Very Minimalist Deck

[deepfry3]

Hi!
I'm new to this forum, and to playing cards in general.
I'm interested to see what advice or thoughts you all have on a plain/minimalist design I've been experimenting with.
It's intended to be an art kind of thing, but I'd still like it to be a playable deck. I'm sure this has probably been done before several times,  but I love minimalist design so I wanted to try my own.

What do you think?
Thanks for any feedback

[JackofDiamonds]

It is attractive, but if you want it to be used for play then the card value will need to be able to be read in a fan.

Will you be doing your own typography?

[Don Boyer]

Hi!
I'm new to this forum, and to playing cards in general.
I'm interested to see what advice or thoughts you all have on a plain/minimalist design I've been experimenting with.
It's intended to be an art kind of thing, but I'd still like it to be a playable deck. I'm sure this has probably been done before several times,  but I love minimalist design so I wanted to try my own.

What do you think?
Thanks for any feedback

The term "minimalist" is ridiculously overused and for decks that don't really qualify for the term.  Factor in that minimalist decks have been done so many times over that the category is pretty tired by now and you'll have a tough sell.

If this design were truly "minimalist," it would have the bare minimum needed.  Taking a nice, compact index and stretching it out into three words and a pip symbol doesn't sound like the bare minimum to me.  Indices are intended to make the cards easier to fan while still knowing what cards one is holding (suits and values).  In addition, standard deck indices should be of the same WIDTH, because spreading your cards to different widths for different indices would clue in your opponent to what cards you were holding.  Take this back to the drawing board and consider these factors if you really want to make a minimalist deck design.

[EndersGame]

The term "minimalist" is ridiculously overused and for decks that don't really qualify for the term.  Factor in that minimalist decks have been done so many times over that the category is pretty tired by now and you'll have a tough sell.

I do like the look of these cards. 

But for true minimalism, take a look at Joe Doucet's Minimal deck, also referred to as the Iota deck, which comes in both a white version and a black version.



It would be difficult to actually play a game with these cards, but it's considered a great graphical study on why decks of playing cards do need faces and variety to be functional.

[publius]

As a designer myself, minimalism is the toughest style to master in playing card design. You can't go minimal for the sake of being minimal. It has to be functional, attractive, and balanced - and it needs a theme. Daniel Madison has had some great success with minimalist decks - but then again, some of his decks are too minimal in my view. Most notably, his blank deck lol. The Rounders deck is a good example of being very minimalist - yet meeting the proper criteria of what makes a successful deck.

The Fulton's decks are another example. Chinatown and Ace Fulton's Casino decks aren't as minimalist as Madison's decks, yet they are very minimalist when compared to much of what's out there with so much detailed and intricate artwork. The Fulton's decks have probably been my main inspiration - second only to the early 20th and late 19th century classics from USPC, Dougherty, and the like. I'm still in awe with what artists in 1896 were able to accomplish.

I would start with a theme. And experiment with the bare minimum required to present that theme attractively. I wouldn't go too minimal on the pips and indices to keep the cards fully functional - but try maybe working on the back design first. Just my 2 cents. Good luck!