Divine Art Playing Cards - Inspired by traditional Indian art & crafts

[leangyan]

Hi All,

I'm pleased to share a few draft designs of a fully custom deck. It had a few bumps and it might have gone to Kickstarter even before Ganjifa, but it didn't happen.

This is inspired from Kalamkari & Sanjhi, two of the traditional Indian folk art & crafts. The illustrations are hand-drawn and we interacted with a few Kalmakari & Sanjhi artisans to get their feedback during the design process. 

The early designs were shown on another forum and received some feedback.

Here is a peek at the old designs:





And, please find below the first court card with updated design and coloring. The subject is Lakshmi - a Hindu Goddess of wealth, fortune, and prosperity and is worshiped by millions the world over.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lakshmi



If you've got any feedback and/or suggestions, please feel free to comment.  Appreciate your help.


Regards,
Sunish

[variantventures]

I very much like the updated Lakshmi design in comparison to the older design.  I think the colors/contrasts really make the card visually appealing.  I think all your cards need a similar pop to them, particularly the back of the deck.  I'm okay with one way designs (a lot of people aren't) but you need more contrast to the colors to make them stand out.  Right now the back just sort of fades together.

[leangyan]

I very much like the updated Lakshmi design in comparison to the older design.  I think the colors/contrasts really make the card visually appealing.  I think all your cards need a similar pop to them, particularly the back of the deck.  I'm okay with one way designs (a lot of people aren't) but you need more contrast to the colors to make them stand out.  Right now the back just sort of fades together.

Absolutely. The updated back design will just stand out from other cards. I'll be sharing the update soon.

[Don Boyer]

Black and gold will be a poor choice for the back - gold metallic ink might look bright on a computer screen, but the color is closer to that of brown deli mustard.  It's dark and won't provide good contrast to the black background.  Now metallic gold on a WHITE background really pops nicely!  Not as good as gold foil would, but gold foil on card backs isn't cheap.

The redesign is fantastic!  Very nice work.  Make the thick gold line work just a wee bit thinner, I think - it will allow the colors to show more and stand out better.  Remove the background pattern from behind the indices as well, for better clarity.

I hope you're not repeating the pale pip/dark pip concept for the new design.  It's a bad idea - it makes the cards too easily confused with each other.

[leangyan]

Hi Don,

Yes, the back is going to be completely redesigned with inspiration from Mehndi/Henna designs. The focus is on making the back stand out from the rest of the cards with fans looking way nicer.

There may not be  any metallic gold ink print or gold foil because it sometimes make things a bit complicated and adds to the cost as well. Given the no. of decks being released nowadays, and the usual competition, and more importantly, when people see any new deck coming from a first time creator, I think it is better to price it right and giving people an incentive to back it then and there rather than wait for it to appear on some shopping site.

I've got a few things in mind regarding pricing, but let me share more updates on the deck and will definitely look for guidance on other aspects before launch.

PS: Yes, I may not repeat the pale/dark pip, but still will try how it looks with new background and colors. I got one deck with old designs printed by MPC, and had a few games played with friends and family.  No one did complain of any confusion apart from minor inconvenience of handling the court cards due to indices on one side.

Regards,
Sunish

[leangyan]

Draft of few court cards here. Joker and aces will be next.

[Cardfool]

I'm in!

[Don Boyer]

The art is looking good.  I'd tweak the color palette just a bit, though - the colors are mostly on the darker end of the spectrum and as a result there's not a lot of contrast in the art.  The art will "pop" more if there's more contrast.

[leangyan]

The art is looking good.  I'd tweak the color palette just a bit, though - the colors are mostly on the darker end of the spectrum and as a result there's not a lot of contrast in the art.  The art will "pop" more if there's more contrast.

Thanks Don. This is being looked into.

[NineLives]

I missed the bumps and twists of the earlier version though I do like the look of your new design Don has a point about colours (it's always good to do a few test prints, even if you just use a home printer to get an idea of what direction colours will go)... If you are aiming for a subdued, natural and slightly darker colour palette, then I think you should stick with it - though it may be worth playing around with a few options to see if more contrast makes that popping difference. I really like the drawings and look forward to more updates.

*wave*

[leangyan]

Here is another attempt after going through the feedback received.

Please let me know for any further inputs, suggestions, and /or feedback.

A brief on the reasoning behind the given colors is also attached.

Regards,
Sunish

[Don Boyer]

Here is another attempt after going through the feedback received.

Please let me know for any further inputs, suggestions, and /or feedback.

A brief on the reasoning behind the given colors is also attached.

Regards,
Sunish

Even with the palette given, there's wiggle room to make colors brighter or darker as needed.  Consider creating greater contrast.

[leangyan]

Hi Don,

I'm still in two minds about the pale pip/dark pip concept. One part of me says, it is somewhat new and not seen in custom decks. Also, I didn't face any issue during gameplay with the deck (original) that I'd got printed via MPC. This part makes me believe that anyone can get used to it once this deck is in their hands though at first, it may look different.

Other part of me thinks about your feedback and  asks me to go back to what is usually there on the number cards. Here are a few drafts. I'm also thinking to go ahead with indices on both diagonals.

Appreciate your thoughts.


Regards,
Sunish

[NineLives]

Hi Sunish I like the look of the latest number cards; how you have created a pattern within a pattern and a nice sense of depth.

Contrast can work in a similar way to complimentary colours: when placed side-by-side, colours bounce off each other, both appearing brighter and more exciting. Thick line next to thin adds contrast and depth ... dark next to light has a similar effect. By contrast (no pun intended), when there is distance between 'opposites' you can at times end up with gaps - or even holes... The rubber-band has stretched too far to allow the opposites to 'work together' and instead of 'bouncing' there is a sense of something having fallen through the gap.

I think your new palette has a lot going for it - it's both fresh and eye-catching! Though at the moment, your characters seem to disappear into the background. As the illustrations are so lovely in themselves, my ramblings merely suggest - keep looking for the bounce

[Don Boyer]

Hi Don,

I'm still in two minds about the pale pip/dark pip concept. One part of me says, it is somewhat new and not seen in custom decks. Also, I didn't face any issue during gameplay with the deck (original) that I'd got printed via MPC. This part makes me believe that anyone can get used to it once this deck is in their hands though at first, it may look different.

Other part of me thinks about your feedback and  asks me to go back to what is usually there on the number cards. Here are a few drafts. I'm also thinking to go ahead with indices on both diagonals.

Appreciate your thoughts.


Regards,
Sunish

There's a popular acronym that's sort of a mantra among designers in all fields.  K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple, Stupid!  It's meant as a reminder to not overcomplicate something just because you can.

The reason why you don't see those extra pips very often is simple - they can be confusing.  Maybe they aren't to you, but consider the centuries of playtesting that have gone into the standard design we use today.  Some players are so traditional, they don't even like when people rearrange the pips into non-traditional patterns - those and some others are the players who would absolutely reject a design such as this.  They see a number on a card's index, they expect to see exactly that many pips in the card's main artwork - no more, no less.  Even in cases where people are "capable" of understanding the artistic license you're taking, some less-than-scrupulous players might take your design as an opportunity to fudge a play made in a game, pretending to misunderstand what was played or what they were playing - "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was a different card - all those extra pips are so confusing..."

There are numerous other ways one can embellish a card's design without resorting to superfluous pips - stick with something simpler and easier to understand that doesn't allow for any interpretive ambivalence.  The idea of adding decorations in a lighter shade is a good start, but consider some design or pattern other than what you have now.  You can keep your unique pip configurations - there are enough people who will find them acceptable, especially in the custom card community - evidence has shown this in the popularity of similarly-unique designs.  But the extra pips do the design more harm than good.

At least that's my perspective on the topic - your mileage may vary!

[leangyan]

Hi Don,

I'm still in two minds about the pale pip/dark pip concept. One part of me says, it is somewhat new and not seen in custom decks. Also, I didn't face any issue during gameplay with the deck (original) that I'd got printed via MPC. This part makes me believe that anyone can get used to it once this deck is in their hands though at first, it may look different.

Other part of me thinks about your feedback and  asks me to go back to what is usually there on the number cards. Here are a few drafts. I'm also thinking to go ahead with indices on both diagonals.

Appreciate your thoughts.


Regards,
Sunish

There's a popular acronym that's sort of a mantra among designers in all fields.  K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple, Stupid!  It's meant as a reminder to not overcomplicate something just because you can.

The reason why you don't see those extra pips very often is simple - they can be confusing.  Maybe they aren't to you, but consider the centuries of playtesting that have gone into the standard design we use today.  Some players are so traditional, they don't even like when people rearrange the pips into non-traditional patterns - those and some others are the players who would absolutely reject a design such as this.  They see a number on a card's index, they expect to see exactly that many pips in the card's main artwork - no more, no less.  Even in cases where people are "capable" of understanding the artistic license you're taking, some less-than-scrupulous players might take your design as an opportunity to fudge a play made in a game, pretending to misunderstand what was played or what they were playing - "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was a different card - all those extra pips are so confusing..."

There are numerous other ways one can embellish a card's design without resorting to superfluous pips - stick with something simpler and easier to understand that doesn't allow for any interpretive ambivalence.  The idea of adding decorations in a lighter shade is a good start, but consider some design or pattern other than what you have now.  You can keep your unique pip configurations - there are enough people who will find them acceptable, especially in the custom card community - evidence has shown this in the popularity of similarly-unique designs.  But the extra pips do the design more harm than good.

At least that's my perspective on the topic - your mileage may vary!

Thanks Don.

I'd already started looking at various decks, and even historical decks (had got IPCS membership) to look at the design patterns. But, the perspective (players taking advantage) you provided above is unique in a way that can only be given by a thorough practitioner in the field. Thanks once again.


Regards,
Sunish

[NineLives]

Hi Don,

I'm still in two minds about the pale pip/dark pip concept. One part of me says, it is somewhat new and not seen in custom decks. Also, I didn't face any issue during gameplay with the deck (original) that I'd got printed via MPC. This part makes me believe that anyone can get used to it once this deck is in their hands though at first, it may look different.

Other part of me thinks about your feedback and  asks me to go back to what is usually there on the number cards. Here are a few drafts. I'm also thinking to go ahead with indices on both diagonals.

Appreciate your thoughts.


Regards,
Sunish

There's a popular acronym that's sort of a mantra among designers in all fields.  K.I.S.S. - Keep It Simple, Stupid!  It's meant as a reminder to not overcomplicate something just because you can.

The reason why you don't see those extra pips very often is simple - they can be confusing.  Maybe they aren't to you, but consider the centuries of playtesting that have gone into the standard design we use today.  Some players are so traditional, they don't even like when people rearrange the pips into non-traditional patterns - those and some others are the players who would absolutely reject a design such as this.  They see a number on a card's index, they expect to see exactly that many pips in the card's main artwork - no more, no less.  Even in cases where people are "capable" of understanding the artistic license you're taking, some less-than-scrupulous players might take your design as an opportunity to fudge a play made in a game, pretending to misunderstand what was played or what they were playing - "Oh, I'm sorry, I thought this was a different card - all those extra pips are so confusing..."

There are numerous other ways one can embellish a card's design without resorting to superfluous pips - stick with something simpler and easier to understand that doesn't allow for any interpretive ambivalence.  The idea of adding decorations in a lighter shade is a good start, but consider some design or pattern other than what you have now.  You can keep your unique pip configurations - there are enough people who will find them acceptable, especially in the custom card community - evidence has shown this in the popularity of similarly-unique designs.  But the extra pips do the design more harm than good.

At least that's my perspective on the topic - your mileage may vary!

And there was me looking at pretty patterns    -  I can see Don's point about possible confusion arising in game play from the light / dark pips and it will be interesting to see what you come up with Sunish
*wave*

[leangyan]

Still thinking about the pip configuration, but here is the back design.

[Don Boyer]

Still thinking about the pip configuration, but here is the back design.

It's a lovely design and I like the background color - that's a lovely red-purple shade.  You need to insure two things if you're going to use this.

1) Can your printer print your cards at that level of detail, especially on an embossed cardstock?
2) Go over the design with a fine-toothed comb to insure radial symmetry - I've already spotted some small errors that would make this a one-way design.  While a one-way design isn't necessarily the kiss of death, the market preference tends to be two-way designs, both for collectors and for card players.  Poker players in particular, even casual players, will avoid one-way designs so as to not be accused of cheating.  Magicians like a subtle one-way design, but it's a much smaller market to be catering to, especially for a collectible, art-oriented deck - and they prefer standard faces!

Simply put, the card has to look 100% identical when rotated 180 degrees.  Yours is close, and looks like it's intended to be two-way, but subtle flaws make it one-way.  It appears that the designer made the cards identical when flipped on a vertical axis, but they need to be identical when rotated - these aren't.  The left side is nearly identical to the right side, with the few exceptions being OK because they're radially symmetrical, but the top half and bottom half have many mismatches in the design.  It could be a case of an overly complex design - remember K.I.S.S.!  The design can be made classic and elegant without having quite this much detail to it.

[leangyan]

Still thinking about the pip configuration, but here is the back design.

It's a lovely design and I like the background color - that's a lovely red-purple shade.  You need to insure two things if you're going to use this.

1) Can your printer print your cards at that level of detail, especially on an embossed cardstock?
2) Go over the design with a fine-toothed comb to insure radial symmetry - I've already spotted some small errors that would make this a one-way design.  While a one-way design isn't necessarily the kiss of death, the market preference tends to be two-way designs, both for collectors and for card players.  Poker players in particular, even casual players, will avoid one-way designs so as to not be accused of cheating.  Magicians like a subtle one-way design, but it's a much smaller market to be catering to, especially for a collectible, art-oriented deck - and they prefer standard faces!

Simply put, the card has to look 100% identical when rotated 180 degrees.  Yours is close, and looks like it's intended to be two-way, but subtle flaws make it one-way.  It appears that the designer made the cards identical when flipped on a vertical axis, but they need to be identical when rotated - these aren't.  The left side is nearly identical to the right side, with the few exceptions being OK because they're radially symmetrical, but the top half and bottom half have many mismatches in the design.  It could be a case of an overly complex design - remember K.I.S.S.!  The design can be made classic and elegant without having quite this much detail to it.

Don,

Regarding the printer, I plan to go with Long Pack (lpboardgames.com) for initial funding goal. I worked with them for the prototype decks of Guru Ganjifa, and found the quality, level of engagement etc. pretty good. They cater mostly to Board games market and have done both card games and tarot decks as well. It was a word of mouth from 2 other successful board game creators. The initial funding goal will be for 250-500 decks and if it succeeds, then I would be going ahead with EPCC.

EPCC had advised me personally on a no. of things during Ganjifa campaign like shipping partner, where to promote etc. and they were the one alone from all the leading printers/manufacturers (playing cards and board games) who responded fast and were in touch with me throughout even when I was waiting on the quotation.  So, I don't think I need to look further than these two.

Regards,
Sunish

[NineLives]

Still thinking about the pip configuration, but here is the back design.

Have you checked with your printer that the flowers outside the border are 'safe' - that they will be evenly printed and cut? Maybe I'm being too cautious
There is a lot to like about your design though I agree with Don that simplifying aspects may work better (especially if you are looking for a two-way back).
*wave*

[leangyan]

Still thinking about the pip configuration, but here is the back design.

Have you checked with your printer that the flowers outside the border are 'safe' - that they will be evenly printed and cut? Maybe I'm being too cautious
There is a lot to like about your design though I agree with Don that simplifying aspects may work better (especially if you are looking for a two-way back).
*wave*

Yeah...need to have a safe border, so need to update the design. Going to have 2-way back and being looked into.


Regards,
Sunish

[leangyan]

Here is another iteration. Working with the printer to see how close can I push the artwork to the edge.

[leangyan]

Ace of Hearts & Joker - Mohini : Female avatar of God Vishnu who is portrayed as an enchantress, who maddens lovers, sometimes leading to their doom.

[NineLives]

Hi Sunish,

I like where you're going with the Ace of Hearts - picking up the colour from the back is very nice Looking forward to see what you do with the other aces!

The idea to use an enchantress as your Joker is fabulous - I am enjoying your descriptions about the characters and the cards
Personally, I'd like to see more colour/contrast - make her stand out and give her room to lure and shine If you are set on the colour scheme - how would you feel about introducing a coloured background or a 'shape outline' to give more contrast between card and character?

*wave*