children your intolerant ways. What a sad world we leave in.
I do hope she figures out who you are as she posted the comment about re-previewing on her personal page - if you don't like someone unfriend them. Don't be a anonymous bitch.
--------- I'm the OP of her moving stores. She posted it on her **design** page, which is where I received the information. I am not friends with her, so I really don't give a flying anything what she posts there.
I didn't say designers are fat because they don't play with their kids. I simply said that scrappers - and the rest of the world frankly - would do well not to sit at their computers all day. Even if it doesn't make you skinny, it's good to get away from computers! But you feel free to twist my words any way you like :)
As far as Tracy posting on her design page - unlike it if you hate her so much!
I find it funny when designers clearly post questions like that, not to actually educate themselves but just to point out how other designers might be violating copyrights.
Why not just mind your own fucking business? Unless, since it IS Laitha, who posted the question she's simply trying to point out someone else's possible violations so she can justify the violations of her own!
Why are you bringing up shit from 2008? Seriously, I don't like Happy Tits anymore than anyone else, but for fuck's sake, you're telling me that 2008 posts are worth dredging up again? Get a grip.
There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day. -----
How do you know they don't, or are you just assuming something?
I'm a designer - and not overweight in the slightest. Guess that's what happens when I'm juggling working outside the home, playing with the kids, and designing! There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day.
< snip > ... a beautiful person inside and out - which is more than I can say for a lot of crappy people here. ------------
Including yourself, by the sounds of it. You sure are sounding like one of the crappy people right about now.
What's the point of me replying to you regarding whether or not I can see past the first 200 comments, if you can't see past the first 200 comments to read my reply?
I just bookmark this page until it gets to the next one, then I bookmark the newest page and delete the old one. This way I don't have to navigate through all the links every time.
I find it funny when designers clearly post questions like that, not to actually educate themselves but just to point out how other designers might be violating copyrights.
Why not just mind your own fucking business? Unless, since it IS Laitha, who posted the question she's simply trying to point out someone else's possible violations so she can justify the violations of her own! ----
WTH are you talking about? And speaking of minding your own business, why don't you follow your own advice?
did anyone see any of the drama that went down on facebook after KCB posted the winners of her CT call? I kept hearing that people were talking a whole lotta shit, but I am guessing the shit talkers are not people I am friends with since I didn't see any of it =(
Sour grapes from those who didn't get in, from what I understand. Very mature. ----------- Yes, very mature, indeed. One who was being snarky is the scrapper who has pics of herself in most of her layouts.
I didn't see any drama after KCB announced her team. I think they're all decent scrappers except for one. But, I'm sure more than just scrapping was taken into consideration (the one is very active at SSD).
There were other good scrappers who didn't make the team that I would take in a heartbeat, but you only have so many slots.
I don't get what the drama could remotely be about. It's a CT Call for crying out loud.
People get a bit too emotional over this crap. Kendall, who is already on 8 CTs, 5 at SSD, said she was shaking and literally crying tears of joy. WTH?
I am just an average scrapper, not a designer. I am not active on any CT's, although I have been in the past. I am not active in any "scrapbook community", I don't post on the message boards, and I don't post my layouts online anymore. I read the Digi boards for entertainment, and am constantly amazed at what people share on the internet. I freely admit to reading the scrapbook smack blogs, it is a guilty pleasure.
You can email me at: DSTHallofFame@gmail.com
679 comments:
«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 400 of 679 Newer› Newest»I do not consider Meridith's previews "amazing". They are a cluttered mess with no rhyme or reason to placement of the elements - like she just turned a jar of stuff upside down on a page. You cannot see the backgrounds - which for me are more important that the elements. If I were out shopping in a gallery and her main previews were the only image, I would not even take a second look.
Talk about similar !
http://www.sweetshoppedesigns.com//sweetshoppe/product.php?productid=22753&cat=477&page=1
http://scraporchard.com/market/Boy-in-Blue-Jeans-Digital-Scrapbook-Kit.html
I was thinking the same thing.
Wow.
But because it is SSD that makes it okay, remember?
Now... Which of those kits would you choose to buy, if you were buying one of them? Based on the previews alone, definitely Jady Day Studio. Her preview is clearer, each element is properly layered and shadowed. Megan Mullens just looks like she threw those few elements on top of the papers and called it a preview. I don't like it at all.
I have a wondering about Miss Tinas cu stuff. If I was to buy one of her cu packages that includes the papers, elements, and the alphas and didn't change the colors that she has them sold in, is that considered ok? I would be adding my own textures and styles and bulking up the kit with my own cu items and adding some wordart/tabs/tags to make a complete kit.
I have seen too many kits out there now that designers are just doing that and reselling. Is that ok? Would you do that?
I have a wondering about Miss Tinas cu stuff. If I was to buy one of her cu packages that includes the papers, elements, and the alphas and didn't change the colors that she has them sold in, is that considered ok? I would be adding my own textures and styles and bulking up the kit with my own cu items and adding some wordart/tabs/tags to make a complete kit.
I have seen too many kits out there now that designers are just doing that and reselling. Is that ok? Would you do that?
^^^^^
Her TOU -->* You are NOT allowed to re-distribute the original products in their original form. This means you must do something to the items you use of mine. Such as apply a style, texture, attach something to them or attach them to something.
That being said - if you're buying her CU and only adding a texture - that's not "designing" that's "texturing".
Meg Mullens' kits looked cheap and rushed. Maybe if she stopped trying to pump out multiple kits every week, my opinion would change. I don't understand the hype at all. A step below her in cheap and rushed looking is Traci Reed.
I agree the kits are similar from Meg and Jady Day, but you all act like Jady Day was the first designer to ever make a blue jeans kit. Give me a break.
I don't see anything wrong with Meredith's previews, either. Like you're too lazy to click the additional image of just the papers to see them? Good Lord. I'd rather see all of the elements spread out and then look at the image of all the papers so I can see as much as possible in the kit.
OMG, will someone please put a sock in Jaguarwoman's mouth already? Anyone who's a member of the DCR KNOWS what she thinks.
lmfao^^^^ A-fucking-men!
Jady's kit looks much better than Meg's. Just based off previews, I would buy Jady's. Meg's preview looks horrible.
Just happened upon an old DST thread, sorry it is in the DCR for those of you can't access, but was reading through it and I think I have worked out who has the hard on for Robin Gough. She sounds really defensive about a comment Robin made. Guess she thinks she needs to do payback!
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/showthread.php?t=273702
-----------------------------------
I think you might be on to something there. Courtneys Digiscrappin sounds awfully defensive ...
I don't "get" what Megan Mullens style is all about. I've looked through her store and I really don't like her stuff. I don't know why Robin chose her to be a designer at Sweet Shoppe when they had their designer call last year. I know lots of other designers who applied that would have been better fits with the store than Megan Mullens.
""""Her TOU -->* You are NOT allowed to re-distribute the original products in their original form. This means you must do something to the items you use of mine. Such as apply a style, texture, attach something to them or attach them to something.
That being said - if you're buying her CU and only adding a texture - that's not "designing" that's "texturing".
January 14, 2012 11:17 AM
--------------------------------
I've bought lots of Miss Tina's CU in the past. I love her papers especially. You can really play around with the layers to create your own style. I always recolor them, add my own textures (that i've created myself). Does that make me a "texturizer", not a designer?
Are you one of these "designers" who claim to create 100% of your own kits? Do you use any styles or shapes or textures that you haven't scanned and extracted yourself? Do you create your own flowers at home with paper or pick them from your garden and extract those? Do you cast your own buttons and sew your own stitches? If you answered no to any of these, I guess you aren't a "designer" either.
Do you see how ridiculous your "designer" vs "texturizer" comment was? Loser!!!
Speaking of losers... Has anyone seen Amy Stoffels new release? It's hideous. Talk about something that looks rushed. It seems like she just threw some stuff together so she'd have something to release this week.
I think all of Amy's stuff is terrible. VERY oversaturated!
I don't see the problem with Meg Mullens or Traci Reed. Looking in their galleries, their CTs seem to have no problem making beautiful pages that don't look "cheap."
Jady's kit looks much better than Meg's. Just based off previews, I would buy Jady's. Meg's preview looks horrible.
January 14, 2012 5:28 PM
In all fairness to Meg, I think SSD's new previews are HORRIBLE. And by horrible I mean positively awful. And I am not an SSD hater.
Looking at the example pages, I think both kits are nice from both designers. Jady's looks much fuller for the price, but that's only because she includes recolored elements (which I like when I'm scrapping).
I think the kits are similar, but Jady certainly doesn't have the blue jean kit market to herself.
I don't understand the Meredith Cardall hate, either. Her kits and previews look fine. I don't usually call the personal card, but I think someone is a little ticked off for personal reasons when it comes to SO lately.
Meg got picked to be a designer at SSD because she was already very involved with the site.
Who do you think would be a good addition to SSD?
I've bought lots of Miss Tina's CU in the past. I love her papers especially. You can really play around with the layers to create your own style. I always recolor them, add my own textures (that i've created myself). Does that make me a "texturizer", not a designer?
Are you one of these "designers" who claim to create 100% of your own kits? Do you use any styles or shapes or textures that you haven't scanned and extracted yourself? Do you create your own flowers at home with paper or pick them from your garden and extract those? Do you cast your own buttons and sew your own stitches? If you answered no to any of these, I guess you aren't a "designer" either.
Do you see how ridiculous your "designer" vs "texturizer" comment was? Loser!!!
^^^
I was referring to the inability of the person asking to choose even their own palette - sounds like someone is being awfully defensive!!
And in reference to your question - I would say approx 90% the stuff in my kits is my own creation - whether extraction/doodling/creating my own styles because I know how to use my programs/etc - and I'll tell you what - I used to be a CU-recolorer/texturizer - but since I stopped my sales (which were already good) have taken off. Who's the loser now?
Re: Jaguarwoman--couldn't agree more.
I stumbled across her stuff over 2 years ago and bought a few things and thought she had some talent. Design talent is one thing but customer service and the way you present yourself in the community you choose to work in is a bigger, much more important skill to master. I've never personally had an issue with her but just the way she presents herself generally to the community really turns my stomach.
Her attitude and "mouth" are the sole reason I will never purchase another item from her.
I do not consider Meridith's previews "amazing". They are a cluttered mess with no rhyme or reason to placement of the elements - like she just turned a jar of stuff upside down on a page. You cannot see the backgrounds - which for me are more important that the elements. If I were out shopping in a gallery and her main previews were the only image, I would not even take a second look.
-----------
Couldn't agree more.
I don't see anything wrong with Meredith's previews, either. Like you're too lazy to click the additional image of just the papers to see them? Good Lord. I'd rather see all of the elements spread out and then look at the image of all the papers so I can see as much as possible in the kit.
----------------------------
You obviously don't give much care to first impressions. Each product has about 3 seconds to grab the customer's attention. I can tell you that unless I find a preview to be appealing on the first glance, I am not going to take MY precious time and waste time "hoping" the designer buried the best product preview somewhere. It has nothing to do with being lazy. It has everything to do with a designer nderstanding marketing. I love how it always the customer's fault for not taking time to fully checkout every designer. Yeah. That is why major brands spend so much money making sure they grab our attention immediately. I don't think any company asks you to please check out all our advertising ads to find the one that appeals to you.
Anyway - I am sure she is a lovely person and perhaps earns a great living. I just won't spend time trying to find the value underneath the sprawl.
Until she gets her colors under control, I'm not sure her previews make much difference.
Re: Jaguarwoman - gosh - the girl drives me bonkers with her holier-than-thou attitude. She goes on and on about doing her own stuff - but then in a thread about Dover she talks about how she uses it (or used it) and colored it in herself.
You obviously don't give much care to first impressions. Each product has about 3 seconds to grab the customer's attention. I can tell you that unless I find a preview to be appealing on the first glance, I am not going to take MY precious time and waste time "hoping" the designer buried the best product preview somewhere. It has nothing to do with being lazy. It has everything to do with a designer nderstanding marketing. I love how it always the customer's fault for not taking time to fully checkout every designer. Yeah. That is why major brands spend so much money making sure they grab our attention immediately. I don't think any company asks you to please check out all our advertising ads to find the one that appeals to you.
Anyway - I am sure she is a lovely person and perhaps earns a great living. I just won't spend time trying to find the value underneath the sprawl.
January 15, 2012 9:53 AM
You must be one of those people that walk by a shop and just buy whatever is in the window without trying anything on. I mean, your time is so valuable and all.
Seriously. It's ONE CLICK. I don't care if you like her previews or not, but that is just LAZY.
Re: Jaguarwoman - gosh - the girl drives me bonkers with her holier-than-thou attitude. She goes on and on about doing her own stuff - but then in a thread about Dover she talks about how she uses it (or used it) and colored it in herself.
January 15, 2012 12:58 PM
Jaguarwoman is the reason the term "douche bag" exists.
Did anyone else get Sweet Shoppe's newsletter 5 times yesterday?
Yes
think I got it 7 or something silly.
Alot of people got it 5 or more times yet some never got it at all LOL.
I'm not a fan of Meredith's new previews ... I think it's amusing how inspired they are by Suzy Q's previews - which I also don't like. I don't agree with whomever commented on 'getting her colors under control' ... I actually like her colors, they are bright and fun but she always has some whites in there (unlike some people who just have all the brights - ugh)
I'm no Meredith or SO hater, actually I think I spend more money at SO than anywhere else.
You must be one of those people that walk by a shop and just buy whatever is in the window without trying anything on. I mean, your time is so valuable and all.
____________
Well, that's a pretty stupid analogy.
If I'm window shopping and see something that catches my eye...THEN I might go try it on. I keep on walking if it is ugly upon first glance. Same goes with previews here. If it catches my eye, then I will go on and click more.
A good preview is what sells a kit. I totally agree with that. The kit could be the most cutest, adorable, scrapable kit on the market today, but the wrong preview can really tank sales. I had a kit last year that only sold a few copies. The preview was ok but not great. I sat down at my computer and re-previewed it and sales went up dramatically. I mean from only a few sales up to around 155 kits sold in the first 2 weeks!!! I even had customers who had specifically said that they saw the original preview and wouldn't buy it. Once it was re-previewed and looked soooooooo much better, sales went through the roof. :)
I HATE previews that have everything on top of the patterned papers, and I'm surprised at how many here like them. I think Karla Dudley, Paislee Press, and One Little Bird all have excellent previews.
^^^^^
If you like that minimalist style of kit, then yes... those previews are great for that. It wouldn't really work for my style though. I've tried but they just don't work. (sigh)
I'm sure a store like SO would let a designer know if their previews weren't good enough. I know many top stores that will tell designers what to change on their previews so that their products sell better in that particular store. Like them or not, I'm sure that style of preview moves products at SO. SuzyQ is no lightweight and has a lot of fans. Most customers want to see as much as possible in a kit and aren't too "lazy" to click to see the papers.
A clustered style preview or a minimal style preview for a designer like Meredith or Suzy or most of the designers at SO and SSD just wouldn't work. Knowing which style showcases YOUR style of product is what sells kits. Not what people say is their personal preference or what happens to work for them.
That said, I think SSDs new previews are a little weird looking, too. I like the larger size and wish my store had that feature. But most of them look off-balance/top heavy.
That said, I think SSDs new previews are a little weird looking, too. I like the larger size and wish my store had that feature. But most of them look off-balance/top heavy.
January 16, 2012 3:13 PM
-------------------------------------
I totally agree!!!!!If you look at some of Kristin CB's previous previews, they look very well layered and balanced. On the new previews, they just look out of place and kinda scrunched up in the middle.
I really like simple previews. Strips on the top and bottom with lots of previewing space. IE: Gotta Pixel, the old 9th and B, and SBB too. Those types of previews allow the designer to properly showcase the kit without the preview packaging being the main focus. It looks good and functions well.
I actually like the new SSD previews. Papers are often what sells me on a kit, and I like being able to see unobscured views of the papers along the bottom, with the elements above it. It works for me. I'd bet I am very similar to most of their target customer base, too. My guess is it's working.
I hate cluttered previews. I want to see the papers beneath all the crap on top. I will use a few elements, but it's the papers that really matter when you print out your digi layout.
I rarely go over to DST anymore but I must say I'm surprised that the hot topics section isn't jumping with it nearing election time in the states. Of course there are only 3-4 of them talking at each other usually anyways.
There are several forums that provide a much better environment to discuss such things. A bunch of women (already petty enough over stupid things in the first place) discussing politics isn't best served in a digital scrapbook community. I stopped going in there a loooong time ago.
If I'm going to get in a messageboard battle with forum trolls over my political beliefs, I'd rather do it in a place where I don't have to pretend to be polite.
Doesn't DST have anything better to do with their time than be a fucking siggie Nazi? I was just cleaning out my e-mail from a few weeks ago and I have two warnings. "Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away?
Doesn't DST have anything better to do with their time than be a fucking siggie Nazi? I was just cleaning out my e-mail from a few weeks ago and I have two warnings. "Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away?
---------
Yup, mine was FIVE pixels too wide and they "warned" me.
So don't have a siggy, easy peasy. I don't. They are extremely annoying.
I hate big siggies. Yeah. Hate. I'm terribly annoyed when people come to contribute the whole 2 words to the discussion but leave the damn 3-inch tall siggie of them for all to see. Please downsize. Why having it FIVE pixels bigger means so much to you anyway? It's not a penis for Pete's sake.
If there is a rule for maximum size and they let 5 extra pixels go, then someone will say "Hey, mine is only 5 pixels more than this other siggie", and then a third one will say the same and in the end, people will have siggies that do not follow DST rules, and then someone will come in here, bitching that the staff at DST are not doing their job. If you want to bitch at something, be consistent in your arguments (general "you" in here).
"Downsize". Or what? They gonna take my damn birthday away?
-------------
Keep a large siggie, don't downsize and you will find out what they will do. I did. Then, you will come here, complaining again.
It's not a penis for Pete's sake.
^^^^
LOL!
To everyone else, I agree w/ the PP who suggests not having a siggie. Or just keep what you have, but make it smaller. We can all still see it, trust me. The people who have 3x5" siggies crack me up. Do you really think we're all blind and can't see it if it's smaller? We can read the tiny journaling on your 600x600 layout, but you think we can't see your 600x600 5-letter name? Sheesh.
FINALLY I'll get to scrap all my Crusades photos!
https://www.facebook.com/?ref=logo#!/photo.php?fbid=158158790961100&set=a.153938671383112.28999.153914068052239&type=1&theater
The people who have 3x5" siggies crack me up. Do you really think we're all blind and can't see it if it's smaller? We can read the tiny journaling on your 600x600 layout, but you think we can't see your 600x600 5-letter name? Sheesh.
-------
I so agree! I also agree with the PP who mentioned posters saying a few words and having a humungous siggy. It drives me crackers. Mostly because I can't see what they said due to their overwhelming siggy!
I also don't get those scrappers who feel the need to mention who they previously guested for in their siggy. Who the heck cares?
LOL
FINALLY I'll get to scrap all my Crusades photos!
---------------------------
WARNING please! I snorted wine on that one. But now my sinuses are happy, so thanks I guess.
^^agreed. Cracked my shit up.
I can see them being used for maybe some of the jousting type places (the popular chain name is escaping me right now).
However, the quality is deplorable. No way I'd ever consider buying them.
I don't get why there's a cross and the word faith. Seems odd to me.
As for quality, it's hand cut paper and supposed to look like that.
^^^^^
It's probably along the lines of "putting on the armor of faith" or similar Christian sentiment.
I understand it's hand cut paper, but the drawn borders are very jagged. That would not look good.
I love Jady Days previews, her kits are amazing. Always great quality, I think she belongs more at a store like SSD rather than SO. Not a fan of a lot of the designers at SO anymore.
Not loving the new SSD previews, they do look unbalanced.
I'm getting sick of Captivated Visions kits always being the same with just barely different color palettes. BORING.
Speaking of SO, is anyone following the 'Rumble in the Orchard'??
I think the losers getting voted off would make it more interesting but I think it sort of shows of the strengths of the designers CT's and the versatility of the designs.
I disagree about Jady Day belonging at SSD. If she were at SSD, she would just blend in because there are so many designers there who have styles that are similar to hers. At least at SO there are lots of different styles, so each designer has the chance to stand out from the crowd.
I'm getting sick of Captivated Visions kits always being the same with just barely different color palettes. BORING.
January 19, 2012 11:17 AM
I agree. I used to really like her stuff and bought from her regularly. Now, it just all looks the same.
Then again, I think it all looks the same after awhile.
Kristin CB is having a ct call. http://www.sweetshoppecommunity.com/forum/showthread.php?p=926294#post926294
I am sooooooooooooooooo sick of Captivated Visions!!!!!! Everything she makes looks the same. I've bought this up here before and was shit on about my opinion so I'm so glad to see that someone else thinks the same. :):):)
"I understand it's hand cut paper, but the drawn borders are very jagged. That would not look good."
Hmmm that's the point they are MEANT to look hand drawn and wonky lines are typical in hand drawn work. Get off being so perfectionist and calling everything that is natural poor quality.
Amen. Jacque Larsen is one of the most talented digi designers around. She's original and all of her pieces are hand made. I love her style and look forward to seeing what she puts out every week.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I, personally, think it looks like crap.
http://www.digishoptalk.com/boards/showthread.php?t=295383
REALLY??? Wouldn't one think that Muggles is copyrighted in the book Harry Potter. The author came up with the name. I certainly wouldn't use this title knowing that the author came up with the word.
The word muggle was used long before Rowling used it and is defined as a "common person" or one without technical knowledge. Rowling was in fact sued by another author Stouffer over the use of the word muggle because she claimed to have invented the word in her book "The Legend of Rah and the Muggles." She did not win her suit obviously. So no, the word "Muggle" is not copyrighted by Rowling in any way. Perfectly legal to use.
BTW - Google is your friend, that took me very little time to find. Look before you type.
^^^^
Agreed.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I, personally, think it looks like crap.
----
Yes, they are and I don't like them either. But if you were saying it was poor quality, then you were wrong, even if it does look crappy :)
I was thinking about this, as an online industry and as designers, we are usually very sensitive to piracy and copyright concerns... yet how many of us use pirated software to make our designs? Of course everyone here willl say "Not I, of course I paid 900$ for MY copy of Photoshop", but being realistic, the Adobe Creative Suite IS the most pirated software out there, so the odds are that a big number of designers are using pirated software. Not only are a number of designers probably using pirated software, but a big number of the clients are probably ALSO using pirated software. Seriously, how many digi scrappers out there are using Photoshop, and how many would truly pay the $$$$ needed for a hobby. Right, not everyone pays for it. So taking that further, are you profiting from your customers piracy? It's been said that Adobe actually MAKES MONEY off of people pirating their software. Since Photoshop is SO PIRATED, it is way more popular than the Corel products or any other product out there, since it's used by so many people. So the piracy in fact cements Adobe's spot as the industry leader, not because their product is the best, but because it's the most widely used. Even small businesses pirate the software. So if Adobe makes more money because of piracy, what about you, digi scrap designer? Do you lose some money to filthy dirty pirates sharing your files? But how much extra did you make by having MORE clients because more people have the software needed to actually use your stuff?
OMG Jaguarwoman is here. ^^^^
^^^
Idiot
I can honestly say that my copies of PSE and CS are legitimate. I had access to PSE through work, disc with code licensed for us to have on our home computers (I am not a designer so it is personal use) and thanks to the education discount I got CS for $200. Some of us are legit.
Now don't ask me about my music files. . . . .
Shhh I cancelled cable and download all my TV shows now.
^^^
Idiot
====================
Actually, with that long, without paragraph breaks, obsessive tirade about piracy that made my eyes glaze over, I thought the same thing.
^^^^
It doesn't read like her. Given, it's long and obsessive, but the wording is all wrong. Not nearly pompous enough.
There is no way jaguar woman would say piracy is good for adobe. What a load of absolute crap. Sounds like justification to make someone feel better about pirating to me.
For what it is worth, I have several legitimate versions of PSE. I got several through buying peripherals. PSE is NOT expensive, there are plenty who would buy it. I also got a recent legitimate copy of PSE from the store I work for who has contacts at Adobe.
My last two versions of Adobe Photoshop are also legitimate. Yes, shock horror, I am a designer and I actually paid for them. I would not feel right about selling my designs made with pirated software.
In fact, ALL the software on my laptop and desktop is bought not pirated software.
So all you designers out there trying to justify using pirated software by saying it is good for adobe, (NOT!) pull your finger out of your butt and do the right thing. It is actually possible to pay for software and do the right thing. SHOCK HORROR!
I find it amusing that there are some people here who feel the need to tell a bunch of anons on an anon blog that they have legitimate software. Funniest thing I've read all day.
Who the heck cares if your software is legit? I don't and I'm guessing that most on here don't either.
There's also perfectly good free open source software like Gimp and Inkscape.
I don't doubt though that a lot are using pirated software. I don't have pirated software but I have to admit that my "legal" copy is the CS2 educational version, and as far as I know the CS2 educational version was not supposed to be used for commercial use. I think the CS5 version no longer has that restriction.
^^^^^
That was a common misconception. CS2 Education version could and can be used for commercial purposes. I have no idea how the rumor started, but it was either deliberate bullshit or someone was mistaken.
I was thinking about this, as an online industry and as designers, we are usually very sensitive to piracy and copyright concerns... yet how many of us use pirated software to make our designs? Of course everyone here willl say "Not I, of course I paid 900$ for MY copy of Photoshop", but being realistic, the Adobe Creative Suite IS the most pirated software out there, so the odds are that a big number of designers are using pirated software. Not only are a number of designers probably using pirated software, but a big number of the clients are probably ALSO using pirated software. Seriously, how many digi scrappers out there are using Photoshop, and how many would truly pay the $$$$ needed for a hobby. Right, not everyone pays for it. So taking that further, are you profiting from your customers piracy? It's been said that Adobe actually MAKES MONEY off of people pirating their software. Since Photoshop is SO PIRATED, it is way more popular than the Corel products or any other product out there, since it's used by so many people. So the piracy in fact cements Adobe's spot as the industry leader, not because their product is the best, but because it's the most widely used. Even small businesses pirate the software. So if Adobe makes more money because of piracy, what about you, digi scrap designer? Do you lose some money to filthy dirty pirates sharing your files? But how much extra did you make by having MORE clients because more people have the software needed to actually use your stuff?
-------
You are assuming an awful lot. Or is this info just from personal experience? You are a filthy dirty pirate right? Using a illegal version of Photoshop or have. There are so many cheap options out there to design and scrap. Its ludicrous to think a "big number" of all of us are filthy dirty pirates. Please go take your rant elsewhere.
There is no way jaguar woman would say piracy is good for adobe. What a load of absolute crap. Sounds like justification to make someone feel better about pirating to me.
------
Really? How is that? Do explain. Your comment, like most, makes little sense.
CS2 EDUCATION is ok for commercial use CS2 STUDENT is not. Student used to be cheaper than education.
Now they are one and the same, and the education version is ok for commercial use for most countries.
I find it amusing that there are some people here who feel the need to tell a bunch of anons on an anon blog that they have legitimate software. Funniest thing I've read all day.
Who the heck cares if your software is legit? I don't and I'm guessing that most on here don't either.
----------------------------
I find it amusing that pirates tell us on a smack blog that most designers pirate their software... they know that exactly...how!?
^^^
They don't, it's assumption.
If my customers use pirated software then that's on their conscience and I can't worry about that. I bought a copy of PSE when I started designing. My DH is working on his Master's so this year I upgraded to CS5 Educational. Most people know someone who is a student that can get them this discount.
I'm glad to find out that CS2 educational can be used for commercial, mine definitely says educational and not student. Thanks, I feel better now!
http://scraporchard.com/gallery/data/500/puzzletemplate1.jpg
Happy Tits thinks she is photogenic.
http://scraporchard.com/gallery/data/500/puzzletemplate1.jpg
Happy Tits thinks she is photogenic.
January 20, 2012 8:33 AM
I love how the cat is rubbing her happy tits, too. Thoughtful placement.
Since CS5, the Student and Teacher Editions can be utilized for personal as well as commercial use, for all academic customers worldwide. And after graduation or completion of coursework, you can continue to use the software on your personal systems; there is no usage expiration.
http://prodesigntools.com/difference-between-adobe-cs5-student-editions-vs-regular.html
I'm confused. Was that rant about you being pissed because you can't afford Adobe or was it because you have pirated and want to justify it by saying everyone else does too?
My Adobe is bought and paid for. I don't need some anon coming in here and disparaging the reputation of other designers just because they want software they can't afford. Take a xanax, your crazy is showing.
I agree - I hate that people automatically assume that all designers download their software illegally. No thank you. I have mine and any other software I have bought and paid for. If you can't afford PS, design in PSE. Otherwise you are just a hypocrite if you get upset about people pirating kits.
I started out with Gimp and PSE. Gimp is free and PSE came free with my tablet purchase. These worked wonderfully and allowed me to save to upgrade to PSCS2. From there, I upgraded to CS5.
You know what they say about people who ASSume shit.
My Adobe is bought and paid for. I don't need some anon coming in here and disparaging the reputation of other designers just because they want software they can't afford. Take a xanax, your crazy is showing.
------
I think your crazy is showing. Getting upset and defensive about what anons are disparaging? Get real.
Oh wow, can I joining the discussion too? Yes, I have the whole kit and kaboodle of CS because my nephew is very good at pirating. We have everything we could ever need. Oh gosh, I'm so sorry I wasn't silly enough to pay for it and then have to explain that decision on a smack blog! Yes, I know, you feel kinda dumb and have to justify it somewhere, don't you?
Seriously, what is with some of you having to explain that you have a legitimate copy? Like I asked before, who the heck cares, besides you?
You look desperate justifying yourself on here.
Do I really have pirated software, or did I buy it? You'll never know.
Most people know someone who is a student that can get them this discount.
-----
True, but isn't that just as bad as pirating to some extent? Someone is still lying about who is the student and who the software is for, aren't they?
Just buy the damn software. It's a business expense, and well worth it.
But if youre guilty conscience doesn't bother you why pay for something you don't have to. It may be well worth it but free is even more.
True, but isn't that just as bad as pirating to some extent? Someone is still lying about who is the student and who the software is for, aren't they?
--------------
Not sure if it is that bad. I did purchase CS5 recently with my son's ID, but they only ask for the student's ID. They do not check if that student is you or related to you. If they did and you lied, that would be one thing, but they do NOT ask, so they surely know that everyone can make the purchase like that. Heck, they will allow you to purchase the academic version even if the child is in grade one! Do they really think that the 6 year old will be the one using it?
Hmmm my daughter is starting Kindergarten in September and I'm still using CS2, I wonder if she'll qualify!
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites.
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites.
-----
issues much? Also, what exactly does bitching about the products being similar and paying for the software have to with each other? If you just wanted to rant about hypocrites, do it. You didn't have to try to "lead up to it"
Well it's nice to know this blog is full of pirates. FFS we bitch about designers' kits being similar but you won't pay for your fucking software? I bet you claim to be God-Fearing Christians too. Hypocrites.
------
I don't see anyone saying they didn't pay for their software. Go and learn to read before having a tantrum. FYI, I'm not a Christian and I don't claim to be one either.
Not sure if it is that bad. I did purchase CS5 recently with my son's ID, but they only ask for the student's ID. They do not check if that student is you or related to you. If they did and you lied, that would be one thing, but they do NOT ask, so they surely know that everyone can make the purchase like that. Heck, they will allow you to purchase the academic version even if the child is in grade one! Do they really think that the 6 year old will be the one using it?
---------
It seems pretty stupid to have Education and Student versions when they don't ask for proper ID. What's the point?
You know they say a lie of omission is still a lie. Not an accusation, by any means, just pointing it out.
It's like saying that you, generic you, took someone else's pension check but they didn't ask for your ID when you cashed it, so technically, apparently, you didn't steal it. See what I mean? It's a thin line.
Gotta love how you can all pull apart a anything here!
I'm bored.
Next topic .... anyone .... please?
Not an original design idea out there anymore, I see? A week or two ago, I saw these chipboard word bubbles and arrows at TDC by Wishing Well: http://www.thedigichick.com/shop/Everyday-Life-Say-What-Word-Bits.html
I thought they were cute, but didn't buy them. Then today I get the SSD newsletter and am looking at their new releases and Jenn Barrette went and did the same thing: http://www.sweetshoppedesigns.com/sweetshoppe/product.php?productid=22782&cat=478&page=1
If you can't think of your own ideas you should prolly wait at least a week or two before you release a copy of something else. At least she made them a different color. *eyeroll*
Who says one copied the other? Maybe they both saw a scrapper using that idea, and they both started working on it but one released it earlier than the other. Ever thought of that? Why everything that is similar as to be "copied" from someone else? Can't they both be inspired by the same thing? Oh wait... that would not be smack-worthy then, would it?
that it came out the very next week does make Barrette look bad. not that that's the only thing that makes her look bad.
I don't think they copied each other. I saw some craft stickers like that on Pinterest. They probably both saw it there.
Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos. They are all over Pinterest. So neither of them had the idea in the first place.
Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos. They are all over Pinterest. So neither of them had the idea in the first place.
-----
"Those are shapes that a bunch of Project Life people have been cutting on their Cameos." ?????
No, those are basic word bubbles and arrows, found in Photoshop's basic shapes. It's not something that's specific to Project Life or any other scrapbooking project. Basic shapes are up for grabs for anyone who wants to use them in their designs.
I think the point the OP was trying to make (excuse me if I am offbase or get it wrong here) is that it's always interesting when one designer releases something that's almost exactly the same as another designer, a week later. We've said on this blog plenty of times that no idea is truly original. Not arguing that, b/c the idea itself might not have been original to either one of them, but I think the point being made was have some shame and don't release an almost identical product the very week after another designer releases it. I'm not saying I agree with that, but just that I think it was the original point.
"Making sure one does not release something very similar soon after" might be just an idealistic way to see this. If Designer A and Designer B both see something interesting (on Pinterest or other) and they both consider making something like that, are they supposed to search everywhere in case someone already released something similar so they can wait a bit longer "to be nice"? What if Designer C decides to jump in and release something similar one week after Designer A? Does that mean that now, Designer B has to wait a bit longer so that it does not look like she copied Designer A AND Designer C who "didn't wait her turn" so to speak? When you release a kit or a product or an element pack, do you check out everywhere in case something similar exists? And if you have that time to spare, and find something similar, do you really wait? Honestly!
I never look at other stores to see what other people are designing! Am I the only one?
I think that Pinterest can actually be a good thing to look at. If your target audience see something as interesting, they if you create that (or something in that style), then you might just sell them. Living under a rock and not looking anywhere for trends and novel ideas, and interest is making things harder to reach your market.
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time).
Once I started designing I had to stop following a lot of store newsletters and other designers' personal newsletters (and blogs) because it's paralyzing to get caught in that cycle of "Someone else made something similar". We're all existing in the same relatively small little world exposed to a lot of the same inspiration and influences from social media and the paper industry. I went through a period where I kept making products and then before I finished them I'd notice something very similar (or even just a little bit similar) from another designer in that week's newsletter and I'd trash the whole project just so someone wouldn't accuse me of copying them. You'd never get anything created if you worried about whether someone else did something similar. Ignorance is bliss to a certain extent. Plus, the customer deserves options anyway. If one designer makes something using a set of a dozen words, then another designer makes it using different ones, or with different colors - one customer may find Designer #2's items more useful for their needs.
I just looked at both of them and the worst part isn't that the products are similar. That part, as said already, can be explained by Pinterest. Many people have something similar pinned there. But Jenn picked the same name, Everyday, for her bubbles that was used by Wishing Well the week before. I know Everyday isn't copywrited or anything, but wow pick another title.
Kinda makes it seem like Jenn really hadn't seen the first set last week. Either that or she's super stupid or arrogant.
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time).
-------
Exactly.
Why would Jenn Barrette even know who this nobody is to copy her?
Gotta love how you can all pull apart a anything here!
I'm bored.
Next topic .... anyone .... please?
----
But we can't, coz we'll have to pull it apart, which apparently you find boring.
Boredom is a sign of great stupidity, which I guess you just proved, didn't you?
I never look at other stores to see what other people are designing! Am I the only one?
-----
No, you aren't, but some people have a bee up their behinds about anything that SSD does.
I love how you're all defending the word bubbles, but were blasting Meg Mullens just a few days ago for releasing something similar to Jady Day - who released it LAST YEAR (for the first time).
--------
Blasted? No one blasted her. The convo is right at the top of this page and I don't see a single blast for her having a similar kit. I see some people bashing her for bad design and color choices, but not for the similar kit.
But Jenn picked the same name, Everyday, for her bubbles that was used by Wishing Well the week before. I know Everyday isn't copywrited or anything, but wow pick another title.
------
For instance? Everyday is a good description, that's what they are, everyday words. What should she have called them?
Not an original design idea out there anymore, I see? A week or two ago, I saw these chipboard word bubbles and arrows at TDC by Wishing Well: http://www.thedigichick.com/shop/Everyday-Life-Say-What-Word-Bits.html
I thought they were cute, but didn't buy them. Then today I get the SSD newsletter and am looking at their new releases and Jenn Barrette went and did the same thing: http://www.sweetshoppedesigns.com/sweetshoppe/product.php?productid=22782&cat=478&page=1
-----------
Well I guess neither of them should have made those word bubbles, considering that I saw them over two years ago by some other designer.
True, but isn't that just as bad as pirating to some extent? Someone is still lying about who is the student and who the software is for, aren't they?
-------------------------------------
I have bought the software from adobe for my daughter and then changed the registration later to me, and guess what, adobe don't care. At least I have paid for software instead of stealing it.
I think they would prefer you buy it at a discount than not at all.
"Making sure one does not release something very similar soon after" might be just an idealistic way to see this. If Designer A and Designer B both see something interesting (on Pinterest or other) and they both consider making something like that, are they supposed to search everywhere in case someone already released something similar so they can wait a bit longer "to be nice"? What if Designer C decides to jump in and release something similar one week after Designer A? Does that mean that now, Designer B has to wait a bit longer so that it does not look like she copied Designer A AND Designer C who "didn't wait her turn" so to speak?
----------
Exactly!
Why would Jenn Barrette even know who this nobody is to copy her?
-----
What an ignorant thing to say.
I went through a period where I kept making products and then before I finished them I'd notice something very similar (or even just a little bit similar) from another designer in that week's newsletter and I'd trash the whole project just so someone wouldn't accuse me of copying them.
------
Yep, me too, especially if the other designer was a name.
Kinda makes it seem like Jenn really hadn't seen the first set last week.
-----
Why would she have seen them? They sell at different stores and I bet she has better things to do, like design, than cruise every digi store to see if someone has the same idea.
Why would Jenn Barrette even know who this nobody is to copy her?
-----
What an ignorant thing to say.
---------
Exactly. Just because you don't shop at TDC doesn't mean loads of other customers don't, she's hardly a nobody at least not in my book.
Speaking of SSD, hey Robin please figure out/fix whatever problems you're having with your new site and stop sending me 4 newsletters every Saturday. It's getting really fucking annoying. I'm on the verge of unsubscribing, and I actually like shopping there.
^^^^
Did you contact SSD or are you just complaining here?
Why would Jenn Barrette even know who this nobody is to copy her?
-----
Remember how someone here on the blog used to quote facebook fan numbers all of the time as an indicator of a store's tier standing? I used to think it was funny how much it ticked some of you off. So naturally when I read the above statement, I thoguht it would be interesting to compare the two designer's facebook numbers and Barrette's losing that race by over 1300 fans, not that I place a lot of importance on that, but I know some of you do and it's a substantial difference.
^^^^
That's funny actually. I think it's because Wishing Wells is active at DST and Jenn is not.
I think it's because Wishing Well gives away a TON of freebies. Nothing more.
^^^
yes, at DST, which is where I see her. I don't see Jenn at all.
I don't ever see either of them at DST anymore. That place is dead now though.
I think it's because Wishing Well gives away a TON of freebies. Nothing more.
---------
I follow her and she gives out about a freebie a month, I wish she gave out more. Is that a TON of freebies? Compared to a lot of other designers I follow, I don't think it is. Personally I think her follower number is so high because she still does the blog train.
I follow her and she gives out about a freebie a month, I wish she gave out more. Is that a TON of freebies? Compared to a lot of other designers I follow, I don't think it is. Personally I think her follower number is so high because she still does the blog train.
January 22, 2012 10:43 AM
Last I knew, the blog train was a freebie.
^^^
Last I knew, the blog train was once every 2 months. Hardly a TON.
LMAO that we are even having this discussion. We all know that neither of them are nobodys, and it's really unlikely that either of them copied the other. We must really be out of topics for this to have become a full scale discussion.
^^^^
Meh, it's no more trivial than some discussions we've had.
So call me bored but after mention of Happy Tits, I decided to look into her baby gaga drama again. I stumbled on this thread where Victorya says that Happy Tits claimed she left her daughter with her sister while she was out of the country getting treatment for CANCER. So apparently now she is a cancer survivor as well.
http://forum.p.baby-gaga.com/about168363-2.html
According to that thread she supposedly had ovarian cancer and was in the states getting chemo for it. HA wow that girl is more crazy than I thought.
http://miss-alyssawade.blogspot.com/
http://miss-alyssawade.blogspot.com/
...............
The header "youknowyouloveme" LOL! Suuure we love ya girl! You just love the attention!
So call me bored but after mention of Happy Tits, I decided to look into her baby gaga drama again. I stumbled on this thread where Victorya says that Happy Tits claimed she left her daughter with her sister while she was out of the country getting treatment for CANCER. So apparently now she is a cancer survivor as well.
http://forum.p.baby-gaga.com/about168363-2.html
-------------
I despair for the future after reading some of those posts.
http://miss-alyssawade.blogspot.com/
=========
WTH? She's one screwed up kid, that's for sure.
From her blog -
Tuesday, January 22, 2008
bitches..
now days are crazy. seriously.
e-crazies.
SMH.
Posted by MissAlyssa at 12:28 AM 0 comments
___________________________
The irony.
Trixie just posted on her facebook page that she is opening yet another store. WTH is that, 15?
Trixie just posted on her facebook page that she is opening yet another store. WTH is that, 15?
January 23, 2012 7:23 PM
Well, she's also closing a store. And who cares if she's selling everywhere, more power to her!
One store for each chin.
Seriously, though. How these designers keep up with multiple stores is beyond me.
Good grief - yes, Tracy is fat - who the hell cares?
Seriously. As if you're a supermodel.
I'd be willing to guess MANY digiscrap designers are not "average" sized.
I'm a designer and am about 25-30 pounds over what I should weigh.
Grow up, I'm sure you're nowhere near perfect.
^^^^^
I'd bet it's about half and half. I'm overweight, but I know a lot of digi designers who aren't.
I'm a designer - and not overweight in the slightest. Guess that's what happens when I'm juggling working outside the home, playing with the kids, and designing! There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day.
As far as Tracy - she's a beautiful person inside and out - which is more than I can say for a lot of crappy people here. I'm very happy to know her as well as anyone can in this industry. As far as her moving store - good for her - I wish her all the best! I do hope she figures out who you are as she posted the comment about re-previewing on her personal page - if you don't like someone unfriend them. Don't be a anonymous bitch.
Good Lord. There are fat people, average people, and skinny people everywhere.
To make some comment inferring that designers are fat because they sit around at the computer all day instead of playing with their kids is just as ignorant as the initial comment.
The sad part is, I bet you're all teaching your children your intolerant ways. What a sad world we leave in.
I do hope she figures out who you are as she posted the comment about re-previewing on her personal page - if you don't like someone unfriend them. Don't be a anonymous bitch.
---------
I'm the OP of her moving stores. She posted it on her **design** page, which is where I received the information. I am not friends with her, so I really don't give a flying anything what she posts there.
I can't see comments past 200. Am I the only one?
I didn't say designers are fat because they don't play with their kids. I simply said that scrappers - and the rest of the world frankly - would do well not to sit at their computers all day. Even if it doesn't make you skinny, it's good to get away from computers! But you feel free to twist my words any way you like :)
As far as Tracy posting on her design page - unlike it if you hate her so much!
Wow. If only you could travel the world and let all the fat people know all they need to do is take a walk and their health would be better.
Just think of all those poor, dumb, fat people just sitting in front of their computers wondering what to do...
^^ LOL
I do always get a chuckle over the people who come to this blog and try to educate everyone else.
I can't see comments past 200. Am I the only one?
No, you're not the only one. I can't see past 200 either unless I do a whole lotta clicking.
I can't see past 200 posts wth?
I find it funny when designers clearly post questions like that, not to actually educate themselves but just to point out how other designers might be violating copyrights.
Why not just mind your own fucking business? Unless, since it IS Laitha, who posted the question she's simply trying to point out someone else's possible violations so she can justify the violations of her own!
Why are you bringing up shit from 2008? Seriously, I don't like Happy Tits anymore than anyone else, but for fuck's sake, you're telling me that 2008 posts are worth dredging up again? Get a grip.
Anyone else having trouble seeing comments 201+? Been trying all day to see the latest comments. I hope they're catty!
I can see all comments fine.
There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day.
-----
How do you know they don't, or are you just assuming something?
I'm a designer - and not overweight in the slightest. Guess that's what happens when I'm juggling working outside the home, playing with the kids, and designing! There are plenty of scrappers who would do well to play with their kids - or even just go for a walk rather than just sit on their computer all day.
< snip > ... a beautiful person inside and out - which is more than I can say for a lot of crappy people here.
------------
Including yourself, by the sounds of it. You sure are sounding like one of the crappy people right about now.
Looks like Mye is opening her 6th store, too.
http://myedeleon.com/2012/01/big-news-im-opening-a-new-store/
Wonder if it's the same store as Trixie...
Any guesses?
What's the point of me replying to you regarding whether or not I can see past the first 200 comments, if you can't see past the first 200 comments to read my reply?
When I first land here, I click on the number of comments link. When I do that, the page I get to doesn't seem to be showing the "newer-older" links.
I have to click the post title in order to the last post. If that makes sense.
I like the way I've been doing it better but oh, well.
I can see the "newer-older" links. Try copying and pasting this to see if it helps you.
http://www.blogger.com/comment.g?postID=7405758044643110537&blogID=611446092248022860&isPopup=false&page=2
I just bookmark this page until it gets to the next one, then I bookmark the newest page and delete the old one. This way I don't have to navigate through all the links every time.
http://dsthof.blogspot.com/2012/01/new-space-for-2012.html?commentPage=2
Hope this helps.
^^^^
I do something similar, I just click on the newest page in my history bar.
I find it funny when designers clearly post questions like that, not to actually educate themselves but just to point out how other designers might be violating copyrights.
Why not just mind your own fucking business? Unless, since it IS Laitha, who posted the question she's simply trying to point out someone else's possible violations so she can justify the violations of her own!
----
WTH are you talking about? And speaking of minding your own business, why don't you follow your own advice?
Where the heck is everyone?
did anyone see any of the drama that went down on facebook after KCB posted the winners of her CT call? I kept hearing that people were talking a whole lotta shit, but I am guessing the shit talkers are not people I am friends with since I didn't see any of it =(
went to check her business page and saw nothing unusual. Was it deleted already or on her personal page?
went to check her business page and saw nothing unusual. Was it deleted already or on her personal page?
Sour grapes from those who didn't get in, from what I understand. Very mature.
I think they might be referring to individual scrappers?
Who the heck is KCB?
Sour grapes from those who didn't get in, from what I understand. Very mature.
-----------
Yes, very mature, indeed. One who was being snarky is the scrapper who has pics of herself in most of her layouts.
i don't see any page numbers down at the bottom of the blog any longer so I can't get to the new posts. What's up with that??
LOL guess all I had to do was post and I got it back!! CRAZYYYY
This happens with almost every call at SSD. It happened with Cindy's call also.
Looks like Mye is opening her 6th store, too.
http://myedeleon.com/2012/01/big-news-im-opening-a-new-store/
Wonder if it's the same store as Trixie...
Any guesses?
Um, 6 stores? How does she keep up? Her stuff is not all that good either.
Who was the one bitching about KCB's call?
IDK but she was taking potshots at KCB's team on her design page or maybe it was at SSD. I know that I saw some status updates about that.
Tracy is going to pickleberry pop - I am on her team.
Thank you to the person on Tracy's team for that tidbit. I really could care less where she is going.
KCB set her self up for the backlash. Put your big girl panties on and pick your own CT.
I didn't see any drama after KCB announced her team. I think they're all decent scrappers except for one. But, I'm sure more than just scrapping was taken into consideration (the one is very active at SSD).
There were other good scrappers who didn't make the team that I would take in a heartbeat, but you only have so many slots.
I don't get what the drama could remotely be about. It's a CT Call for crying out loud.
People get a bit too emotional over this crap. Kendall, who is already on 8 CTs, 5 at SSD, said she was shaking and literally crying tears of joy. WTH?
Post a Comment