Nowadays scientific illustration became an integral part of publications. Apart from original research images, graphical abstract is imperative for journal submission. It even receives more attention than the main article. I, as a person with mediocre drawing skills, always fascinated by published graphical abstracts. Recent times, many illustration making softwares came in rescue. Many softwares provide free/ paid services like icon libraries, flow charts, etc., which form the basis for creating illustrations according to one's requirement. Some softwares provide templates, which can be modified by paying subscription. What perplexed me is, Are these templates making us copycats?

For example, a simple google image search resulted in exact matches of nearly more than 50 publications, where a image template was slightly modified. As a person, who used to see the images first, this is really confusing to identify a publication based on its graphical abstract. In essence, these templates will fail to create a hype/curiosity among the audience (as it is initially aimed for) and making all our work similar like "Agent Smith". Is it acceptable?