Doreen, You definitely are professional and learned in everything you say.and I appreciate that that is where you are. I know that I am probably not, and may never attain the level you have achieved. I respect what you write, and how you comment, and try to glean from you.
I don't feel like I throw around the word art. But I do stick with the fact that customers do not judge the cards the way we are being judged now. I have had recent sales on the cards that have been rejected. And, I admit that my cards are not perfect. But I think that if the judging does continue to be stiffly cut and dry without a vision for what the artist is trying to create then we are losing something very important here.
But, I do strive to do my best on every card I send in for approval. They are not slap a photograph on a page and print whatever. Each one is composed in a way that I believe they look good and all of the elements flow together. I try hard to listen what the customers are asking in the wanted forum and create something that answers to those requests.  
I realize that I am not one of the popular kids on the block here. But every effort I make is to do my best and create something that will touch someone else's heart in a card. Hopefully each card I create is better than the one before it. But, right now I am going to have to dig really deep here to get the inspiration to create.
Sincerely,
Sandy

This is obviously a very thorny subject - it's almost impossible to talk objectively about art!  
 
I think it's a red herring to make a distinction between Fine Art and 'other'. 'Fine Artists' like Klimt and Mondrian could equally well be classified as 'designers'. One of our local shops sells very pretty umbrellas with Monet paintings on them and I have a tea towel and a chalkboard with Toulouse Lautrec paintings on them!
 
Remembering that GCU now sells worldwide, I have to say that our UK greeting card shops are full of 'fine art' cards, side by side with the 'others'. I was actually approached by what later became a UK PODstore, back in 2004, simply on the basis of my pastel paintings and, although they haven't sold in huge numbers, they have brought in a little cheque most quarters.
 
And why shouldn't a 'fine art' landscape be as suitable for a greeting card as a photographic one?
 
So, how can GCU decide what is 'marketable' or not, what is 'quality' when it comes to art? I would have thought that the technical considerations, like composition, are very much secondary, and that any
image that 'speaks to' someone (in a positive way!!!) is 'marketable', however we classify it. And there's the rub - what speaks to one will not necessarily speak to others. A while back I was mortified to find that one of my cards that I thought was pretty hideous was chosen as Design of the Day. I only uploaded it out of curiousity to see whether it would be approved!
 
But there are practical considerations such as certain colours and amounts of shade in an image that don't print well and obvious difficulties like narrow borders that would be cropped off in the production process. Those are objective criteria and ones that we, as artists, could understand and accept without hurt feelings.
 
'Improvement' and 'growing as artists' have been mentioned a lot since this subject came up. So, by way of approaching this positively, here's my suggestion -
 
The UK Greeting Card Association says that UK design is 10 years ahead of the rest of the world. Whether or not this is true, if we want to 'improve', maybe what we could all learn from, is looking at the cards on such well known publishers as Woodmansterne's and Camden Graphics' websites.
 
http://www.woodmansterne.co.uk/
 
http://www.ukgreetings.co.uk/Brand/Camden-Graphics.html
 
or smaller ones like these:
 
http://www.peartreeheybridge.co.uk/contents/en-
 
uk/d83_Greetings_Cards.html
 
http://www.emmaball.co.uk/
 
http://www.soultraderuk.com/
 
Of course, we then have to find ways to integrate things like ages and names into our designs to make them very specific, as that's what online shoppers appear to be looking for. And maybe that's where they cross over from being 'Fine Art' to being 'Design'?
 
I hope this is helpful and that Mindy would agree that this is a good way to improve our standards!
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Thanks for the links Judy, beautiful art...quite inspiring (still need to get my old art room up and running...,maybe when the snow starts to fly?)
I agree with your comments too...
 
p.s. The Woodmansterne link...I guess they don't sell online, as I couldn't click on the cards to view them? I'm from the U.K. originally...must say it makes me homesick to look at some of the coastal art, and others.

Quote from Cara_131386 on Oct 13^th, 2011, 8:12am:

 
Cara, I envy your ability to be so open-minded.  I guess my ignorance in this whole deal is that I like to work with a goal in mind as time to create is very limited at the moment and I don't like waiting the long amount of time it now takes to go through the review process if I am so off the beaten path with a design - nor do I like the thought of submitting something that might be wasting the reviewer's precious time since hundreds of cards are being submitted.  As I mention, I'm getting a feeling only certain types of designs are going to be acceptable and being the sort of person I am, I'd like to know if this is what it will be like so I can decide on submitting if it's only going to get kicked back to me.  I have only one other store elsewhere with my main focus obviously here.  My sales are still pretty slim so it's obviously my continued failure to grasp the desired types of cards GCU offers to satisfy the people visiting and buying here.   I do my very best but I'm still feeling my very best just isn't good enough - and I guess I'm just really confused with what GCU feels is marketable, as Judy points out so beautifully.  Yes, this is THEIR business - but do they really know what every single visitor is looking for?  What if that one really different card that was rejected was what that buyer was looking for?  And had it been available and that buyer bought then told other potential people about that card and they could come and buy... you get where I'm confused.
 
As I said, I'm so sorry I ever got on this list.  Seeing how angrily I was responded to, yup, I get a decided feeling I haven't the ability to ask questions or get insight when it affects what I am in the end going to be submitting here in the future - if at all now.

Quote from Judy_139270 on Oct 13^th, 2011, 3:54pm:

Congrats. Judy! A little serendipity for you? I loved the card, your art is just the kind I like!  

Quote from Doreen_137017 on Oct 13^th, 2011, 5:03pm:

 
And you KNOW I appreciate the community spirit.
 
OK to go back... Cara has a card rejected for its particular design.  I don't quite understand the reasoning for rejecting it.  I know this isn't the Critique forum, but WHAT is wrong with Cara's very different Christmas tree that it warranted rejection?  I know she's cool with the rejection, but I don't understand why.
 
Sandy has a card rejected and stated the reviewer mentions something about the flower not being perfect.  Ok, what flower IS perfect, I ask myself?  So, that one I misinterpreted what was actually being critiqued about it.  Is Sandy's card perfect?  I thought it was very doable with an edit in the image - something that could easily be fixed in my eyes.  This is something I ask whether or not it couldn't have been sent back for edits instead of a total rejection no different than sending back for change of category or verse changes and that's done through edits and yet an image is a bit off and gets totally declined?
 
Another person mentions a card with a Halloween dog on it had something said because of the distracting shadow under the dog.  I personally saw no problem with that card - actually found it quite adorable.  Again I ask, why isn't it acceptable?  I believe it was said that the shadow was distracting.  How would that card be improved other than shooting it in a professional photographer's studio with perfectly controlled lighting?  
 
Hence, this brings me to the question, are professionals soon to be the only ones able to post cards here?  I'm not being a snot - I'm thoroughly concerned about my abilities - or lack there of - and my continuing obvious ignorance in what "marketable" means.
 
Doreen, I'm obviously as stupid as they come that I'm not "getting it".  When this whole process began, I spent 48 hours STRAIGHT (NO SLEEP) going through all my cards trying to give them that hard look.  Do I see an issue with Cara's card?  To be honest, not at all.  Did I see a problem with the card with the dog in the devil costume taken on a sunny day?  Not at all.  Did I necessarily see a real problem with Sandy's card?  With just a touch of clean up, I think it's a good one - worth rejecting, no - send back for edits perhaps.  
 
Every time I ask for clarification and question why, I feel like I'm the troublemaker and thorn in everyone's side and wasting everyone's time because I'm not understanding it all.  Right now, I just want to walk away and say for what I make here, is it all worth it?  Judy's brought up some interesting food for thought as well.  I keep trying and trying and trying and nothing is coming of it.  The worry of wasting the time of the reviewers and the fears of rejection weigh very heavy on me and for the few sales I do make, I don't know what to think of this whole game overall.  I'm feeling like I'm trying to jump through hoops and failing miserably at it for so little in return.  Am I giving my best?  You bet I am.  Therefore, I am obviously missing the big picture and am less of an artist than I thought I was.  
 
I'd like to know my time spent is worthwhile for everyone involved.  And this is where my comment on cookie cutter designs stems from the rejection of Cara's card.  I don't see the problem with it.  It was different and colorful and unusual and NOT your typical Christmas card and wasn't in your typical Christmas colors and what not.  If that "type" of work is not allowed because it's deemed not "marketable", then I'm still so in the dark in what I should be doing.  I have never been through this sort of process and I'm just so dazed and confused reading all this and feeling like my posts are taken as if I should know this stuff.  I'd hazard to ask you - when was the last time you had a card rejected?  I'd hazard to answer probably not in a long time because you are a very experienced long time professional artist.  As Sandy expressed to you, you've "been there done that" - you ARE a professional (self-trained or not) - Sandy and I are not.  It's a struggle and I am sure I can reiterate that we've appreciated EVERYTHING anyone has offered to help, but I'm starting to wonder if I'm ever really going to get a handle on this or not.  
 
So, perhaps I should just take another break and go do something else because I'm just not getting it with this card business and I'm stressing way too much over it for the few sales I do make here.  Something within my abilities and my understanding is still so very wrong and I don't know what it is.

Donna - you certainly are NOT stupid and my apologies if what I said made you feel that way!  I guess what I'm trying to say, and thought I've said before, you are in the middle or maybe the beginning of a learning curve in this business; something all of us go through.  You will grow at your own pace and things will begin to make sense when something you see or do suddenly triggers the old 'light bulb moment' . . . that's how it was for me anyway
 
Please keep in mind that your frustration over not understanding what went on with other artist's cards is based on bits and pieces of information that has been passed on via the forum and combined with your own interpretation.  That's all any of us can do and that does not give us a whole picture, nor is it a good way to learn.  
 
I don't feel it's at all appropriate for us to expect GCU to critique these cards on the forum to the level of detail we would need to completely understand the "no thank you".  If the artist wished for other people's critique, they can enter them in the Critique Clinic where we can all learn from the comments.
 
Take a breath dear one - stop dwelling on what you don't have answers to and focus that energy on something positive to learn from . . . for example when I entered the Greeting Card side of business, I was clueless.  So I would spend a little time each day looking at best sellers.  I learned a lot about how to visualize layout, composition, blending of elements and typography by doing that. Today it would be better to watch the cards GCU is approving daily.  Those that draw your attention ask yourself why?  Train you eye to see harmony in the colors and elements of a good greeting card.  Identify the characteristics not subject matter of why a card speaks to you.  You will learn more and faster doing that then trying to understanding a rejection of cards which are not even yours.  This is by the way what they teach in photography schools, to critique other people's photographs so that you can train your brain how to critique your own.  
 
Hope that helps and I hope you know that's all I'm trying to do.

Donna - if you are stupid, then so am I and, I suspect, so are a lot of other artists!
 
The problem arises because GCU seem unable to say exactly what they are looking for in a design, apart from the rather vague term, 'quality'. That doesn't really get us anywhere because one person's idea of quality can be so different from someone else's, as evidenced by my Design of the Day that I thought looked 'cheap and nasty'.
 
So maybe it's impossible for GCU to give us any really clear guidelines and we just have to carry on doing our own thing and hope for the best.
 
It may not even come down to 'learning' and 'improving, except inasmuch as we could possibly learn to make cards that fit with the GCU model, if that's what we want to do.
 
But remember, GCU is not the only card publisher in the world. Just because they reject what we offer doesn't necessarily mean there is something wrong with our offerings. Keep telling yourself that, over and over, and don't let these rejections dent your confidence.  
 
In the end, it must surely all come down to personal opinions. How else can we explain the fact that some cards are being rejected even though someone has ordered them in the past? That makes a nonsense of the word, 'marketability'.
 
So you can either continue as you are but reminding yourself that rejections can be for all sorts of subjective reasons, and not necessarily anything to do with the quality of your work. Or, alternatively, you can take your work elsewhere, where it will only be subjected to the REAL test of 'marketability' - whether anyone buys it, or not! Or a combination of both.
 
'Stupidity' or otherwise - really doesn't come into it! Neither does training - or lack of. You can have all the knowledge and training in the world and still still lack that certain something that touches another person's heart.