Author (Read 3599 times)

Evan · « **on:** January 27, 2012, 08:10:13 PM »

Hey everyone, please check out my Unboxing and Sneak Peak of the Brimstone and Revision 1 decks from Circle City Card Company! I hope you enjoy and please give the video a thumbs up

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=S39xfy8bJ08

phantom1412 · « **Reply #1 on:** January 27, 2012, 08:20:53 PM »

Waiting for reviews

Evan · « **Reply #2 on:** January 27, 2012, 08:22:53 PM »

Quote from: phantom1412 on January 27, 2012, 08:20:53 PM

Waiting for reviews

I've been walking all around with this Revision 1 deck breaking it in! Hopefully I can make the review Saturday or Sunday!

chdmagicdude · « **Reply #3 on:** January 27, 2012, 10:35:05 PM »

sick unboxing i cant wait to get some and i well be doing my first unboxing in a week or two.

Don Boyer · « **Reply #4 on:** January 28, 2012, 12:24:48 AM »

I'm really looking forward to hearing what you have to say about the Revision 1 deck - I have just two on order and I'm wondering if I'll be regretting that very soon...

Evan · « **Reply #5 on:** January 28, 2012, 11:24:52 AM »

Quote from: Good@Sabacc on January 28, 2012, 12:24:48 AM

I'm really looking forward to hearing what you have to say about the Revision 1 deck - I have just two on order and I'm wondering if I'll be regretting that very soon...

You won't be regretting it. They feel smooth and the design is awesome. The only problem that I have is that the blue is too light

loldudex2 · « **Reply #6 on:** January 28, 2012, 12:35:09 PM »

I think the blue is perfect, because it looks like blueprint paper.

dmbaggs · « **Reply #7 on:** January 28, 2012, 03:48:10 PM »

Yeah when I first saw the blue on the kickstarter I thought it was to dark. It wasn't the color of blueprint paper and it contrasted with the red too much. Once I saw the pictures 52cartes put up I was pleasantly surprised!! The blue is lighter in real life. Like Loldude said it looks like blueprint paper (which it's suppose to). I'm more than happy with how they look!!

Evan · « **Reply #8 on:** January 28, 2012, 04:34:07 PM »

Actually, the photos on the Kickstarter looked just right. The kickstarter made it seem like it would be a darker blue like old fashion blueprints. But this blue isn't like that at all.

dmbaggs · « **Reply #9 on:** January 28, 2012, 04:39:14 PM »

Quote from: MagicAddictz on January 28, 2012, 04:34:07 PM

Actually, the photos on the Kickstarter looked just right. The kickstarter made it seem like it would be a darker blue like old fashion blueprints. But this blue isn't like that at all.

Well I suppose that's a matter of opinion. I though the blue was too dark (for my liking). I think the color that you actually see on the cards just flows better with the deck. The contrast isn't too harsh. That was my biggest worry when I saw it on Kickstarter, and I was pleasantly surprised to see 52cartes pictures that showed it was lighter than appeared on the kickstarter web page.

We'll all have our own opinions on it. That's just my take on the deck. I think it really stays true to the classic blue print feel

JimmyJohns · « **Reply #10 on:** January 28, 2012, 07:33:22 PM »

Quote from: MagicAddictz on January 28, 2012, 04:34:07 PM

Actually, the photos on the Kickstarter looked just right. The kickstarter made it seem like it would be a darker blue like old fashion blueprints. But this blue isn't like that at all.

You are right! It's not to much contrast in between the light blue and the white...
I agree, the blue should be more darker.

moonexe · « **Reply #11 on:** January 28, 2012, 08:34:19 PM »

Um, guys, blueprint paper is dark... $:-\$
Too light means the designs are barely visible. How can that be a good thing?

EDIT: Here's a comparison.
Actual blueprint paper: http://www.stormgrounds.com/media/iphone/iphone-Blueprint-Paper.jpg
Kickstarter picture: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/OneFreeHour/fannedcards-1.jpg
Printed deck: http://52cartes.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/uncutfront.jpg?w=614&h=558

Your argument about it being closer to blueprint paper is ignorant at best.
A blueprint is meant to be clearly visible for easy reference.

Evan · « **Reply #12 on:** January 28, 2012, 08:41:14 PM »

Quote from: Moon.exe on January 28, 2012, 08:34:19 PM

Um, guys, blueprint paper is dark... $:-\$
Too light means the designs are barely visible. How can that be a good thing?

Exactly! Thank you.
This is way too light. Blueprint paper really looks darker. The Ace of Spades and Back design is hardly visible. Those are the only bad things about the deck though

Don Boyer · « **Reply #13 on:** January 29, 2012, 12:57:43 AM »

I'm inclined to agree - they started a few shades too light and lightened it even further for the finished product. The index corners are the original shade on the faces, with a fade to a lighter color in the center. It's more of a stylized blueprint look rather than an actual blueprint look.

I guess I'll know once I'm handling them myself - which may take a while, since I was too late for the Kickstarter.

dmbaggs · « **Reply #14 on:** January 29, 2012, 04:41:45 AM »

Quote from: Moon.exe on January 28, 2012, 08:34:19 PM

Um, guys, blueprint paper is dark... $:-\$
Too light means the designs are barely visible. How can that be a good thing?

EDIT: Here's a comparison.
Actual blueprint paper: http://www.stormgrounds.com/media/iphone/iphone-Blueprint-Paper.jpg
Kickstarter picture: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/OneFreeHour/fannedcards-1.jpg
Printed deck: http://52cartes.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/uncutfront.jpg?w=614&h=558

Your argument about it being closer to blueprint paper is ignorant at best.
A blueprint is meant to be clearly visible for easy reference.

I'm thinking of my grandpa's old blueprint paper he used for his architecture work. His was lighter blue than that. Not as light as the deck looks to be but closer to that. I use to look at all his drawings growing up. It may be different for his line of work, I don't know. I'm just basing my opinion off that.

You can call me ignorant and all that I really don't care. It's just personal experience for me. Others may see it differently

Jin Jian · « **Reply #15 on:** January 29, 2012, 05:31:14 AM »

will you be doing deck review of them ??

Don Boyer · « **Reply #16 on:** January 29, 2012, 06:16:32 AM »

Quote from: brown_baggs on January 29, 2012, 04:41:45 AM

Quote from: Moon.exe on January 28, 2012, 08:34:19 PM
Um, guys, blueprint paper is dark... $:-\$
Too light means the designs are barely visible. How can that be a good thing?

EDIT: Here's a comparison.
Actual blueprint paper: http://www.stormgrounds.com/media/iphone/iphone-Blueprint-Paper.jpg
Kickstarter picture: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/OneFreeHour/fannedcards-1.jpg
Printed deck: http://52cartes.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/uncutfront.jpg?w=614&h=558

Your argument about it being closer to blueprint paper is ignorant at best.
A blueprint is meant to be clearly visible for easy reference.

I'm thinking of my grandpa's old blueprint paper he used for his architecture work. His was lighter blue than that. Not as light as the deck looks to be but closer to that. I use to look at all his drawings growing up. It may be different for his line of work, I don't know. I'm just basing my opinion off that.

You can call me ignorant and all that I really don't care. It's just personal experience for me. Others may see it differently

I wouldn't say ignorant in the least.

Like all things, doesn't blueprint paper fade with age and exposure? Were you looking at brand new blueprints, or older ones from when he was younger?

And like practically ANYTHING made of paper, is it not possible that there are variances in characteristics, including color, from time to time? And that "blueprint blue" is not a single, fixed, dyed-in-the-wool shade, but that many shades would qualify?

Personally, I've seen variances myself in blueprint color, even on the same sheet of blueprint paper!

(Moon, I like you, but maybe you should try a little decaf, nowadays it tastes just like the real thing...)

dmbaggs · « **Reply #17 on:** January 29, 2012, 02:20:24 PM »

Quote from: Good@Sabacc on January 29, 2012, 06:16:32 AM

Quote from: brown_baggs on January 29, 2012, 04:41:45 AM
Quote from: Moon.exe on January 28, 2012, 08:34:19 PM
Um, guys, blueprint paper is dark... $:-\$
Too light means the designs are barely visible. How can that be a good thing?

EDIT: Here's a comparison.
Actual blueprint paper: http://www.stormgrounds.com/media/iphone/iphone-Blueprint-Paper.jpg
Kickstarter picture: http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y159/OneFreeHour/fannedcards-1.jpg
Printed deck: http://52cartes.files.wordpress.com/2012/01/uncutfront.jpg?w=614&h=558

Your argument about it being closer to blueprint paper is ignorant at best.
A blueprint is meant to be clearly visible for easy reference.

I'm thinking of my grandpa's old blueprint paper he used for his architecture work. His was lighter blue than that. Not as light as the deck looks to be but closer to that. I use to look at all his drawings growing up. It may be different for his line of work, I don't know. I'm just basing my opinion off that.

You can call me ignorant and all that I really don't care. It's just personal experience for me. Others may see it differently

I wouldn't say ignorant in the least.

Like all things, doesn't blueprint paper fade with age and exposure? Were you looking at brand new blueprints, or older ones from when he was younger?

And like practically ANYTHING made of paper, is it not possible that there are variances in characteristics, including color, from time to time? And that "blueprint blue" is not a single, fixed, dyed-in-the-wool shade, but that many shades would qualify?

Personally, I've seen variances myself in blueprint color, even on the same sheet of blueprint paper!

(Moon, I like you, but maybe you should try a little decaf, nowadays it tastes just like the real thing...)

They were a little older but not super old. That could have played a part in it. They also were slightly transparent (so a light could be on under them). I have seen other color blueprint paper and the darker blue may be the norm, but I guess I'm used to seeing lighter stuff. Like you said there are differences in blueprint color, just as there are differences in many other things.

Don Boyer · « **Reply #18 on:** January 30, 2012, 12:11:58 AM »

Quote from: brown_baggs on January 29, 2012, 02:20:24 PM

They were a little older but not super old. That could have played a part in it. They also were slightly transparent (so a light could be on under them). I have seen other color blueprint paper and the darker blue may be the norm, but I guess I'm used to seeing lighter stuff. Like you said there are differences in blueprint color, just as there are differences in many other things.

Slight age and being viewed atop an illuminated drafting table would make the difference - you may not have been seeing the true shade of the paper when it was first made under those conditions. If that was the table he regularly used for viewing his plans, the light and heat of that table could also be a factor in discoloration.

No matter how you slice it, it's NOT a big deal what a real blueprint looks like. What matters is how good the Revision 1 deck looks, and you won't know that until you're actually holding it in your hands.

Case closed?

moonexe · « **Reply #19 on:** January 30, 2012, 12:41:49 AM »

Yeah, I guess I'll wait for my deck to get here before getting back in the debate.

Evan, is your review ready to be uploaded?

dmbaggs · « **Reply #20 on:** January 30, 2012, 12:44:08 AM »

Quote from: Moon.exe on January 30, 2012, 12:41:49 AM

Yeah, I guess I'll wait for my deck to get here before getting back in the debate.
Evan, is your review ready to be uploaded?

I'm not really trying to debate. The color is going to be what it is and we will both look at it differently. I understand that and I respect your opinion. I've grown up thinking one color and you think another. There's nothing wrong with that

In the end we both have a beautiful deck!

Don Boyer · « **Reply #21 on:** January 30, 2012, 04:33:38 AM »

Quote from: brown_baggs on January 30, 2012, 12:44:08 AM

Quote from: Moon.exe on January 30, 2012, 12:41:49 AM
Yeah, I guess I'll wait for my deck to get here before getting back in the debate.
Evan, is your review ready to be uploaded?

I'm not really trying to debate. The color is going to be what it is and we will both look at it differently. I understand that and I respect your opinion. I've grown up thinking one color and you think another. There's nothing wrong with that In the end we both have a beautiful deck!

Moon, I'm with b_b on this one. Just let it go and get back on the real topic - the Revision 1 deck itself, not the shade everyone does or doesn't think a blueprint is supposed to be... And the Brimstone as well, I guess, even though that's been out a while now.

moonexe · « **Reply #22 on:** January 30, 2012, 04:42:24 AM »

"debate" might have been a bad word to use. My point here is that if it is light enough that it makes the design hard to see, it's hardly a good thing regardless. I don't mean to go further into the "what blueprint paper should look like" thing.

So what I'm saying is that I can't judge whether or not it is too light for visibility, until I get the deck in my hands.

Evan · « **Reply #23 on:** January 30, 2012, 05:27:42 PM »

I recorded the video and I will edit and upload it tonight which means it will be up by tomorrow morning EST

Evan · « **Reply #24 on:** January 30, 2012, 09:34:36 PM »

My Revision 1 deck review will be up in a few hours!