I just uploaded another design to my store on www.RedBubble.com ... I also have them on www.SpreadShirt.com but Red Bubble's interface seems to work a lot easier. Anyway, feel free to check 'em out...



http://www.redbubble.com/people/flapanther33781

Yes. Needs work.

Please elaborate.

I provided a screenshot of how your product description appears in my Firefox.

When you asked me to elaborate, I used Chrome. The product description (your image) pops up.

Could be my Firefox needs an update.

Why the 4th millennium? The wheel was old by then. And, 'we' had beer.

What I mean is you're being a bit vague about what the problem is (what needs work?) ... the only thing I can see that looks wrong is that the template rectangle is (to me) clearly a lighter shade than the rest of the shirt. I've remade the design twice and got the same result, I'm not sure but I think it might just be a flaw with the way their website displays the design. If you're just trying to tell me that you're having problems with the way the display shows up in different browsers, erm ... it's not my website. The site is a portal for people to put their own designs on.

As for the date of 4,000 BC ... (a) although I'm sure we had some form of tools befor ethen the exact date masterminds and minions appeared is debatable, and (b) it's far enough back that my point is clear about mankind being stupid hasn't changed in a long, long time.

Your product looks like crap due to the fact that it cannot be viewed, as clearly demonstrated in the example provided.

Also, your 'science' is flawed - so much so that it becomes self-referential..

I was able to manipulate my browser settings to allow the product to display better. As a reviewer, I was willing to do so. As a consumer, I would probably just shop elsewhere.

I browsed other products at that site. Other products present properly.

Display better? Are you talking about it being too small to read? Because if you hover your mouse over the design your mouse cursor turns into a magnifying glass with a + inside it (at least mine does). This is hard to see because the mouse pointer is black over a background that's also black. Anyway, if you then click on the design an animated zoom of the image pops up. Did that resolve your issue?

On the other topic - how is my "science" flawed to the point of being self referential?

The wheel was almost a thousand years old. Copper smelting was an established technology 7,000 years ago. Brick buildings are 8,000 years old. Wine. Beer. Not only the development of organized, permanent agriculture settlements in two hemispheres, but adaptive agriculture in Mesopotamia. Basketry, advances in pottery, weaving. Irrigation.

Sufficient examples of applied science that your point is clear about mankind being uninformed won't change for a long, long time.

Let me add some emphasis:

(a) although I'm sure we had some form of tools before then the exact date masterminds and minions appeared is debatable

So yes, the date is arbitrary. I don't have a problem with that.

My mistake. I thought masterminds were the target market.

http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/6190-is-science-arbitrary/

Masterminds (or people who think they are) of the present day, not of millenia past. We can all have our own ideas of what makes one a mastermind, one aspect of their character (as I see them) are that they're so egotistical that they wouldn't care what other historical masterminds are or are not included - as long as they themselves are.

Anyway, I feel like I'm having to defend myself with you about minutae. I was about to explain that I eventually learned not to worry about minutae because even my 85% is better than a lot of peoples' 100% - but when I wrote the word minutae something else came to mind... which is that another aspect of my idea of a mastermind is someone who comes up with the big picture and lets other people worry about the fine details. Granted that's often to the demise of their plan but I'm not REALLY plotting world domination here. I think I can live with a few debatable details.

Yes, 120 DPI, 2400 x 3600. As a matter of fact if you upload anything less Red Bubble will reject the design. The only thing I can think of is that they register the black in the design as a different color but I see other designs on the site that don't have that issue. Maybe I'll play with GiMP some more this weekend and discover I'm doing something wrong with my color selection.