GCU Forum - A proposal on images

Randall_140313

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 1013

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #15 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 9:00am

Quote from Norma_133903 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 10:29pm:

Randy, I am afraid I agree with the review about the sky on the seaside image. It does not look artistic, just badly pixelated. It is a lovely image, but looks like a badly taken photo rather than an artistic effort.
Did the original picture have problems?

Thanks, Norma!

No, The original is fine maybe just a bit washed out, but an easy clean up. It was shot with an old 7.1 mp camera I gave to my friend. But what I was trying to do is make it look like a painting instead of a photo. Kind of like the paint by number scenes I remember from years back. Probably still sell them, I haven't really looked. Guess it's not working. Too much tweaking with saturation and adding grain, huh?

OK! I'll start from scratch again on that one. What about the wedding pic? Hope I didn't overdo it!

Probably what the Critique Clinic is for, but i think that is for cards already approved?

Thanks again and best, Randy

Back to top

Kind Xpressions:
http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/KindeXpressions

IP Logged

Rebecca_140932

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 624

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #16 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 3:48pm

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 9:00am:

Quote from Norma_133903 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 10:29pm:

Randy, I am afraid I agree with the review about the sky on the seaside image. It does not look artistic, just badly pixelated. It is a lovely image, but looks like a badly taken photo rather than an artistic effort.
Did the original picture have problems?

Thanks, Norma!

No, The original is fine maybe just a bit washed out, but an easy clean up. It was shot with an old 7.1 mp camera I gave to my friend. But what I was trying to do is make it look like a painting instead of a photo. Kind of like the paint by number scenes I remember from years back. Probably still sell them, I haven't really looked. Guess it's not working. Too much tweaking with saturation and adding grain, huh?

OK! I'll start from scratch again on that one. What about the wedding pic? Hope I didn't overdo it!

Probably what the Critique Clinic is for, but i think that is for cards already approved?

Thanks again and best, Randy

Randy, if you want to send me your original seaside picture. I will take a shot at turning it into a painting for you and send it back. If you like it, you can use it, if they approve. If you don't want to, I understand. Just trying to help. Send me a private message if you do, and I will send you my email address so you can send it.

Here is an example of one of mine I did.

http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/shopping/zoom.asp?pid=617026&w=1& ref=details_large_view

Back to top

Grant Greetings:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/GrantGreetings

IP Logged

Mary_140624 Senior Member artist Posts: 454	Re: A proposal on images Reply #17 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 4:05pm Hi rebecca, loved what you did to the pic ... was that watercolour effect, or something else, I only have the basic Photoshop. thanks Mary
Back to top	Gable End: http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/gableendcards IP Logged

Rebecca_140932 Gold Member artist Posts: 624	Re: A proposal on images Reply #18 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 4:07pm Quote from Mary_140624 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 4:05pm: Hi rebecca, loved what you did to the pic ... was that watercolour effect, or something else, I only have the basic Photoshop. thanks Mary It is oil painting with leather texture. I have PhotoStudio 5.5
Back to top	Grant Greetings: http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/GrantGreetings IP Logged

Randall_140313

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 1013

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #19 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 4:24pm

Quote from Rebecca_140932 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 3:48pm:

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 9:00am:

Quote from Norma_133903 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 10:29pm:

Randy, I am afraid I agree with the review about the sky on the seaside image. It does not look artistic, just badly pixelated. It is a lovely image, but looks like a badly taken photo rather than an artistic effort.
Did the original picture have problems?

Thanks, Norma!

No, The original is fine maybe just a bit washed out, but an easy clean up. It was shot with an old 7.1 mp camera I gave to my friend. But what I was trying to do is make it look like a painting instead of a photo. Kind of like the paint by number scenes I remember from years back. Probably still sell them, I haven't really looked. Guess it's not working. Too much tweaking with saturation and adding grain, huh?

OK! I'll start from scratch again on that one. What about the wedding pic? Hope I didn't overdo it!

Probably what the Critique Clinic is for, but i think that is for cards already approved?

Thanks again and best, Randy

Randy, if you want to send me your original seaside picture. I will take a shot at turning it into a painting for you and send it back. If you like it, you can use it, if they approve. If you don't want to, I understand. Just trying to help. Send me a private message if you do, and I will send you my email address so you can send it.

Here is an example of one of mine I did.

http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/shopping/zoom.asp?pid=617026&w=1& ref=details_large_view

Hi Rebecca,

Yes that's very nice! Kind of what I was trying to achieve, but with more of a watercolor impressionistic look. I've got one submitted which I worked on today and will see what the reviewer has to say about it. I basically saturated the color a bit, then sharpened about 50% and added some grain. One of these days I'll have to break down and purchase photoshop. All I use is the free version of Picasa & Piknik. I do have a paint program which now that days are shorter and I'm spending more time indoors, may get a chance to play with.

Appreciate your offer, but it's not that big a deal. Just thought it was a nice shot from my friend Denise and she get's all excited about the possibility of someone purchasing something she shot. She was bragging herself up on facebook on a sunset photo I created a card for. The first was approved, but now the second is being held. I hate getting those emails, 'Card On Hold,' worse than returns for editing as you don't have any idea what is the issue and you can't do anything about it until they either return the card for editing, approve or decline it.

Anyway, thank you again. That pup turned out awesome!

Best always, Randy

Back to top

Kind Xpressions:
http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/KindeXpressions

IP Logged

Rebecca_140932

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 624

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #20 - Nov 14^th, 2011, 7:27pm

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 4:24pm:

Quote from Rebecca_140932 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 3:48pm:

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 9:00am:

Quote from Norma_133903 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 10:29pm:

Randy, I am afraid I agree with the review about the sky on the seaside image. It does not look artistic, just badly pixelated. It is a lovely image, but looks like a badly taken photo rather than an artistic effort.
Did the original picture have problems?

Thanks, Norma!

No, The original is fine maybe just a bit washed out, but an easy clean up. It was shot with an old 7.1 mp camera I gave to my friend. But what I was trying to do is make it look like a painting instead of a photo. Kind of like the paint by number scenes I remember from years back. Probably still sell them, I haven't really looked. Guess it's not working. Too much tweaking with saturation and adding grain, huh?

OK! I'll start from scratch again on that one. What about the wedding pic? Hope I didn't overdo it!

Probably what the Critique Clinic is for, but i think that is for cards already approved?

Thanks again and best, Randy

Randy, if you want to send me your original seaside picture. I will take a shot at turning it into a painting for you and send it back. If you like it, you can use it, if they approve. If you don't want to, I understand. Just trying to help. Send me a private message if you do, and I will send you my email address so you can send it.

Here is an example of one of mine I did.

http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/shopping/zoom.asp?pid=617026&w=1& ref=details_large_view

Hi Rebecca,

Yes that's very nice! Kind of what I was trying to achieve, but with more of a watercolor impressionistic look. I've got one submitted which I worked on today and will see what the reviewer has to say about it. I basically saturated the color a bit, then sharpened about 50% and added some grain. One of these days I'll have to break down and purchase photoshop. All I use is the free version of Picasa & Piknik. I do have a paint program which now that days are shorter and I'm spending more time indoors, may get a chance to play with.

Appreciate your offer, but it's not that big a deal. Just thought it was a nice shot from my friend Denise and she get's all excited about the possibility of someone purchasing something she shot. She was bragging herself up on facebook on a sunset photo I created a card for. The first was approved, but now the second is being held. I hate getting those emails, 'Card On Hold,' worse than returns for editing as you don't have any idea what is the issue and you can't do anything about it until they either return the card for editing, approve or decline it.

Anyway, thank you again. That pup turned out awesome!

Best always, Randy

You're welcome! The offer always stands. I'm here if you need me. Good luck with your new creations.

Back to top

Grant Greetings:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/GrantGreetings

IP Logged

Austin_133058

GCU Newbies
artist

Posts: 1

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #21 - Nov 15^th, 2011, 8:57am

Wow Randy! What a beautiful card!!!

GREETING CARD UNIVERSE ........review your reviewers! Obviously they don't have ANY idea about what they are talking about when they decline a card. Are you paying someone minimum wage to go through and mark declined or not.

PLEASE implement some QUALITY CONTROL on your reviewers because they are lacking. They are out of focus, not composed correctly, their brains are pixelated..do you get the point.

Get back to what you do best GCU, a platform for artists who sell online and also buy their own cards to sell in stores. LET THE ARTISTS BE THE JUDGE !!! If you want a HALLMARK type card, create that store and have people submit cards to be there.

BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER AND THE PEOPLE WHO BUY OUR CARDS.

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 5:51pm:

HaHa! I just had a card declined too and on my birthday! cry

The reviewer says it doesn't meet GCU's marketability standards as the foreground is out of focus and the sky is pixleated. It's supposed to be that way and has been exaggerated to that point to look like immpressionistic art. It's a seacoast scene with the beach and cliffs in the backgound and flowers and a post in the immediate foreground. It was a photo shot by a friend of mine and I played with it in post editing to get the artistic feel I wanted to make it look more like a painting.
I've gotten some rave compliments on the image. Now I know what you guys are talking about. The reviewers aren't always aware of their subject and when it comes to understanding marketability, they have no idea what they are doing, it's just a crap shoot!
Anyway, that is my humble opinion(OK, not so humble as I've been doing this stuff for a long time). I've got a couple of wedding invitations that I submitted and vignetted the outside edges and blurred it on purpose to give that dreamy feel to the card. Wonder if that'll pass or if everything if a photograph has to be crystal sharp focus, even if that's not the feel we want to convey.
I think GCU is pretty much off base on some of their decisions. If they are so concerned with space and what content their artists are presenting, then change the format to Hallmark and make or buy their own cards. After all what do these new standards give them an advantage in, except for limiting artists creativity.
Perhaps this is a bad image, but I didn''t really think so and as far as the focus, this is a scenic image, blur the foreground to add depth to the overall scene. A basic rule of photography that all good artists use. Roll Eyes

I forget what all this hoopla was about in the first place. Was it that GCU has too many cards and needs the extra bandwidth or are they trying to assert their authority by controling artists more. If the later is the case, they will destroy the very platform that this site was built on. That of everyday artists being able to market their work in a friendly atmosphere. Anyway, didn't think it was a problem until reading all the sob stories here in the forum and then having this image wihich I personally thought was good declined.

I did a race car photo of an antique dragster with this same effect and have sold many copies of it. But, what do I know???

Here are the images that I submitted to my Private Gallery. The seacoast one has been declined, but the wedding shot is up with several invitations in the works if the two I submitted are approved. Some opinions please and don't be afraid of honesty. I can't throw my mouse through the computer! Grin

http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/collections/any-occasion-blank-note-cards/co astal-seaside-beach/greeting-card-880503?aid=140313

http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/invitations/wedding/general/greeting-card-88 0504?aid=140313

Best always, Randy

Back to top

Azul Cielo Designs:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/austinsloan

IP Logged

Mindy

GCU Administrator
Community Manager

Posts: 6567
Gender: female

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #22 - Nov 18^th, 2011, 4:32pm

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 14^th, 2011, 9:00am:

Quote from Norma_133903 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 10:29pm:

Randy, I am afraid I agree with the review about the sky on the seaside image. It does not look artistic, just badly pixelated. It is a lovely image, but looks like a badly taken photo rather than an artistic effort.
Did the original picture have problems?

Thanks, Norma!

No, The original is fine maybe just a bit washed out, but an easy clean up. It was shot with an old 7.1 mp camera I gave to my friend. But what I was trying to do is make it look like a painting instead of a photo. Kind of like the paint by number scenes I remember from years back. Probably still sell them, I haven't really looked. Guess it's not working. Too much tweaking with saturation and adding grain, huh?

OK! I'll start from scratch again on that one. What about the wedding pic? Hope I didn't overdo it!

Probably what the Critique Clinic is for, but i think that is for cards already approved?

Thanks again and best, Randy

Hi Randy,
The critique clinic is open for any designs, not just approved ones.

We'll have the review team return your beach card back to you in case you decide to resubmit it with the original photo or with nominal edits. I agree the effect is grainy and could be mistaken as a poor photo or poor printing.

Of course not all cards need to be in perfect focus. We are completely open to and embrace variety. We are not looking for Hallmark designs, but as far as overall quality, absolutely!

Back to top

IP Logged

Angela_134247

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 761

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #23 - Nov 18^th, 2011, 4:49pm

Mindy, with all do respect, I have had almost every single card returned that I have submitted in the last month. Most of the pictures that have been returned have been for tiny discrepencies that only a seasoned photographer would notice. I am absolutely not alone in this predicament. And, as said before, I have sold over 20,000 cards for your site.

Back to top

FairyGirl Cards:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/fairygirlcards

IP Logged

Donna_137698

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 1064

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #24 - Nov 18^th, 2011, 4:57pm

Quote from Card_Review_Team on Nov 3^rd, 2011, 7:50am:

Hi Angela, as nice as that would be, the correct procedure would be to submit one card ONLY with an image, and make sure it passes the new 'Marketability Standards' before submitting multiple cards with that exact image. Much easier on the artist, and on the reviewers.

Thanks so much!
Reviewer 528

lets face it - it's taking some 2 months to get cards reviewed. If only one goes in, we wait for the approval/rejection, then either make adjustments or get approval, then have to produce the rest of the designs only to have THOSE now put through the ringer and possibly face rejection because another reviewer might get put on that batch. Can't there be some sort of streamlining done? In my eyes this is a waste of valuable time and it's sapping my creative energies. When I am working on an image, I like to bang out all I can with it then move on to something else.

Just my most humble opinion.

The Chronic Complainer

Back to top

Sunshine's Creative Endeavors:
http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/sunshinescreativeendeavors

IP Logged

Mindy

GCU Administrator
Community Manager

Posts: 6567
Gender: female

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #25 - Nov 18^th, 2011, 5:53pm

Quote from Austin_133058 on Nov 15^th, 2011, 8:57am:

Wow Randy! What a beautiful card!!!

GREETING CARD UNIVERSE ........review your reviewers! Obviously they don't have ANY idea about what they are talking about when they decline a card. Are you paying someone minimum wage to go through and mark declined or not.

PLEASE implement some QUALITY CONTROL on your reviewers because they are lacking. They are out of focus, not composed correctly, their brains are pixelated..do you get the point.

Get back to what you do best GCU, a platform for artists who sell online and also buy their own cards to sell in stores. LET THE ARTISTS BE THE JUDGE !!! If you want a HALLMARK type card, create that store and have people submit cards to be there.

BEAUTY IS IN THE EYE OF THE BEHOLDER AND THE PEOPLE WHO BUY OUR CARDS.

Quote from Randall_140313 on Nov 13^th, 2011, 5:51pm:

HaHa! I just had a card declined too and on my birthday! cry

The reviewer says it doesn't meet GCU's marketability standards as the foreground is out of focus and the sky is pixleated. It's supposed to be that way and has been exaggerated to that point to look like immpressionistic art. It's a seacoast scene with the beach and cliffs in the backgound and flowers and a post in the immediate foreground. It was a photo shot by a friend of mine and I played with it in post editing to get the artistic feel I wanted to make it look more like a painting.
I've gotten some rave compliments on the image. Now I know what you guys are talking about. The reviewers aren't always aware of their subject and when it comes to understanding marketability, they have no idea what they are doing, it's just a crap shoot!
Anyway, that is my humble opinion(OK, not so humble as I've been doing this stuff for a long time). I've got a couple of wedding invitations that I submitted and vignetted the outside edges and blurred it on purpose to give that dreamy feel to the card. Wonder if that'll pass or if everything if a photograph has to be crystal sharp focus, even if that's not the feel we want to convey.
I think GCU is pretty much off base on some of their decisions. If they are so concerned with space and what content their artists are presenting, then change the format to Hallmark and make or buy their own cards. After all what do these new standards give them an advantage in, except for limiting artists creativity.
Perhaps this is a bad image, but I didn''t really think so and as far as the focus, this is a scenic image, blur the foreground to add depth to the overall scene. A basic rule of photography that all good artists use. Roll Eyes

I forget what all this hoopla was about in the first place. Was it that GCU has too many cards and needs the extra bandwidth or are they trying to assert their authority by controling artists more. If the later is the case, they will destroy the very platform that this site was built on. That of everyday artists being able to market their work in a friendly atmosphere. Anyway, didn't think it was a problem until reading all the sob stories here in the forum and then having this image wihich I personally thought was good declined.

I did a race car photo of an antique dragster with this same effect and have sold many copies of it. But, what do I know???

Here are the images that I submitted to my Private Gallery. The seacoast one has been declined, but the wedding shot is up with several invitations in the works if the two I submitted are approved. Some opinions please and don't be afraid of honesty. I can't throw my mouse through the computer! Grin

http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/collections/any-occasion-blank-note-cards/co astal-seaside-beach/greeting-card-880503?aid=140313

http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/invitations/wedding/general/greeting-card-88 0504?aid=140313

Best always, Randy

Austin,
Quality control is our review team's #1 job. The relatively new marketability standards are an additional guide on which to meaure quality. The quality (or lack of) of a single card reflects positively or negatively on all cards and artists on GCU.

There is a cost to developing, managing and marketing cards on GCU. And although our site would be zilch w/o our artists, it does not mean that GCU should simply provide the infrastucture for all artists to do whatever they like. The relationship is symbiotic however this is a business, not a lovefest.

As you may or may not know, our review team members are GCU artists just like you. They have varied expertise and credentials that they bring to the table that are greatly valued and appreciated. We ask that you refrain from such harsh insults and unfounded accusations.

Back to top

IP Logged

Mindy

GCU Administrator
Community Manager

Posts: 6567
Gender: female

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #26 - Nov 18^th, 2011, 6:24pm

Quote from Angela_134247 on Nov 18^th, 2011, 4:49pm:

Mindy, with all do respect, I have had almost every single card returned that I have submitted in the last month. Most of the pictures that have been returned have been for tiny discrepencies that only a seasoned photographer would notice. I am absolutely not alone in this predicament. And, as said before, I have sold over 20,000 cards for your site.

I'm sure it is frustrating. Many of our reviewers do have an expertise in photography and it is by far, photography, the biggest area of cards with the worst offenders.

Do you feel these discrepencies are edits that you can make and in turn result in a better end product? Or do you feel they are unreasonable?

If you feel examples are worth me reviewing as a sanity check please share.

Thank you.

Back to top

IP Logged

Judy_139270

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 870

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #27 - Nov 20^th, 2011, 12:32pm

Hi Mindy

I have just had one of my cards with a photo declined and, while I'm not putting in a special plea for my card to be reinstated - I'm a painter, not a photographer, I must say that I think the reviewers are going too far in their criticisms and I'm putting forward my card as a good example of this.

This is the Zazzle version of it:

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/customisable_birthday_card_for_grandmother-1374746035666 12316

- and the reason given is that the pot is out of focus, but not enough for it to look as if it's deliberate.

To me it does not look out of focus at all, even blown up to 100% and I've shown it around to friends who have, without exception, said, 'Ridiculous'!

So, I wondered whether most of my 'oldie' friends maybe have poor eyesight and sent it to my son, in his 30s, with 20/20 vision and quite a perfectionist. He couldn't see that it was out of focus at all and suggested that maybe the reviewers need their monitors recalibrated.

The point I am making is that these are greeting cards for the general public, not entries in a photographic competition. There is, or should be, a difference.

I am all for high standards but surely the buying public should be setting the standard and if they don't have a problem, then why should they be denied the opportunity to buy our cards? Doesn't make sense to me.

Back to top

Judy's Card Store:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/judyscardstore

IP Logged

Donna_137698

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 1064

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #28 - Nov 20^th, 2011, 12:58pm

Quote from Donna_137698 on Nov 18^th, 2011, 4:57pm:

lets face it - it's taking some 2 months to get cards reviewed. If only one goes in, we wait for the approval/rejection, then either make adjustments or get approval, then have to produce the rest of the designs only to have THOSE now put through the ringer and possibly face rejection because another reviewer might get put on that batch. Can't there be some sort of streamlining done? In my eyes this is a waste of valuable time and it's sapping my creative energies. When I am working on an image, I like to bang out all I can with it then move on to something else.

And for me, I'm re-posting a previous post that never got answered - I hope GCU will consider this too.

As someone definitely feeling out of sorts with this process yet again and in the midst of the daunting task of still trying to learn the ropes, I really find this most frustrating. I'm having enough of a problem being my own worst critic and as I've said before - I learn through example and this is NOT helping me avoid future blunders.

I originally was enamored by the fact that the artists could communicate with Admin and the Reviewers. I'm also feeling very much like there is too much nit-picking going on now. Maybe it's my continuing stupidity with this business. However, right now, I am needing to focus my efforts elsewhere because this is taking too much energy from me at the moment.

Let me also ask this - why can't customers do the commenting on our cards? Why are artists the only ones? They certainly are not buying my cards - the general public is. This sets up only a select bunch of artists being "spotlighted" if they are in favor with the rest of the family while others might not see such an opportunity.

Although Austin was harsh, I think his sentiments are being shared by a lot of us and like him, I too am lashing out in frustration. I've taken a step back and will break from submitting here in the hopes that when I'm ready to return, GCU will be a happier place to be a part of again.

I second Judy's sentiments. Granted this is YOUR business and business is to make money, and I too am all for producing the best products I can. But if we have to step up to the plate, then I think GCU needs to do something about this new review process. It's still taking a boat load of time and I agree that things seem to be really nit-picky at times. Again, maybe it's just my continuing naivety with the whole deal. What happened to the partnership between GCU and all its artists? I'm really sensing a serious breakdown in that atmosphere with some of us (certainly not all the artists because they are just running with whatever is going on) - some of us don't understand why certain things are happening and feeling a bit slighted as a result. I've been party to another business where fellow artists did a lot of critiquing and would favor some artists and not others (pay no mind to the quality of work) - they would "bad mouth" or find fault in competition just to eliminate it. I pray that isn't what is really going on here and I apologize if that comes of as harsh too - just citing an experience of mine in another venue and hoping this isn't happening here with all the inconsistencies that are being cited. Just trying to make sense of it all. I'm not saying let us all pass every single card we want - however I too am watching what is happening to other artists and scratching my head wondering what is going on.

Back to top

Sunshine's Creative Endeavors:
http://artist.greetingcarduniverse.com/sunshinescreativeendeavors

IP Logged

Doreen_137017

Gold Member
artist

Posts: 5273

Re: A proposal on images
Reply #29 - Nov 20^th, 2011, 1:06pm

Quote from Judy_139270 on Nov 20^th, 2011, 12:32pm:

Hi Mindy

I have just had one of my cards with a photo declined and, while I'm not putting in a special plea for my card to be reinstated - I'm a painter, not a photographer, I must say that I think the reviewers are going too far in their criticisms and I'm putting forward my card as a good example of this.

This is the Zazzle version of it:

http://www.zazzle.co.uk/customisable_birthday_card_for_grandmother-1374746035666 12316

- and the reason given is that the pot is out of focus, but not enough for it to look as if it's deliberate.

To me it does not look out of focus at all, even blown up to 100% and I've shown it around to friends who have, without exception, said, 'Ridiculous'!

So, I wondered whether most of my 'oldie' friends maybe have poor eyesight and sent it to my son, in his 30s, with 20/20 vision and quite a perfectionist. He couldn't see that it was out of focus at all and suggested that maybe the reviewers need their monitors recalibrated.

The point I am making is that these are greeting cards for the general public, not entries in a photographic competition. There is, or should be, a difference.

I am all for high standards but surely the buying public should be setting the standard and if they don't have a problem, then why should they be denied the opportunity to buy our cards? Doesn't make sense to me.

Judy, I have a question just because I'm curious. You say you are not a photographer so why are you putting your photographs, which must then be snapshots on greeting cards? I'm not being sarcastic, I am really just curious as to your thought process.

Back to top

Salon of Art:
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/SalonOfArt

IP Logged