Author (Read 41925 times)

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #25 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:01:37 AM »

It looks like a lot of you like the detail work so I'm posting a couple larger images so you can see them clearer.

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #26 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:05:27 AM »

Queen of Hearts

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #27 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:17:59 AM »

This is probably the last image I'll be posting for a while. I really wasn't ready to introduce these and need to get back to work on the unfinished cards. The image below is a Poster showing all of the completed Backs and Faces (Queens, Ace of Spades and Ace of Diamonds are placeholders for the unfinished Jacks, Kings, Jokers and Gaff Cards). Enlarged versions of the Tuck Boxes are also on the Poster. For the Kickstarter campaign I plan to have Uncut Sheets, the below Poster and Glycee Prints of any Back or Face available for pledges. Every one of the Backs and Faces are built hi res at 18"w x 24"h.

thanks, Randy

loldudex2 · « **Reply #28 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:29:03 AM »

Is deck is insane. The detail is so amazing, I'd say it ties with the Seasons decks for the most detailed, elegant, and beautiful deck to come out.

moonexe · « **Reply #29 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:05:49 AM »

I love the ace of hearts! And I can't wait to see the jacks, kings, and jokers.

xela · « **Reply #30 on:** January 03, 2012, 01:46:26 AM »

Because I want you to succeed as much as you can, and not simply succeed, I won't be leaving this thread without criticism.

Cons:
- This deck lacks practicality due to the borders. This is by all means an artist's deck, kind of like Lance's Actuators. I desperately want to see a version with white borders, and I daresay I would pick up at least a brick of those.
- The amount of ink on the cards will only allow for the thickest stock, and even then there will be handling issues. Bee Casino grade is the only thing that would work for these. USPCC won't be able to help you too much with stocks though, they have no idea what they have to offer. Bee Casino is their thickest, so it's the safest bet.
- With the USPCC printing press, a lot of your detail will be lost. It may be project-breaking, or it may be no big deal at all. You'll only know by ordering their physical proofs, which are $250 per deck. Don't shy away, the decks I see produced that skip the proof stage end up looking like trash.
- The name, in my opinion, is terrible. Yes, it's a very ornate design, but it sounds so bland and blunt. Get creative!
- I'm not 100% sure what the theme of the cards is. It looks almost steam-punky on the spade/club Aces. It definitely has a degree of "robotic" or "sci-fi" to it on the "black" cards. The "red" cards, on the other hand, are just floral-style. I personally adore the red cards, but not the black cards as much.

Take these suggestions as you will, and don't feel for a second that I am demanding them.

I hope you read over what I wrote and do with the opinion as you will. Remember, even if something I said sounds outrageous, at least 1/100 people will agree. Ask yourself if the effort needed to fix or change something is worth gaining those customers, and have the potential to lose others. This is the thought process that drives every change I make to a deck of cards.

Pros:
- The backs are easily my favorite from any deck I've seen in my life. Again, that border ruins it for me, but I'm very particular about that kind of stuff. The actual design is amazing.
- The detail on the face cards is beautiful, and it is clear that someone put a lot of passion into their creation.
- Wonderful court cards, I am glad you took the time to make them customized.
- The contrast on the red cards is stunning.
- The pips look fantastic!

Don Boyer · « **Reply #31 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:21:14 AM »

I'll toss in a few comments.

First: it's a gorgeous deck design. Looking forward to seeing the Jacks, Kings, Jokers.

I think the "black" deck would actually look better as a blue deck - use the same blue background on the fronts that you're using on the backs. It would make the pips stand out more on that deck. If you really want the blackish background, consider brightening the pips and indices.

I agree with Alex about "Ornate" being more of a description than a name here. There must be countless good names you can use that are better than Ornate and not in use. I like using a woman's name for this one - like "Victoria". They look like Victoriana/steampunk, so why not? If not that, then maybe "Charlotte" or "Caroline" or "Valerie" - men name their cars after women, why not their playing cards? It would evoke thoughts of Lady Luck - even "Lady Luck" would be an awesome name, though it may already be in use! Perhaps "Milady" - the British contraction of "My Lady".

There's a bit of a disconnect on the typefaces. The "Ornate" typeface definitely evokes steampunk/Victoriana. But then you have that "worm" typeface used on the Ace of Spades and on the deck box for the smaller print - something straight out of the 1970s, to my eyes. I'd say stick with Victoriana and find another era-suitable typeface. But if you don't want that, then match the worm typeface with a more modern typeface for the name.

Kanped · « **Reply #32 on:** January 03, 2012, 09:03:37 AM »

Quote from: Good@Sabacc on January 03, 2012, 06:21:14 AM

Perhaps "Milady" - the British contraction of "My Lady".

I think it's just written as 'M'Lady'. It's usually butlers and the like say it. I dunno, I like the name and there's already a good amount of buzz around it; I feel that changing it at this stage could make it loose some stream I don't think the name is massively important, anyway. While not as functional for magic as pure white borders, I think the borders here are beautiful and unique and I think that's more important. I think too many decks are sacrificing design and creativity for conformity to what magicians want; I'd really like to see people break that cycle. If you need to do a trick, use another deck. Maybe there could be a 'Magician's Edition' with white borders and a bunch of gaff cards down the line but I think these borders are too pretty to let go. I also think the black cards should stay black just to make it clear what suit you're holding; I'm pretty sure that both the red and black backgrounds will be on both editions of the deck for this purpose.

Don Boyer · « **Reply #33 on:** January 03, 2012, 10:14:35 AM »

I've seen "M'Lady" and "Milady" in print. Neither is wrong.

Having the alternative color-theme fronts based on suit with a single color-theme back does indeed render the deck very impractical, and not simply for magic. You'd be able to spot red- and black-suited cards from the edge of the deck!

Keeping the same color border on both the front and the back makes the deck more practical. If you plan on making the front border different than the back, make it so consistently through the whole deck (a la 1st ed. Artifice), or you have a pretty stack of pasteboards that aren't remotely practical as playing cards anymore.

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #34 on:** January 03, 2012, 10:42:46 AM »

Wow. We're getting serious now!

Alex and Good@Sabacc thanks for your comments. I will keep them in mind when I'm working on the deck.

My line of thinking is very similar to Kanped's post above. I thought about making the Black/Gold face cards Blue/Gold but I liked having the Black suits have a Black background. I knew I was taking a controversial chance with the borders but if it ends up being just an artist's deck in the end, I'm fine with that. I'm a little worried about the Gold and Silver bordered face cards together in one deck but I don't think they'll make the deck impractical for use. I doubt the different borders would be noticeable from the edge of the deck. I guess I'll find out with the first prototype deck. I definitely plan on at least 2 rounds of prototypes to get the colors and detail just right. Since they have to run each of the 56 cards for the prototype my plan is to change opacity levels for the background patterns and even detail levels in the borders. The prototype will look uneven but it will be the best shot of nailing down a good quality with the first or second prototype.

I'm not too worried about the deck name. I like Ornate because of it's bluntness. In my opinion it's no worse/better then names such as Arcane, Artifice, Infinity, Aristocrats, Sentinels….

I saw the USPCC printing press on that History Channel segment and unless that thing has a horrible newspaper-quality line screen of 75 lpi then the quality of printing should be fine. I noticed the Theory 11 Steampunk Back Card has some very small 4CProcess details. I ordered a couple decks to see how the quality stood up. If their detail came through then the USPCC presses shouldn't have any problem with the details on mine.

My first job out of college was at a print shop / prepress house and my job was to prep and troubleshoot files for print and then run the film separations. We never had to worry about high ink saturation and these jobs were being printed on a small-scale press that doesn't come close to the USPCC press. And this was back in the mid 90's! I don't see how playing card printing could be that much different than the rest of the print industry.

Just in case I will try to get the thickest paper I can. I did build the Ornate Black CMYK build at a pretty standard saturation at 30, 30, 30, 100 and that's only in the dark corners. The majority of the Black is only a 25, 25, 25, 90 build that should be fine with any printing press.

The thing I'm most worried about is the trimming of the cards. Watching the History Channel segment I was impressed with everything in their setup except for the trimming. I couldn't believe they were being punched out by an actual person! With today's technology they should have a large diecut that punches out all 56 cards on a press sheet at once. That would minimalize mis aligned cuts by a great deal. No wonder they have uneven border problems!

thanks,
Randy

danktrees · « **Reply #35 on:** January 03, 2012, 12:54:16 PM »

I've read some replies as to the borders and design of the cards lacking practicality. Can I get some clarification on what that is referring to? Do you mean that it can't be used for magic etc.? Cuz as randy said, he's not a practitioner and did not design this deck for that purpose. I believe he just wanted to make a beautiful deck and people can use it however they see fit. So if that's the goal then I think he has achieved it.

loldudex2 · « **Reply #36 on:** January 03, 2012, 02:25:36 PM »

About the mis-aligned borders and such, I have heard from many people that getting a deck standard cut usually has the most centered cards. From personal experience, I don't know, but throughout watching reviews on decks, people say traditionally cut cards are usually pretty centered. Plus, it makes faro shuffles amazingly easy. I'm not sure if it costs more to get cards traditionally cut (I wouldn't be surprised), but I would look into that option if I were you.

moonexe · « **Reply #37 on:** January 03, 2012, 02:34:05 PM »

I'm not a magician, and honestly couldn't care less about the impracticality in magic. To me, the different colors in the borders are actually a problem on the artistic level. I'm totally fine with the red and black backgrounds, but the borders being a different color would just completely break the smoothness of the deck. Think of flourishing, where everything is about visuals and suits/colors/values don't even matter in the slightest. Any move that involves the cards being spread with the faces visible would make it look like half the cards are from a different deck. The background can definitely pass as purely a suit distinction, but only if the borders are consistent throughout the deck. Have you tried using the silver border on the black suits? Maybe making the black a bit more blue-ish, but not completely blue, would help make it fit.

Also, as loldudex2 mentioned, a traditional cut is always a plus.

CBJ · « **Reply #38 on:** January 03, 2012, 03:48:08 PM »

Sorry I'm late to the party...

These look amazing! And I really like the idea of the diamond pip on the front of the box. Hopefully, if these go well, you'll release 2 more in the series with a club pip and a heart pip.

I do have to agree with some of the members on here... there something about the borders that is a little off to me.

Anyway, keep up the good work!

CBJ

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #39 on:** January 03, 2012, 04:31:52 PM »

I suppose this solution could work and get rid of the 2 different border colors. I'm missing the Gold already though! I think I might add some gold into some of the queen details. I'll have to mull it over tonight.

thanks, Randy

loldudex2 · « **Reply #40 on:** January 03, 2012, 04:40:23 PM »

Here's my solution. Keep the red deck having JUST silver borders, and the blue deck JUST gold. I feel everyone wins there.

danktrees · « **Reply #41 on:** January 03, 2012, 04:45:46 PM »

wait what? I thought the blue deck only had gold borders from the beginning...?

lordlupus · « **Reply #42 on:** January 03, 2012, 04:55:13 PM »

I love the look of the cards and the overall design is beautiful. When I saw the design on 52cartes, I was blown away. I thought that the gold bordered front is for the gold/blue back and the silver bordered front is for the silver/red back.

Unfortunately there's where my only dislike (as others have mentioned) for the decks lies. You are going to have 2 distinctly different border colours for the black and the red cards in the same deck and, unfortunately, they will look the same in both decks with different back designs.

Perhaps you can consider Moon's and loludex2's advices? I feel that the borders should be the same colour on the front for each deck but I am not creative enough to suggest what the pips and indice colours should be to make it work. The current red front with silver border should maintain as it is for the red back and the black front with gold border should maintain as it is for the gold back. If you make this change, you will have 2 distinct deck designs (both back and front) and you can rename them Ornate Ruby and Ornate Sapphire or something.

Having 2 different back designs give you an opportunity to make 2 unique decks. Having the same front for both, to me, is a wasted opportunity to make them so much more appealing.

Just my humble non-magician/non-flourisher/art-loving-collector's opinion

sinsandman · « **Reply #43 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:11:33 PM »

I like everything except the obvious one way back. There is noting subtle about it....it is right there in the middle of the card.

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #44 on:** January 03, 2012, 05:22:00 PM »

Quote from: lordlupus on January 03, 2012, 04:55:13 PM

Having 2 different back designs give you an opportunity to make 2 unique decks. Having the same front for both, to me, is a wasted opportunity to make them so much more appealing.

I think I hate the Blue/Silver look! For the backs I'm going back to what I originally posted - Blue/Gold and Red/Silver. I'll see what I can do with the Faces to be less problematic. When I first decided on the 2 different borders I figured most card players organize they're hands as soon as they look at them so it would minimize the "Rainbow" effect.

I would love to do the Red/Silver Back with Silver Border Faces and vice versa for the Blue/Gold Back but I know USPCC would ream me for a quote of 2 completely separate decks! The reason I'm trying to use the same Face Cards for both Backs is because I want to see if the USPCC would take a full print run and print half with each different back. With most print companies this would only incur a small extra cost, I'm not sure about USPCC yet.

I'm also working on some ORNATE Poker Chip designs and the plan is to start another Kickstarter campaign if/when the Playing Cards get fully funded. The second campaign would involve completely custom Poker Sets of 100, 300, 500, 750 or 1,000 (with the exception of the cases). The Chips would be Ceramic and the goal would be to include 1 Blue/Gold Deck and 1 Red/Silver Deck with each Poker Set.

thanks, Randy

JMMJ · « **Reply #45 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:23:04 PM »

Quote from: MagicAddictz on January 02, 2012, 12:10:36 PM

Quote from: loldudex2 on January 02, 2012, 11:41:28 AM
I like the very subtle one way back design.
I just figured it out too! Its pretty easy to find if you are examining the cards but no one would see it if they weren't looking for it.

That is a really good one! It allows for quick identification unlike most of the ones from the major companies

P.S. When and where is this deck coming out, it looks fantastic?!

dee1orean · « **Reply #46 on:** January 03, 2012, 06:48:04 PM »

If you're missing the Gold, why not have both decks with gold borders, I think I'd rather both decks had gold borders than silver ones.

I like the poker set Idea!

lordlupus · « **Reply #47 on:** January 03, 2012, 07:47:41 PM »

Personally I feel that the front border colours should match the back metallic colour (gold for blue back, silver for red back)

If you can revise the colour of the pips/indice for the red cards in the blue/gold deck (copper? reddish gold? blue? red with silver outline?) and the colour of the pips/indice for the black cards in the red/silver deck (gunmetal? black with silver outline?), you will have distinct front corresponding to the distinctive backs.

Anyway it is your deck, your design. I learn from my experience working with agency designers is that sometimes they do not appreciate "creative" inputs provided by the suits

I am not sure about others, but I will not use a one-way back in a poker game, especially if I provide the deck and the one-way design is subtle. I will not use the decks as they are now with the one-way backs in a poker game where money is involved. Maybe in a poker game where the stake is whiskey shots, push-ups or clothing, but not money.

As for the Ornate chips, you have to consider that shipping cost for ceramic chips to international backers will be expensive because of the weight. As such you may not have as many backers for the chips as compared with the decks since custom chips is not really a collectible item (from what I know) to justify for us international buyers to pay a higher shipping cost for. Just for your considerations.

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #48 on:** January 04, 2012, 12:05:00 AM »

Here's my solution to the border dilemma, a bit of a "Hybrid" of the Gold and Silver.

RandyButterfield · « **Reply #49 on:** January 04, 2012, 12:06:15 AM »

A few face cards with the new Border.