Making the image is the initial edit of reality. My edit, my choice, my vision.

Do I need to sell it too? Well, most likely needs more editing. I don't believe that a novel should go out as written, it needs an editor to look it over. If I don't want to sell it, if it pleases me as is, then so be it.

I think that's probably a pretty common quandary. I participated in a discussion about this kind of thing last week. One of the upshots was that editing and making iterative versions of a work is often a good way to make a good piece of art for the largest audience. But that really spectacularly great things (and also spectacular failures) are usually the result of the undiluted vision and intent of the artist. Which is most appropriate depends on the situation. Not sure if that is exactly on topic, but it seems related.

> the purist part in me wants to keep it very natural (as I took it so shall it be)
> the needing to feed myself practical part tends to pull me towards editing skin flaws so the subject will more likely buy my work
...
> How do you make your choice?

If I'm selling, then I have a *customer*.
My position then is, "the customer is always right."

I would go ahead and edit the shot for maximum "salability" and then, perhaps, offer *both* and see which sells.
Remember -- you've still *got* your original, natural, un-retouched image. Your art is still intact.

But meanwhile, the customer gets what THEY want, whichever that is (and you get paid).


- Steve