Your feedback is appreciated

I recently uploaded this after effects template and it was rejected.

How do you evaluate the quality of the animation?
What’s wrong with this project and how can I improve it?

Thanks for all your feedback remarks and tips.

Hi, sorry for the rejection. I want to tell you my personal opinion.
Charmander is a special character. You must purchase the copyrights before using this character for the template. Reflective flooring was popular last year. That’s okay, but the charmander and the floor have different styles. There is a problem with the character’s walk. Flames old style. Logo animation is just a fade. If this is a transparent video. Everyone who has this video gets the same result. No need for a template.
These are my personal comments.
Good luck.


Thanks for sharing your personal comments and opinion.

I just wanted to shed the light on the copyright issue: I posted a question on this forum months ago about this subject.

I also sent and email for the support to clarify this thing for me more:

HI there,

It’s Skyler here, thanks for reaching out to us.

If you follow the guidelines and you have the proper licensing for the included content, there shouldn’t be any issues. Just make sure that the content that’s being used, has the correct license and that you double-check the terms 👍

All items will be considered at the point of review.


As I can tell form both the answers, nothing was really clear.
No one gave me a concrete answer.

Thanks for your remarks and feed-back about the overall look of the animation.
I may make some the changes on the aspects that you mentioned for the animation and effects, so I can improve it and re-upload it when I clarify the copyright issue.

1 Like

Sorry, but the animation looks bad.

  • when the pokemon emits fire, it doesn’t even stagger. he is in an absolute state of calm
  • when the pokemon emits fire, the fire hasn’t changed the pokemon’s illumination in any way.
  • the pattern on the floor repeats, which looks artificial.
  • passing near the logo, the pokemon slides.
  • the fire is not reflected from the ground, it is just duplicated on the floor.
  • the logo does not interact with animation.
  • general animation and logo animation have a slightly different style.
  • this font is not suitable for this composition.
  • I do not see any commercial potential in this product. It’s hard for me to imagine a buyer who will need this.

Skyler from Support told you “If you follow the guidelines and you have the proper licensing for the included content, there shouldn’t be any issues.”

You don’t really have a license for Pokemon from Nintendo, that allows you to make money with their brand, do you?

The rejection is because of the quality issues the other authors already mentioned but to get you away from trouble, my advice is: Do not include trademarks, characters, etc in your items.


Thank you so much, I really appreciate your feed-back and remarks.
No I don’t have a license from Nintendo or from the Pokémon company.
As far as I know, Nintendo no longer licenses it characters and properties to outside vendors.
What got me wondering about the possibility to use a Pokémon character is that there are so many platforms and sites that sells 3d models, assets and elements of Pokémon.
Even, in there some elements that are associated with the Pokémon.

This is why, I can’t get a clear and definite answer.

That is a good point. I cannot clearly give you a definitive answer, as at the end it will all come down if you can justify any end product made with your item to be “fair use”.

On all of these items, you see the “This item may not be property released” text. That is basically envato’s marker for : This work depicts something that neither we, nor you will have a license to use non-editorially or maybe not even in any other way, even if you buy a license for this on envato market".

Basically, that means the customer is buying the work of the 3D artist, but the created artwork represents something he may not actually use, and may need an extra license for.

This property release text is available on videohive as well, so you might get it approved with this tag. It will then be for sale for editorial use only. But as you did a logo reveal here, how can that still be editorial use? Hard to justify, probably.

I wouldn’t risk to invest time to create an item that either gets rejected because of the trademarks or cannot be used by my clients because of the trademarks.

Here is more info on the property release text:


This makes a lot of sense.
If we suppose that this project was accepted, this may represent some issues in the license later when this terms are applied.
You’re absolutely right about this point, why would anyone risk time and energy on something that is not guaranteed. :+1:
Following a safer choice is more rational.
I may be walking in a way that’s not optimal and rational.
However, we learn from our mistakes and false interpretations.
Thank you again, for your analysis, tips and explanation. :pray:

1 Like

3docean is also paid I mean they charge $2 .