Here are some more related resources I've seen recommended by others:
Photoshop but for Illustrations (paid): https://www.drawkit.io/peach
>This license does not include the right to compile assets, vectors or images from unDraw to replicate a similar or competing service, in any form or distribute the assets in packs. This extends to automated and non-automated ways to link, embed, scrape, search or download the assets included on the website without our consent.
This is exactly the sort of thing you say when you're trying to make data public but keep someone else from slapping a different header on your data and pretending they did all the work.
The ability to redistribute and change is as important, I think, as the ability to see the source.
Although I suppose you won't get as many downvotes as I did (the reason for which still eludes me)
https://opensource.org/history claims that the term did not really exist before those behind OSI/opensource.org started using it. While the originality of any composition of dictionary terms is debatable, I'm quite willing to accept that claim. I remember hot debates about the conceptual differences between FSF and OSI but none about prior use of the term.
You want the word shared source maybe? Or viewable source?
Many companies like Microsoft allow people to view the source code to their closed-source products under restrictive licenses, but nobody would claim that these products are "open source" as a result.
"Open" doesn't just mean "viewable."
> unDraw grants you an nonexclusive, worldwide copyright license to download, copy, modify, distribute, perform, and use the assets provided from unDraw for free
Edit: thinking of it again - kind of like software on github can be open source even if github isn't.
This is open source with a restriction on agregate use, thus making it officially not open source.
Well, any collection, even one of the images, if it's served up in a similar service.
This basically means that if it's not free, it's not open source either.
Creating tons of confusion and not helping their cause at all as free proprietary software may benefit from the label when distributed to the masses as they heard "free" software is good.
Thinking about it, my previous point may be heavily biased by how “free software” sounds and how the wording is used in my native language.
A few questions:
1) How do you plan to monetize the service? Always important to ask of free services so I don't get blindsighted later. :)
2) How often are new images added? Is there a process to go through to request specific images/themes being added (perhaps for a fee)?
3) On the "For Designers" page I see that every image is a vector and scalable -- do you plan on offering a few separate PNG downloads for things like small, medium, large? Obviously people can resize things manually (or, at least, I assume they can losslessly resize PNGs without photoshop), but it might be a nice quality of life improvement too.
Sorry if these are answered in an FAQ or something in the footer -- with infinite scroll I can't ever get down long enough to see what's actually in it. :P
1) There's no chance of getting blindsided as Katerina started this to share work that was not used in client projects and keeps designing new ones daily since the reception of it has been amazing. In the off chance she gets tired, she'll just stop adding new ones, so no worries there!
2) She adds 2 daily for the past two years, but can't promise she'll keep up the pace during the holidays! If you want to request a specific one, she's pretty open to it on Twitter @ninalimpi. But don't share this! Haha...
3) Having the color change on the fly and offering PNG alongside SVG's, I think it would be redundant to add more options.
Btw, the footer is available in the homepage and is included in the /illustrations page for aesthetic reasons! Haha!
I often need graphics like these and my design skills don't match Katarina's so I am really thankful you give us the right to use the work in commercial projects as well.
Have a great time with your beloved one's and hopefully some awesome food :)
I think the terms you are looking for are "royalty free" or "permissively licensed".
nope. open source isn't making anything clearer in this case. in fact using that word made me wonder what exactly the license is for this... still not exactly sure what it is.
There was something recently about human-like illustrations that was too unrealistic.
I'd say these are realistic enough and general enough and as said above very nicely done.
1. "Pull request" really tell a story: it is not always effortless to pull in a contribution.
2. I was not able to figure out how to download vectors on mobile, just png.
I routinely come across sites out there with these illustrations now, and it is becoming a little same-y (check out @humansofflat on Twitter).
I'm not sure I'd call changing the colour parameter in an SVG "cutting edge tech" but oh well.
Overall looks good, might check out the license more fully before using it though.
Check it out for an example of the types of images you can grab.
What I think is really unfair to mention is that unDraw has contributed to the commoditization of illustrations. On the contrary, there have been many many projects available to illustrators just because the initial design/proposal/prototype could be built with that and win over the clients. Project designs that would otherwise use photographs but not illustrations.
Sites like Upwork, Freelancer, etc. existed long before unDraw and you could find creative work there for truly humiliating prices. It's extremely inaccurate to blame unDraw for that.
The fact is that unDraw helped bring attention to illustrators and illustrations, which were called icons even a few years ago, by opening up a discussion and many new projects.
I'm willing to throw a few bucks at that. For clip art (SVG) in a blog post, I'll throw $10-$15 at that. Per post. But the art needs to speak to me or otherwise just "click" with my yet-to-be-defined vision for the content. I don't know what will click until I see it. I also don't want to waste either party's time with my hemming and hawing, trying to put a feeling into words so I can describe to the designer... how I think they should do their job. I'm not the expert. I just fail at communicating. It's much easier on everyone if I see it already done or otherwise 95% of the way there.
Sites like these help me a lot more with finding things that just "click." At least a lot more than the alternatives of finding someone on Upwork, et al.
One point of criticism is that these images don't work at all sizes (or resolutions).
For example, the image for "login" wouldn't fit in a small bar typically at the top of a website. Or as another example, you wouldn't be able to use these images as emoticons in a chat program. They are simply too big and detailed for that.
If you mean some images have too many details to be displayed as small icons, well, these are not really designed to be used as icons... if you need icons, try the nounproject as others suggested: https://thenounproject.com/
Try again :P