In regards to the missing thread. We unfortunately are unable to control this and we too understand your frustration. When a forum user closes their account it removes the thread they had posted on.  
 
I will read on to see if I may be able to help in any of your other concerns.
 
Kindest regards,
 
KC
 

Well I was waiting to see what the outcome would be, but am tired of working so hard on a design and working at getting cards approved.  Just had three cards returned back for edits, that I edited, they were placed on hold for almost two weeks, mind you, that was over Thanksgiving so I can't say much, but finally got them returned for edits again.  
 
I just gave up and threw them in my private gallery and wrote an email to the reviewer.
 
"Hello,  
If I wanted to submit a straight uninteresting photograph, I would have.  This is supposed to look vintage.  Not one person I've shown this to outside of GCU has given me negative fdbk on this or the other masks that I used.   I posted these up on facebook asking for help and all I got was compliments, even for the rose tinted version I first submitted which one of the people is a professional photagraphers assistant I work with occasionally and she shoots the engagement, bride - dressing room shots at wedddings and her specialty, pregnant mothers, mothers with baby photos.  Many of those are silhouettes, with backlighting and masks like these, that's what people love and what's fun to create.   It's not like I threw these together on a whim, I probably worked severl hours into the wee hours of the morning on these.  I do these shots all the time for my wedding albums and people love them.  Guess it doesn't matter what someone wants, just what you all think and I'm pretty sure you are wrong.  If you want just a straight photograph then take the darned thing yourselves, but it's not what i'm trying to do here.  I want to sell cards, but my cards, my creations, not yours!
Sorry for being so blunt, but this is getting ridiculously frustrating trying to figure out what you all will accept and what you won't!
Thanks anyway, but the reason I joined this site is so I could create.  Not pop out someone elses cookies, then when I pull out a batch have them tell me it should have been twelve cookies on the pan, not thirteen, throw that batch away and start a a new one.
Best always, Randy"
 
The cards I'm referring to are the first four in my gallery here:  
http://www.greetingcarduniverse.com/community/store.asp?private=true&store_i d=3878
 
Anyway, maybe I'm way off on the images, but I'm right on with the frustration most of us are going through I think.  
Guess I'll be moving on to a genuine 'crafts' show and whenever I come up with a generic, store boxed card add it to the store here.  Nothing against all the cute little snowmen and traditional flower pics, but I'd think as a customer, why wade through all these here, it's exactly what Hallmark and the others are selling.
 
As an artist, the management here doesn't give a darn what we think, They've got their click of 'arteests' who punch out their so called 'marketable' cards and maybe some of those sell, but that isn't what this site was built on originally.  Now I get the previous posts, asking whether customers have complained, are overall sales down, are there only certain designs which have been selling like hotcakes?  If that's the case, then I am wrong.  The marketability standards are right on and that is the course this company should take.
 
However, I don't bake tollhouse cookies, I don't make spaghetti from a can and I don't punch out little cookie cutter cards that you see everwhere else.  If the money was enough, I could stand on an assembly line and do just what GCU wants, but the money isn't here.  GCU has turned from fun and a nice place to work to a rigid, stock agency type of company.  "No this isn't what we are looking for.   We don't think that will sell, oh it has, well we don;t see why, so we don't want it anyway."
  
But rather than having the medal to tell us outright, have come up with this new marketability strategy.
 
I won't  mention names, but one of the artists who has been on here for quite a while, posted on the forum that they had sold their 10,000th card.  They have two or three thousand cards in their store, if I remember right, but after looking at how long they've been here, say it's only been two years(it was more), and that each one has sold at the full current commision rate, that's $6,000 or $3,000 per year.  If you translate that to the hours they put in, what are they earning?  A dollar an hour, two?  I don't think it's even that!  So marketability?  What's the point?  
 
We aren't doing this to get rich.  So why is GCU making it so difficult?  Tell us outright if they're having a web space issue or if profits have suffered.  I don't quite get it with this being a web based operation, how much space does one card listing take?  
 
Whatever, just tell us what the real issues are and answer our dang emails and forum posts with honest, non-evasive responses!  
 
If a generic, recipe made, pressed out cookie is what you want, then so be it, but I'll take my homebaked, irregular sized cookies over to grandma's, she loves them!
 
Best always, Randy
 
 
  

[quote author=Pattiann_132699 link=1323087268/15#18 date=1323198393]I don't understand comments of this nature. I have sold my cards locally and many moons ago I was a retail buyer. I can't imagine any scenario under which it's acceptable for a salesman/artist to argue with a store owner about their merchandise mix. When I was a buyer, it was the salesman's job to bring me only merchandise that fit into clearly outlined standards I had set. When I visit local stores now I only bring cards with local photos for those store owners who have outlined for me that that is their need or vintage for store owners who feel they sell those best.  Why not accept that we ALL can continue to grow and learn about different marketplaces and the acceptable merchandise for that market? Do you recognize that you're insulting those artists who choose to be guided by the marketability standards? GCU has plenty of artwork that is not generic or cookie cutter, that is different and sometimes funky, but always professional looking. These cards are not always crafted by someone with formal training, but they are beautiful and "card worthy".
 
While you say that you're not making cards to get rich, GCU is in the business of making money. While some artists choose to spend their energy fighting against these standards, there are other artists busy making and selling cards.  
 
Pattiann
 
 
Pattiann
 
You mentioned 'clearly outlined standards' - the standards that appear to be being applied by the reviewers are often not at all 'clearly outlined'. Not to mention that they're seeing defects such as 'blurriness' that really do not exist.
 
Also, as you say, GCU are in the business of making money. So why are they getting rid of cards that are selling well?
 
It's the frustration of not understanding and getting no clear answers to questions like these that causes the outrage. We simply do not know what is 'acceptable merchandise' for GCU so it's as if we're trying to find our way across a tightrope in the dark - a situation that puts us on edge and can squash all the creativity out of us.
 
Judy
 
 
 

Believe me when I tell you, Judy, that MENSA'a not knocking at my door but I've had no trouble navigating the marketability standards. It appears to me that many artists have found the standards understandable. And I've had store owners make a "Yes" stack and a "No" stack of my cards, with no explanation for the "No" cards. And if a store owner offered that they felt one or another of my cards was out of focus or was composed poorly, etc, I would take a long hard look at that card. Perhaps I STILL wouldn't see what they saw, but I would make note to myself that this type of image is not appreciated by that store owner and I wouldn't offer him/her that type of image again. I use my time wisely and don't argue points I have no chance of winning. I have artwork on my walls that I know would not make good greeting cards. To me, they look great on my walls but are not suited to the medium of greeting cards.  
 
Pattiann
 
 
[quote author=Judy_139270 link=1323087268/15#19 date=1323199485]Quote from Pattiann_132699 on Dec 6^th, 2011, 11:06am:

It's working for some of you like Doreen who has been at it a long time, of course there are some politics too, but yes she knows what she's doing when it comes to professionality, that I know.  Maybe you too, Pattiann, I haven't heard much out of you before your absurd comments here.  Maybe not absurd, but confusing anyway from what I thought GCU was and what a forum is for.
 
However, both yours and  Doreen's arguments here are way off.  I was under the impression that these were our storefronts and we could put what we wanted as artists expressing ourselves at whatever so called skill level we are at, within reason of course.  I understand completely a store turning down items they feel are not worthy of their clientelle, but GCU is not these stores.  It is a n umbrella of truly professional artists along with some of us less talented than yourselves.   Of course talent and ability when it comes to art is an opinion and we all know what opinions are like.  
 
You started with this company back when, you put a lot of good cards up and a lot of junk as well.  You learned over time the junk doesn't sell that well, changed your approach and kept on learning.  I'm not arguing with the reviewers or whoever, but the rules are vague and guidelines inconsistent with waht the original premise of this site was.
 
I was under the impression that 'my store' was just that, and I could make my own choices what and what not to put into it within basic guidelines of things that would be considered obscene or to conflict with good ethics like stealing others work, copyright/trademark infringements and so on.  I can also understand suggestions in regard to design elemnts, bad composition, things that won't print well and so on.
However it is still my store so I am the one that is making choices on those pile of cards, so to speak.
 
To hell with having the stores then, why doesn't GCU just buy the cards then like the other places do that you are comparing them to.  I'd have no argument with them saying what they want and don't want then.
But they aren't the other places and they aren't a corner store with a certain clientelle, they're a really unique conglomeration of individuals and artists with an even largerr array of unique and varying styles and abilities.  
 
If that's not so, then don't advertise it as such.  It's just another Hallmark then, only smaller and lamer!
 
It is GCU's perroigative to decide what they want and don't want, only thing make it clear and if it's something they don't want, then come right out and turn it down and let us move on.  Stop wasting our time with this bogus review process of holding cards for a week while we fret and stew around, or as I do, try and forget those and move on to another project while they decide whether it is acceptable or not, only too fret and worry that this project will face the same demise.  Truth is we don't know what goes down behind the scenes and that's frustrating.  Your analogy of the stacks of cards is cut and dry, no BS, we like this one, we can't use that one.  Easy!
 
So don't complain about our complaining, rather let's get GCU to give us some clear guidelines, let us know who monitors the forum, who the reviewers are, not specifically, but if they are trained unbiased professionals that know a creative endeavor as opposed to just a straight from the camera properly focused and composed imaged, are paid well for their work and so on.
 
We always are taught to trust our teachers, police and all those in authority growing up, but we know nothing about our reviewers who are acting as our authoritarians at this venue.  Are they qualified?  Even if they are, I once took a print to a show that I had also submitted in the photo class I was taking the week before.  Got raving comments on it at the show, sold it and returned to class with the teacher returning my assignment saying that although I achieved the use of texture that the assignment called for, the overall composition was poor and if I could submit a new photo that she could give me a proper grade on.  Art is subjective no matter what anyone says, and marketability is also!  It's all a guessing game as to what and what son't sell.
 
Back to, what GCU wants.  Do they want to be a stock greeting card company like Hallmark?  If yes, then fine!  But make that clear to us  that we are no longer artists, rather just designers created what they deem marketable.  Our stores are only pretend stores to show off the designs we've done according to GCU guidelines.  
 
Then we'lll know if we played with the light a bit, or added that sepia tone filter that makes the wedding dress look beige instead of white, GCU won't accept it so either put it in the private  gallery or only submit it at Zazzle.
 
Also if there is a rule that only so called, positive, complimentary of GCU comments can be made here, then I'll refrain from posting anything derrogatory and be sure to keep my rose colored glassees on all the time.  Be a happy GCUer and even happier when they reviewrs return my cards for edit.  I'm learning to be a good little GCU artist, but it's taking a little more time than Pattiann or Doreen.  
 
Best always, Randy

My participation in this discussion ended the moment I read:
". . . I haven't heard much out of you before your absurd comments here."
You get no credit for trying to soften it by saying:
"Maybe not absurd, but confusing anyway from what I thought GCU was and what a forum is for."
With the written word, the writer always has the chance to edit their words. You made the conscious decision the leave in the description of my comments as absurd. My comments may be wrong, they may be incorrect, they may be off-base, they may be mistaken, they may be erroneous, they may be counterfactual, but they are not absurd.
 
One thing before I move on to more productive activities: Your insinuation that politics are a part of this and your inclusion of Doreen's name will win you no friends. I learn from each of Doreen's postings here, on the GCU blog, and on her own blog. I can't believe the generosity she has shown to everyone. I'm sure many artists here feel the same way. So, please, she deserves better than that remark. Please apologize to her.
 
Best always
Pattiann
 
 
[quote author=Randall_140313 link=1323087268/15#23 date=1323205693]It's working for some of you like Doreen who has been at it a long time, of course there are some politics too, but yes she knows what she's doing when it comes to professionality, that I know.  Maybe you too, Pattiann, I haven't heard much out of you before your absurd comments here.  Maybe not absurd, but confusing anyway from what I thought GCU was and what a forum is for.
 
However, both yours and  Doreen's arguments here are way off.  I was under the impression that these were our storefronts and we could put what we wanted as artists expressing ourselves at whatever so called skill level we are at, within reason of course.  I understand completely a store turning down items they feel are not worthy of their clientelle, but GCU is not these stores.  It is a n umbrella of truly professional artists along with some of us less talented than yourselves.   Of course talent and ability when it comes to art is an opinion and we all know what opinions are like.  
 
You started with this company back when, you put a lot of good cards up and a lot of junk as well.  You learned over time the junk doesn't sell that well, changed your approach and kept on learning.  I'm not arguing with the reviewers or whoever, but the rules are vague and guidelines inconsistent with waht the original premise of this site was.
 
I was under the impression that 'my store' was just that, and I could make my own choices what and what not to put into it within basic guidelines of things that would be considered obscene or to conflict with good ethics like stealing others work, copyright/trademark infringements and so on.  I can also understand suggestions in regard to design elemnts, bad composition, things that won't print well and so on.
However it is still my store so I am the one that is making choices on those pile of cards, so to speak.
 
To hell with having the stores then, why doesn't GCU just buy the cards then like the other places do that you are comparing them to.  I'd have no argument with them saying what they want and don't want then.
But they aren't the other places and they aren't a corner store with a certain clientelle, they're a really unique conglomeration of individuals and artists with an even largerr array of unique and varying styles and abilities.  
 
If that's not so, then don't advertise it as such.  It's just another Hallmark then, only smaller and lamer!
 
It is GCU's perroigative to decide what they want and don't want, only thing make it clear and if it's something they don't want, then come right out and turn it down and let us move on.  Stop wasting our time with this bogus review process of holding cards for a week while we fret and stew around, or as I do, try and forget those and move on to another project while they decide whether it is acceptable or not, only too fret and worry that this project will face the same demise.  Truth is we don't know what goes down behind the scenes and that's frustrating.  Your analogy of the stacks of cards is cut and dry, no BS, we like this one, we can't use that one.  Easy!
 
So don't complain about our complaining, rather let's get GCU to give us some clear guidelines, let us know who monitors the forum, who the reviewers are, not specifically, but if they are trained unbiased professionals that know a creative endeavor as opposed to just a straight from the camera properly focused and composed imaged, are paid well for their work and so on.
 
We always are taught to trust our teachers, police and all those in authority growing up, but we know nothing about our reviewers who are acting as our authoritarians at this venue.  Are they qualified?  Even if they are, I once took a print to a show that I had also submitted in the photo class I was taking the week before.  Got raving comments on it at the show, sold it and returned to class with the teacher returning my assignment saying that although I achieved the use of texture that the assignment called for, the overall composition was poor and if I could submit a new photo that she could give me a proper grade on.  Art is subjective no matter what anyone says, and marketability is also!  It's all a guessing game as to what and what son't sell.
 
Back to, what GCU wants.  Do they want to be a stock greeting card company like Hallmark?  If yes, then fine!  But make that clear to us  that we are no longer artists, rather just designers created what they deem marketable.  Our stores are only pretend stores to show off the designs we've done according to GCU guidelines.  
 
Then we'lll know if we played with the light a bit, or added that sepia tone filter that makes the wedding dress look beige instead of white, GCU won't accept it so either put it in the private  gallery or only submit it at Zazzle.
 
Also if there is a rule that only so called, positive, complimentary of GCU comments can b

Hi Mindy  
 
You wrote:
 
"The suggestion of culling cards that have no sales does not provide a solution as one artist has pointed out there are many cards of professional quality that have yet to garner sales.  This is mostly due to lack of visibility.  So lack of sales is by no means an accurate reflection of marketability."
 
 
 
But what I suggested - and repeated to someone else who didn't appear to have read all of what I wrote - was that artists could be given two or three months to make those cards 'visible'. I may be wrong but I get the impression that some artists here aren't at all active in promoting their cards.
 
Also, as far as 'yet to garner sales' is concerned, I suggested that a time limit should be something like a card that has been for sale for two years or more that hasn't yet 'garnered sales' - not ALL cards that haven't yet been ordered.
 
This would surely be a lot fairer than the present system which clearly isn't working.
 

Quote from Randall_140313 on Dec 6^th, 2011, 1:27pm:

 
No worries, timing is everything  
 
A couple of additional comments for topics I did not address:
1. You're right.  No artist is going to get rich on GCU.  Even our top sellers will not make a living alone on their earnings from GCU.  These artists typically have their fingers in many pots with GCU being just one of them.  Collectively the earnings they make from each endeavor does afford them the joy of earning a living as a freelance artist.  
 
Which makes an important point.  They understand the needs and requirements of each endeavor and best leverage their time and "products" at each to be the most successful.
 
2.  A great photo or piece of art may be ideal for an art card but not make a marketable greeting card.  I'll go out on a limb to say that many artists on our site approach the process of creating greeting cards backwards.  They have a design/image and make it fit into a card category/occasion vs finding a card category/occasion and designing a card to fit it.
 
3. Space is not really the pressing issue here.  It is more the limited time and attention of shoppers' eyeballs.    Also the fact that the quality of one card (or lack of) reflects on all cards and artists on GCU.
 
4. You're right, the purpose of the artist storefront has evolved a bit as GCU has grown.  It is not a showcase for all that an artist would like to share but now a more limited collection.  
 
I agree with Pattiann that you were overly harsh and accusatory with both her and Doreen.