Let's try this again followed by updates to common questions and concerns.
 
<original post for the records>
On the heels of our recent landmark of reaching 500,000 cards it is due time for GCU to turn an honest and critical eye to our existing collection and new cards.  To date GCU has accepted virtually all submitted work and artists.  Today we are introducing a Marketability Standards policy.  Based on GCU’s evaluation of marketability and commercial appeal, GCU will begin saying “no thank you” to cards.    
 
The Marketability Standards and Guidelines will raise the bar on card designs to increase professionalism and marketability and ultimately a better experience for our shoppers.  This will up the overall product quality on GCU which reflects on all artists in our community as shoppers view GCU as a single store.  Our goal is to provide a selection of greeting cards to the buying public that are competitive,  professional, and equal to the highest level of design.
 
Although we’d like to say this process will be clear cut, objective and quantitative, in practice that is quite impossible.  By nature it is subjective and heavily qualitative.  However here are some of the elements that we have established as standards and guidelines that our reviewers will be looking at.  These will soon be reflected on our GCU Wiki page with image examples:
 
a.      Subject Matter -  poor, random, unrelated, not professional
b.      Image Quality – clarity, color, lighting, angle, cropping, shadows, composition,  misuse of filter, out of focus, exposure, particularly with photographs
c.      Overused Image
d.      Unrelated Image - not related nor appropriate to occasion/category, gender, relation, age, etc.
e.      Any Reason - on a case by case basis we reserve the right to not accept a card considered to be lacking in commercial appeal
 
The review team will begin to apply these standards to newly submitted cards.  No cards will be grandfathered in.  GCU will also begin weeding through existing cards and saying “no thank you” to those deemed not marketable.  Ultimately the direction is for new artists to submit sample work for evaluation before opening a GCU storefront.
 
This is an excellent time for all artists to look at their body of work with a critical eye as well.  Schedule your own “Weed out Week” where artists look at their own cards and remove those designs that you feel do not reflect your best work or do not shine with professionalism and polish.  Consider using your family and friends and peer artists as honest and frank critics and participating in the GCU Community BLOG Critique Clinic.  
 
We realize many artists will not be happy about this new policy.   This is another corner for GCU and artists to turn and we will all feel the growing pains.  However we are confident that this is a fair and necessary step as GCU grows and strives to be the leader in online paper greeting card sales.
 
Thank you in advance for your understanding and support!  Please let me know if you have any questions or comments.  

Mindy, perhaps inviting the artists if it means a way for all of us to learn (and perhaps the artists given the no thank you can have an immediate opportunity to learn to fix the offending card for submitting again) - maybe that might work?  I'd be happy to possibly volunteer an image or two... I need all the help I can get and would rather have my work looked at with impartial eyes so I can learn.  Give me a private heads up if you plan to can some of my cards.

that's a good idea too but it won't cover the other forms of artwork - painting, drawing, digital art.  We'd need a way to cover those forms too.

...or maybe just do not include the Artist's name when showing a no thank you card

Thanks for posting the guidelines, Mindy.

some folks might not want to be used as an example - even if their name isn't used, they will know that their card is an example of what not to do.  For good examples, it's free advertising if you think about it.  Me personally, I would rather learn from my mistakes so if a card of mine is to be used as an example of a "no thank you", depending on the card, I'd be more inclined to say yes and use it as long as my name isn't showing.

Now....there will be those who will be unhappy receiving a *no thank you* or maybe many *no thank yous*    (probably me) Lol! and they will want to voice their concerns and opinions on this, no doubt. No matter how specific GCU is on why etc., there will be those who disagree so, probably will need a specific way to go about this whether, it's through email only or, on here in another forum - maybe  *The Complaints Department*  

Quote from Judy_139270 on Jul 26^th, 2011, 9:11am:

 
 
Yes...I'm just afraid that the entire Forum will be in an uproar over this, and it's going to pop up all over the board, and there's going to have to be something in place, as to crowd control. Lol!

Oh geez, if it's anything like my own lawn, by the time I get done weeding there will be nothing left!  
 
I wonder if we'll be back under 500,000 soon?  

If we get a "No thank you", can we rework the design and resubmit it?

Quote from Tom_133317 on Jul 26^th, 2011, 10:47am:

 
Yeah, I was thinking about that recently.  If so, they could celebrate when they hit a half million AGAIN!  
 
Cindy

So nicely stated Kati!!  

It's a milestone, Rebecca - Half a million cards available in GCU's on-line inventory, making it truly the world's biggest card store.
 
Corrie

Curious about the scrutiny of new cards, will this same review be given to all the customer request cards as well?  Just curious because sometime when I read the requests I get the feeling the customer is just toying with GCU since some of the requests are non marketable in my humble opinion.

Quote from Myrna_134142 on Jul 27^th, 2011, 6:24am:

 
Myrna, it's been my experience that the majority of card requests are too personal to be a suitable offering for the general customer pool and belong in our private galleries. This should exclude these cards from the same review as cards presented for general purchase.

Quote from Myrna_134142 on Jul 27^th, 2011, 7:01am:

 
Well in that case, Mindy usually posts what category(s) the requested cards should go in, so I would take that to mean that the requested card would be available to the general public and therefore subject to the same review process.

Quote from Kathleen_137290 on Jul 26^th, 2011, 9:04pm:

 
I just observed this in another thread, but I may as well say it here too:  a little clarity in the general feedback, even just a few new things added to the FAQ rather than individually, will take a lot OFF their plate. If we know they will not sell stuffed bunny photos, no problem.  We won't upload them.  That's a whole bunch of cards they don't need to weed through.  Then we and they can focus on the 'fuzzier' aspects like maybe they just don't think that style will sell. We win by not wasting time, they win by not wasting time and man/woman power and good PR continues.
Thanks for posting those links, I'll check them out.  

Quote from Corrie_131338 on Jul 27^th, 2011, 12:56am:

 
 
Thank you, Corrie!  
 
If GCU hitting 500,000 cards is a milestone and makes it the world's biggest card store, then why is GCU deleting cards that have already been approved? That part just doesn't make any sense. If they were not good cards, they wouldn't have been approved in the first place.
 
It seems to me that GCU's slogan of "any card imaginable" is upheld by those approved cards. Why delete them? I can understand turning down newly submitted cards in the attempt to improve the site by upping the standards of what is approved. I just don't understand why GCU would want to undo hard work that is already done and has gotten us to that wonderful milestone.
 
To me, this seems like we're kicking out the old guy who helped us get where we are, just because he is slow. Meaning the old approved cards, of course.  
 
I guess I can understand deleting cards that have been available since this place started, that haven't even sold once.  

Quote from Myrna_134142 on Jul 28^th, 2011, 3:53pm:

 
I do weeding about every 6-months Myrna  

Quote from Rebecca_140932 on Jul 27^th, 2011, 10:11pm:

 
We're not culling based on quantity but quality.  

Thank you for your input and constructive discussion.  Here are some answers to questions or issues brought up on one of the corrupted threads worth noting:
 
1.      We'll define marketability as“suitable for sale”.  A professional looking end product, with quality to compare in the greeting card market.  Whether you like Hallmark or American Greetings cards is not the issue, it’s a level of quality to compete for the buying publics’ dollars.  Good enough to sit on a rack in a store.  Often purchasing online takes a leap of faith on quality so the pressure to not disappoint an online shopper and lose their trust is very important.
 
2.      The bar has not been raised but merely established.  It will not be hard to reach.  
 
3.      GCU is making these subjective judgements based on what we feel is truly marketable most of which are based on technical merits (or lack of), again "suitable for sale".
 
4.      GCU is not choosing to limit nor differentiating among media/styles/forms of work that will or will not be accepted at this time.  Photography is certainly under the most scrutiny.  
 
5.      Guidelines are on wiki with examples images and we will continue to update as a reference
 
6.      Mainstream vs niche? – it is business as usual, as Doreen shares, with GCU embracing the uncommon, quirky, hard to find cards.  So mainstream is certainly not a benchmark here.    We are looking for quality in execution, a polished professional looking final product.  Have quirky animal humor?  Bring it on…when married with a quality image (in focus, good composition, etc) and related verse.
 
7.      Lack of sales is not a factor nor is the level of professional training the artist has or lacks
 
8.      NO cards are exempt – old, new, pending are subject to these guidelines effective immediately

Stanley,
 
Thank you for this note. We (reviewers) feel lucky to be working with all the wonderful artists whose work we review. Believe me, if time allowed, we would leave more positive comments for more artists. A balance must be struck, however, or the cards wouldn't be approved in a timely fashion Thanks for your feedback; it's nice to know that our comments and suggestions are being well-received.
 
Reviewer 443
 
 
Quote from Stanley_134646 on Aug 4^th, 2011, 2:29pm:

Please note as we are taking our time to give cards a fair and unbiased review with the new marketability standards you will begin to see more cards being in a "Held" status.  This is a temporary hold until a another reviewer can give it a second look.  No need to be alarmed.
 
Most often you will receive a note from the reviewer like this:
"We have put this card on hold for further review.  You should receive an update from another reviewer shortly.  Thank you for your patience."
 
So...if you receive this message please just sit tight for the second set of eyes.  If either of the reviewers has a question for you they will ask in the card review email.

Quote from Donna_137698 on Aug 5^th, 2011, 2:03pm:

 
Hi Donna,
I hope the dreading is over and it's not as deep cutting nor as painful as you thought.  Thank you for your reply to share your thoughts.  The review team will be identifying designs and declining those that even with mentioned fixes/edits would not reach the bar or should be started from scratch.  And they will be returning for edits those they think have merit and with modifications may be marketable.  
 
As we are new with the process if you have any examples of cards (pid#) that you think don't are following the above logic please share here.

Ok, I have posted in the next messages a few of my problem cards, first i got my feelings hurt, but I really am wanting to cooperate, so I will be glad to hear opinions . I really do want to know when I have a "bad" card! thanks!

and this one  
http://www.redbubble.com/people/budrfli/art/7584103-sunny

Quote from Sandy_132125 on Aug 8^th, 2011, 11:53am:

 
I must admit the rose one didn't appeal to me, but this one I feel is very eye-catchingly bright and cheerful.

Quote from Rene_136607 on Aug 12^th, 2011, 5:56pm:

 
 
do you have a PID for this card?  I'd like to see it.

With all due respect, to the Review Team and Administration, this is where direct feedback to us artists might need some work.  I appreciate the fact that there is communication between all of us and I think it should even include when there are issues with cards.  I know for myself, I don't ever hear if there are problems if people buy my cards.  And quite honestly, I cannot afford to buy a sample of each one to check for quality myself.  I simply haven't the funds available.  So, it makes sense to me to be told if someone orders a card I made and they end up dissatisfied with it.  As it stands right now, I'll never know about it - sure, it could just be their opinion but I'd still like to know what they might find unacceptable to have to have it returned.  
 
Perhaps this could be added to the "wish list" - direct customer feedback even if filtered through the folks who have to deal with returns of cards.  I'd seriously appreciate knowing if a customer ended up unhappy with something I made.  I think the communication to sort out such issues will only help with the marketability growing pains in the long run.
 
If we artists are going to have to abide by new standards for better marketability, then wouldn't this seem like a valuable asset to know if customers are happy with our own products or to provide feedback when there are problems?

I am closing my store today. I have enough stress in my life that I don't need GCU's judgment.  

Cards returned by customers for quality issues *within the artist's control* are returned to the artist for edits or declined if we feel that no change can be made to the card that would bring the card up to marketability standards (out-of-focus images, excessive noise, etc). We've always done this. We wouldn't leave a questionable card online for another customer to purchase and return.  
 
Regards,
Reviewer 443
 
Quote from Donna_137698 on Aug 13^th, 2011, 5:57am:

I guess I just feel bad that she dropped a bomb and didn't explain any further as to what the actual issue with her card is or if she's communicated with Admin.  I know I've been a pain in the behind but at least there's been a lot of support and communication with fellow artists and Admin and Reviewers to help gain a deeper understanding.
 
I'm trying to learn all I can slowing down to catch my breath and understand the what and why of the process.  It's starting to come together - slow as it may, but I'm striving for better now...

Quote from Myrna_134142 on Aug 13^th, 2011, 12:35pm:

 
Excessive noise in an image refers to a graininess, almost always an undesirable feature in a photograph or scanned piece.  In the digital world, excessive noise often comes in multi-colored graininess called color noise.
 
It can come from light levels being too low when the image was taken.  It can come from a lack of quality in the camera and/or lens.
 
It can come from too much image compression, such as when you save a jpg file over and over again...it degrades the quality every time.
 
 Does that help Myrna?

Quote from Doreen_137017 on Aug 13^th, 2011, 12:41pm:

 
It can come from too much image compression, such as when you save a jpg file over and over again...it degrades the quality every time.
 
 Does that help Myrna? [/quote]
 
 
I second that sentiment!  I certainly appreciate Doreen's input...
 
Just curious, and correct me if I am wrong, Doreen... when an image is saved over and over, isn't it best to rename and save fresh each time and not over the original file?  Also, when a digital file is moved from here and there and back again, it is best to cut and move and not copy and move.  Correct?
 
And the other bane of my life right now - deciding on the best way to archive my digital files...

Quote from Eve_138255 on Aug 12^th, 2011, 6:20pm:

 
Thank you Eve, for taking the time to give an opinion. They asked for me to resubmit "Sunny" with the ellipsis corrected. I did write back to tell them that I was not using my dots in that way. To me as an artist I sometimes use periods to center greetings, or , in my opinion as part of my art. I was told that i could change it or delete it. Because I was still happy with the way I created it I deleted it and put it on another site...I have a similar card that was accepted for the summer camp request.
I appreciate that my rose wedding cake thank you did not appeal to you.But, it was done as an abstract. I also had one that was just the picture of the cake by itself in the art collection category. Both were declined as being blurry. I created them that way on purpose.
Thanks again for hearing me out,  
Sandy!

Quote from Rene_136607 on Aug 12^th, 2011, 5:56pm:

 
Rene, sorry to hear your reaction here.  Not sure why this would fire you up vs opening a discussion.
 
Looking at the reviews I believe your card in question was pid#615524 which was not declined but returned to you for edits with these comments:
 
Remove distracting branch in upper left corner and resubmit for re-review, thank you!
Also note your card title should be more descriptive and include terms like: oak tree
 
Sending you an email to talk offline if you like.  

 http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/maxartkiller  

Hi there,  
I have another declined card, that I think shoulc be accepted, Please give me some honest opinions . I put it here so youcan see it.
Thank you,
Sandy
 
http://www.redbubble.com/people/budrfli/art/7766281-happy-birthday-mom

Sandy, I think that card would have been declined due to the copyright on the angel statue.  Just guessing, but a clear possibility.
It's cute, though.
 
Bright

Quote from Sandy_132125 on Sep 16^th, 2011, 6:59am:

 
Hi Sandy,
 
Maybe your card fell into this guideline from the Wiki?  Just guessing . . .
 
"Use of items such as a Teddy Bear - OK, but must be used creatively and be of studio quality. It must also not infringe on the copyright of the manufacturer. It is best not to use store-bought items in your photos."
 
Your second card of a wedding cake, I agree with the reviewer.  Customers will not know those dark lines on the top and bottom are 'supposed to be there'.  If it were my card, I'd blend them out and resubmit no questions asked.  Remember the reviewers look at our cards from a consumer standpoint based on experience.  We often look at our cards as art and therefore feel they are fine the way they are, but that does not mean the customer will have the save view we do.  We need to be our own worse critic in this business.  

Due to neccesity I have had to walk away from GCU and cards for some time (nothing to do with GCU) and was very surprised to suddenly recieve emails telling me that old cards that had been up for sometime had been declined.
 
However like most people commenting here once I got over the initial shock am pleased to see these standards introduced and the increase in communication from reviewers. I myself had doubts about some of my declines when initially uploading as I guess as a newbie had assumed that these standards where already part of the review process as we were encouraged to put them up "as you never know what will sell" and I guess I thought someone would stop me from putting up a REALLY bad card.
 
In future though maybe you could send an email out of major changes like this so that it will not come as such a surprise to those of us who may not have had time to read the forum or blog.
 
I also would be quite happy to be asked now (not initially, before reading this forum) if my declined cards can be used as examples, I would not like to give a blanket yes but am happy on a case by case basis although I have already deleted most of the REALLY bad ones lol

Quote from Janet_134086 on Dec 17^th, 2011, 1:11pm:

 
Thanks Janet!  

Recently I spoke with Mindy on the phone to ask how to submit a card to be sure I would do that correctly,  but before going through all the items,  Mindy suggested it might not be for me.  My phone line is not the best as we live in the mountains,  so I had to ask her to slow down & repeat,  so she may have been too busy.
That being said,  the reviewers gave me #1 rating for uniqueness & GOOD for photo quality,  yet I was rejected for no good reason & closing my store in a few days!!  
 
Unfortunately ,  if I knew what was rejected, I could have corrected and resubmitted the card,  but was not given that opportunity.  This was a very unique picture that people thought it was photo shopped,  so it would have been an asset to GCU.  I also have an accomplished array of watercolor paintings,  that might be an asset if given the opportunity.  
 
I understand  the new terms do not have to give you a reason ,  so there is no recourse,  but GCU may be missing out on some good new artists.

Hi Lori,
 
I'm confused with something you stated - "the reviewers gave me #1 rating for uniqueness & GOOD for photo quality".
 
There is no ratings on GCU from the reviewers.
 
You need to understand that EVERY image you create will have huge competition in the greeting card world. Your work, photography or paintings, must have strong marketability and appeal to a wide market in order to have a chance in competing with other cards of a similar nature on the site.
 
When/if you should ever open another store on any site which has an approval or acceptance process, I strongly recommend you always put your best foot forward. If you are a watercolor artist, then I'm guessing you are not a trained photographer, so watercolor paintings would be your 'best foot' so to speak.
 
Good luck on your artistic adventures!