1864 Restoration - Saladee's Patent Deck of Cards KS

[cere23]

I just received these Decks (Standard & Original)

I decided to get the Original Version as they have different backs.

Well the look and art are wonderfully recreated, abeit No need for two back designs.
I enjoy All Home Run Games Restorations,
However the Stock and Finish of these cards are pure crap, Initially I thought this would be printed by USPCC.

Cards do not fan, Cards feel really thick, yet flimsy. They Do pharo atleast (one side)
Package, box, all very nice, but really quality of the cards itself is pretty bad. I think this is the new direction of Home Run Games.
Wonder if USPCC is just too expensive. Never thought even JRobinson will be printing with someone other than USPCC.

Overall, I do not regret getting them, The recreation alone is worth it
but I think they should have just released one back design (THE ORIGINAL) as their standard, maybe just cash grab for us completists.

[Fess]

Well the look and art are wonderfully recreated, abeit No need for two back designs.
I enjoy All Home Run Games Restorations,
However the Stock and Finish of these cards are pure crap, Initially I thought this would be printed by USPCC.

To my knowledge no where on the campaign page did Michael Scott mention these would be printed by USPC. In fact if you were to scroll to the bottom of the page and take a gander at Risks and Challenges you will see that it is mentioned that some other nameless printer would be used.

"I have printed a plethora of decks. Due to the square edges and the technical stamps, boxes and wraps we will be using the same printer we used on the weathered decks for the Murphy campaign and the Replicas for the Mauger Campaign.

They are of the highest quality and I know we will only be able to achieve similar results as we have in the past, by holding every element of the process to the highest standards."

I think this is the new direction of Home Run Games.
Wonder if USPCC is just too expensive. Never thought even JRobinson will be printing with someone other than USPCC.

Overall, I do not regret getting them, The recreation alone is worth it
but I think they should have just released one back design (THE ORIGINAL) as their standard, maybe just cash grab for us completists.

From one of his more recent comments in the comment section of the campaign, I agree. It does seem to be a new direction for Michael Scott's recreations. He sites the printing conglomerate used here as being easier for him to print limited runs in the future. This leads me to believe we can expect more of the same. Depending on your side of the fence it's either a good thing or a bad thing.

I'm sorry I have no idea what the JRobinson comment was about. To my knowledge he has never had anything to do with Home Run Games or these recreations in general.

On occasion I used to find myself in the same boat of being a little eager and just pledging while making one critical error. I failed to read the whole campaign page haha. Of the products I backed that were not printed by a printer I assumed it would be finished by I have no regrets. They are all decks I enjoy and caught my eye for an important reason, the design.  It was the initial shock when I had them in hand and realized they were not printed by whomever that gave me pause. Very likely you're experiencing that kind of shock as you don't regret picking this set up. My Tip is, Read the whole campaign. That extra 45 seconds spent gives a much more complete picture of what you can expect. It's something I've gotten used to doing and I've avoided feeling that sense of shock when it wasn't what I assumed it would be.

[cere23]

Oh I ment, Jackson Robinson'snew legal tender will be printed by EPCC,
I was slightly surprised.
My point is many producers seems to be printing with non-Uspcc.
However EPCC is a qaulity producer.

Your right, it was just my assumption that it would be printed uspcc, probably because I didnt see any company name that it would be printing it. and Pratically all his other decks was printed by uspcc.

I have no real regret with this project, my slight quibb  is that There is no way of knowing that the cards would be that terrible. i expect even no name printing companies to yeild better result, especially if the product is marketed for collectors or those who have passion for playing cards, 

No where on the campaign states card stock will be cheap and terrible. Pease expect it..

[Fess]

Ahh okay, Legal Tender quite an exciting set of decks there. I'm looking forward to them! I love EPCC decks myself. 

On the Saladee's, which deck is the worst of the bunch from your experience? It may be they are all the same, it may be one is a standout. You have me curious as to how bad these are and while I had not planned on opening my set yet. I was saving them for a themed friendly poker tournament. It may be best that I investigate mine soon. If they're absolute rubbish there is no way I would want to use them toward that end, could be embarrassing haha.

[cere23]

I only opened the standard, im already thinking of trading or selling an original edition, those were like 20 bones each,   If i were to bet, Id say all are the same stock.

Its a air-cusion style finish, but no where near as good,
Dribbles are bad, springs are not too bad cus its soft

The cards are thick but not stiff (no snap), youll notice it is a pretty thick tuck.
Also, Card holds form, so bends can easily create gaps.
So not as easy to handle, manipulate,  or play poker with.

I wouldnt play poker with them, I love the back design on the original edition,
i got 1 ad-card with that back in the standard

i am very curious to see what your opionion

[Fess]

I only opened the standard, im already thinking of trading or selling an original edition, those were like 20 bones each,   If i were to bet, Id say all are the same stock.

Its a air-cusion style finish, but no where near as good,
Dribbles are bad, springs are not too bad cus its soft

The cards are thick but not stiff (no snap), youll notice it is a pretty thick tuck.
Also, Card holds form, so bends can easily create gaps.
So not as easy to handle, manipulate,  or play poker with.

I wouldnt play poker with them, I love the back design on the original edition,
i got 1 ad-card with that back in the standard

i am very curious to see what your opionion

Thank you for bringing this whole thing up cere23!

I popped the standard and while I didn't use these for a game and I don't know if I will at all to be honest. (solitaire) I see the root of the problem you, me, and probably everyone else is and will be having. It jumped out at me as soon as I pulled the deck from the tuck and started my tests for evaluating a deck. The Die used to cut the cards from the sheet is bad. It's not only long in the tooth and dull, it's become distorted if it was ever created properly in the first place. Instead of cutting through the stock it's using pressure to power through the stock. This creates a lip around the edges of the cards, a burr if you will. This stops the cards from moving as easily as you'd like them to. It happens, it's not a grave error it's just use and probably lazy maintenance.

What KILLS this deck in terms of the use I had planned this deck for, is the upper left corner of the deck. It's distorted almost to the point of Game Crafter, the worst cut cards I have had the misfortune of coming across, making these the second worst. I wonder if it's the same company that Game Crafter uses for it's playing cards with some repairs done to the crap die they used.

I found the stock to be acceptably thin and it's soft however, not in the good way. The card stock is not very resilient at all. Taking the blank face card and bending from upper corner to opposite side lower corner it should spring back when released. This stock doesn't spring back, it's more a mosey back and stops when it's decided it's good enough. This is not a broken in deck we're talking about, it's fresh out of the tuck! They shouldn't do that, they should be springy. When these are broken in they're going to have a very limp feel which could be good for some manipulations but not good for what I'd use the deck for. I do not live in a humid environment, I'm a lizard that lives in the desert so it's not humidity that's at work here. Some folks may really like a stock that behaves this way. It's great for those that do.

I think the stock will hold up to rips and tears that happen with use over time fairly well. Much better than a holiday themed dollar store deck for example, which tend to start having rips and tears after a half an hour of friendly blackjack/poker play. I don't believe it will hold up as well as some of the other brands we're more familiar with although time will tell. Maybe someone who decides to use these for an extended period of time over the coming months will be able to weigh in and let us know.

I and likely most of us could salvage this deck from it's poor cut error if I felt like clamping it down and sanding the nub out of the corner. I'm not going to do that because I prefer a pick up and go deck of playing cards and only modify when it's special to me or a close friend. Speaking of which, I wouldn't recommend putting in the effort to gild this deck either due to the burr along edges. Some people may like that for a gild though as it gives some quick surface area. I don't and would have to sand the thing too much because the burr is a good size on my deck.

The standard version deck we're talking about here is an $8 deck. I think this has to be taken into account when we're talking about the quality of the deck. Purely from a stock and cut standpoint which is what we've been talking about in the thread. I'm going to be honest and say it's better than some $1 dollar store decks, some. Where it succeeds is in the design, it's a great deck from that aspect and I really like it a lot.

They are of the highest quality and I know we will only be able to achieve similar results as we have in the past, by holding every element of the process to the highest standards. - Kickstarter 1864 Restoration - Saladee's Patent Deck of Playing Cards

This line makes me curious about the Original release and Weathered decks. I didn't go in for the Weathered deck because I'm not keen on faux aging etc. Might be a bit before I crack the OR version and have a peek at those.

Edit: this is long so for some folks. TLDR 
Edit 2: Photo of card upper left corner.

[cere23]

Im glad I wasn't being overly critical, You summed it up pretty well.
MS statement that you provided seems disingenious,
its not even close to high qaulity. I am more than happy to spend a few bucks more for a deck, and have the stock be up to par, I wonder how much HRG saved doing it this way.

I probably will not backed any decks by him unless I know it is going to be printed by someone reputable. I dont regret buying this one, I sorta regret buying multiples.

Anyone want to trade for a original edition, hit me up  hah

[Don Boyer]

You mentioned there's a lip around the edges of the cards where they were die-cut.  This is less of an issue with the die, more an issue with how the die is used.  I've seen this before, usually on cheaply-made decks.

When USPC makes a deck, they actually individually cut each card out of the paper - the deck sheet is cut into strips, then the strips are fed through the die cutter and pop-pop-pop, each card is cut out.  It's done quickly enough, but it is a process that takes a little bit of time.

When a cheap card company makes a deck, they cut the sheet into strips, cut the strips into rectangles, stack the rectangles up - perhaps a half-dozen decks to a stack - and FORCE that entire stack through the die cutter all at once using a plunger or a stick of some kind and machine-applied pressure.  That pressure of the plunger forcing the cards through the die is what makes the lip around the edge and, in cases where the die is less than completely sharp, can make for some really ragged-looking, misshapen cuts, which appears to have happened with this deck.  It's the kind of thing you frequently see with cheaply-made dollar store brand decks.

I saw a video somewhere of some Chinese company making decks - I think they were Barney the Purple Dinosaur decks, or maybe Spongebob Squarepants - using that same kind of process of forcing several dozen cards through the die all at once.  It's not pretty.

[Rick Davidson]

Interesting (scary) post.  When quality comes first, I find it hard to think outside the USPCC, but their pricing is stellar.  Get what you pay for?  Are there any other manufacturers that come close?  Even in the tuck production there seems a noticeable difference in quality, particularly the embossing and foiling.

[Fess]

Interesting (scary) post.  When quality comes first, I find it hard to think outside the USPCC, but their pricing is stellar.  Get what you pay for?  Are there any other manufacturers that come close?  Even in the tuck production there seems a noticeable difference in quality, particularly the embossing and foiling.

Responded to your question in a PM to keep this thread about the Saladee's. 

The tuck on the Saladee standard version doesn't have any of the bells and whistles. No embossing or foil, just black and white print on a winter white paper box. The result is great for a recreation deck and I don't have any complaints with it from that standpoint at all. The stamp seal is good too, it's not like Triplicates decks (uspc produced) seal stamp that was plastic and a pain in the tail to tear. Some folks probably liked the seal there though I hated it. haha, I like the path of least resistance when I'm popping a tuck.