Quote from: Collector on October 18, 2014, 02:01:50 PM

The designer has four different decks made in this style. They were printed 7-8 years ago. Only "Bag of Bones" (2008) was printed on casino cardboard (in his words). He wants to reprint them with USPCC now.

His brand had the name "Inky-Dinky". Now his site doesn't belong to him  ( http://inky-dinky.com/ ).

His decks: http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks12/d10740/d10740.htm

I also remember that he sold his rights on these decks. But I am not sure here.

..."Inky-Dinky" is the same person as the man running this project, John Littleboy.  The cat and dog decks don't show this, but the Bag of Bones and Mermaid Queen decks do...

Also I pointed that in my previous message ->

The DESIGNER has four different decks made in this style... His brand had the name "Inky-Dinky"...

Quote from: Collector on October 18, 2014, 01:47:50 PM

Don, I noticed three different decks in their project. I didn't noticed different Jacks, Queens, Kings in each deck. I asked them about this moment through e-mail and have never got any answer. They made the video for their 1st update later. It shows that one deck has different courts. But it doesn't mean that other decks have different courts. You can only assume that.

I always like to read how people will be selective on Kickstarter. And always see how they are I don't have anything against these designers. They just have uncompleted description for their project on Kickstarter.

p.s. Backs of Jessica's deck and Alonzo's deck can be not so nice on real poker playing cards (other scale and, as a result,  more empty space).

If you check the first post of this topic, you'll see that each deck has different courts suited to the deck's design.  Now, if you're asking "Are the courts in each SUIT in a given deck different?,"  that's something I agree with - they need to make this more clear.  One of the creators, "fictivecameron", is on this thread - Cameron, what's the story?

Don, your proposed specification is necessary only for people who are out of context or in case of my total blindness. I am not blind. And I assumed that people here aren’t out of context. It’s obvious that all three decks have different courts. It’s obvious that all courts in Frank Chimero’s deck are different due to their video.  So, my “Will all court cards be different or only in one deck?” is a short question but a quite specific one

Anyway, it’s more interesting to hear appropriate additional information from creators. Unfortunately, I am allergic to some combination of flags (“poor communication”, “First created “, “0 backed”, “Has not connected Facebook”) on Kickstarter due to Founders.

The designer has four different decks made in this style. They were printed 7-8 years ago. Only "Bag of Bones" (2008) was printed on casino cardboard (in his words). He wants to reprint them with USPCC now.

His brand had the name "Inky-Dinky". Now his site doesn't belong to him  ( http://inky-dinky.com/ ).

His decks: http://a.trionfi.eu/WWPCM/decks12/d10740/d10740.htm

I also remember that he sold his rights on these decks. But I am not sure here.

These will be nice playing cards.

- Nice The Queen of Spades;
- The Queen of Hearts is very similar to the Queen of Spades;
- New backgrounds are fussy;
- Backs? #2 from the first reveal of them, but with white borders;
- Agree about lines around indices.

Good luck.

Very uncommunicative Amigos, I must say.
Will all court cards be different or only in one deck?

Strange rendering of the tuck case... I though designers can do that better. Infelicitous backgrounds for court cards. But the backgrounds can get some interesting improvement, I think.

DeviantART: King of Spades by Emilie
http://playingcardcollector.net/2013/10/07/king-of-spades-by-emilie/

DeviantART: Queen of Spades by Elena Berezina
http://playingcardcollector.net/2013/10/08/queen-of-spades-by-elena-berezina/

DeviantART: Knight of Hearts by Margarita Borzykh
http://playingcardcollector.net/2013/10/24/knight-of-hearts-by-margarita-borzykh/

DeviantART: Joker by charlieinoni
http://playingcardcollector.net/2013/11/24/joker-by-charlieinoni/

Quote from: Collector on November 28, 2013, 05:31:42 PM

Those holes in backs of the tuck cases are unnecessary things.

... would you still have a problem with it or say its unnecessary? ...

Yes, I will. Those who care about this moment will know about it before their purchase. Other people won't care about it at all. It is still black and white, not red or blue. Court cards aren't also all standard. But this moment isn't explained on the tuck cases. And I think this moment is more important for people than tints of black on backs.

Now I've heard that only two court cards are custom in Black Legends + there is no marking on them. I am afraid a lot of people will be really disappointed with these details because, I am sure, a lot of them bought up them so quickly due to such features in the first edition. CARC could explain those moments on their site. I won't believe that they didn't understand that it was a question of great importance for their primary audience.

Unfrotunately I see these "innocuous reservations" again and again from different playing card producers. Nothing changes.

Quote from: Collector on November 28, 2013, 05:31:42 PM

Those holes in backs of the tuck cases are unnecessary things.

Actually, Lawrence says that people like them.  Go figure!

These days, people will like anything named "cool" just because someone has skilfully named it "cool". Vampires, steampunk, zombies... Agressive marketing in connection with expertly developed herd instinct works miracles.

Several modest words about the first edition of Legends decks:
http://playingcardcollector.net/2013/11/28/legends-playing-cards-by-lawrence-sullivan/

Try to be the Special One - don't use Zombies 

People, let zombies to have a rest. Kick vampires and werewolves again 

My congratulations with a new site.