Nosejam...I sold a deck last week to someone in Switzerland and the shipping there was just over $12, if you count the $1.75 for the padded envelope , it is very close to $15. I agree that if you are in Canada $15 is indeed steep but to Europe and Asia $15 is close to the norm
There's a missing detail, though. That $15 is IN ADDITION to the portion of the reward cost that was allocated for US shipping. It brings the total collected for shipping a few bucks higher. But unfortunately, from what practically the entire rest of the world says around here, it's more the norm than the exception to pay high shipping costs - AND Customs duty as well.
I've been following Connie's work for years (she's worked on this deck off and on), and she's extremely talented. Connie has a huge following online as well.
When I asked her on Instagram if she's going to be printing with USPCC, she replied that she's looking to print with admagic or cartamundi.
Her art is very good, there's no denying that. But the way it's presented could use a little help. The King of Clubs is missing a suit on one of the indices and the "Q" for the Queens' indices are from a different typeface and don't match, not the least reason being that they're shorter and blockier. Even if the "Q" of that main typeface doesn't have a "traditional" index style, make it match or make the rest match it. Also, while it's not mandatory to make the art not overlap into the indices, it does look much nicer if it avoids them.
I would hope for at least Cartamundi on this. While their card quality can be suspect at times, their ability to reproduce an image with good clarity and sharpness is not bad at all. The Star Wars, Indiana Jones and James Bond 007 franchises have used them in the recent past for creating movie-themed decks with photographic images and they've done nicely with them.
MrMollusk and Fred: you guys are both coming at this deck from very different perspectives and you won't see eye to eye on this. This deck is reasonably functional, but it's clearly not meant as a standard deck of cards - it's more about the art, period. It can't really be judged by the same criteria as, for example, the latest Artifice or Monarchs deck. Those decks and many others like them are about creating a certain style and applying it to a very functional deck, intended for use by card professionals. Only the rare card professional would consider Decked Out as a deck they'd use for any purpose - magic, cardistry, gambling, card housebuilding, etc. - other than to appreciate the art. It's not even comparable to a deck like any of the Federal 52 decks or an Uusi deck - they're artful, but they also have a certain design style that an art deck such as this doesn't have. They have an aesthetic that's meant to be both beautiful and highly functional, while Decked Out is meant as an art showcase above all else.
That price tag of $50 in a paper tuck, $70 with the metal box is all about the art and nothing else. We all know damn well that this deck could be made by USPC for in the ballpark of one-twentieth of what she's asking for it, but that's thinking solely in terms of the cost to manufacture, not the work and creativity that goes into the art. I could make a painting, use the same, exact canvas, brushes and paints as Picasso right down to the colors - that's not going to make it worth anything near what a Picasso is worth, not in the least due to how terrible an artist I am. We don't judge artwork by the price of the materials used to make it - if we did, most of the best paintings by the finest artists in the world that presently fetch six or seven figures at auction wouldn't cost more than a hundred bucks; many would be quite a good deal less.
Yes, the back could have been made more attractive and functional - but in its present state, putting aside that it shares a common affliction that many decks have known as a one-way design, there's absolutely nothing wrong with a simple, repeating design such as this - many classic card designs look VERY similar to this. I would suggest that she invert the symbols on the bottom half to eliminate the one-way design, but it's far from mandatory - again, this deck is about the art on the faces, not about an improved level of functionality. Could she have created a gorgeous clothing-design oriented piece of art to serve as the back design? Sure, it would have been an option. But using what appears to be a logo (or at least something very logo-like) is just another choice she made - it's not right, it's not wrong; it's what she wanted, plain as that.
