You are Here:

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.


Messages - Leif

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6
51
Design & Development / (DDDC) The Chocolate deck
« on: June 08, 2014, 12:03:42 PM »
This is the other deck I'm thinking of submitting to the deck contest.

Having realized my limitations when it comes to custom designing court cards, I opted for a simple recolor with this, my first "concept" deck.

With this deck I had the concept, Chocolate, ready before doing anything else. It was much easier than having to find a concept for a finished deck, like I had to do last time.

I'm currently working on getting the ace of spades to look like real chocolate, but the melted chocolate I used suddenly vanished when I was in the other room. I have secured some traces in the kids room, but the investigation continues.

i have done some variants of the back but I used some stock material which have to get changed in the finished version. I anyone have any advice, on what back to use or if the colors are not chocolatey at all or anything, just spit it out.

52
Ok, I had to redo the back since I felt that it isn't entirely my own design. I tried to come up with a design to fit the current concept of "maelstrom". I ended up doodling a lot of small irregular lines but I really don't know how it looks for a critical eye. Then I tried to play with some ideas from the other deck I have. So if anyone have any advice, please make yourself heard.

53
Design & Development / Re: Design, with or without 'band'?
« on: June 06, 2014, 07:03:04 PM »
I am currently designing the back of a playing card, I already have a border but I am considering including a decorative band on the top and bottom of the card. My question, is there any reason why this should not be done? I have not seen it on many decks and I am wondering if it is wrong for a reason I am missing.
I attached a diagram, the red band is the element in question, it would be inside the main border as pictured.
Any advice at all is appreciated, thank you!
-Rose

If it is inside the main border and not printed out to the edge of the card, I can see no reason for it to be wrong in any way.

54
Playing Card Plethora / Re: Heretic Playing Cards (KS)
« on: June 03, 2014, 03:15:50 PM »
The other place that is different is the circle of dots, on one half they are cut off by the circle with the symbol thingie, and the side circles too, but not at the other.

55
Playing Card Plethora / Re: Heretic Playing Cards (KS)
« on: May 28, 2014, 05:00:14 AM »

Looking at that back, I see two different one-way designs, is that usually how it is done? Shouldn't one be enough? Great deck, BTW.

If the overall design looks different when rotated 180 degrees, it's said to be a one-way back design - the proper mathematical term is that it lacks the radial symmetry needed to make it a two-way design.  The design can be radially asymmetric in more than one way, meaning that more than a single portion of the design creates radial asymmetry, though it's usually more subtle to do so only in one specific area and in the smallest possible way that's still visually detectable for anyone knowing where to look.  For you to see "two different one-way designs," you'd have to be looking at two radially asymmetric card backs - I'm assuming you meant that two specific areas of the card back design create radial asymmetry.

Right, that was what I meant, two of the different design elements that this back consists of, creates radial asymmetry, when rotated 180 degrees. I should have been more clear with that.

56
Playing Card Plethora / Re: Heretic Playing Cards (KS)
« on: May 28, 2014, 04:15:07 AM »
Cool subtle 2-way on the backs.  Love the Spades' Courts! (really love all of them, but the spades are extra special, in my opinion!)

In for 2, more when Noctis hits the mark.

I think you meant "Cool, subtle one-way design on the backs."  'Cause they aren't two-way, they're one-way.

Looking at that back, I see two different one-way designs, is that usually how it is done? Shouldn't one be enough? Great deck, BTW.

57
I don't think you're in need of help at all - this design looks great and is fully-developed.  I could easily imagine a company like Theory11 putting out this deck.  Best of luck!

Don't forget to make your entry post in the official topic.  Make sure you're not missing any details, though from here it looks like you've got all the bases covered.

Well, thank you, Don! Gosh, I'm blushing here.

I still need to present the box in the assembled state in the official topic, right?

58
When people redesign standard court cards, do they recreate the artwork themselves or are they supplied by someone and they edit those vector files?

I'm aware of these:

https://code.google.com/p/vectorized-playing-cards/

However, they are heavy and everything is in one layer. It's a nightmare to edit.

I'm probably going to try my own from scratch, but I'm interested in small changes to "standard" court cards. I'd like to know the process other card designers are using.

If you plan to print with USPC, and only alter the standard courts slightly, they might provide you with their templates, if you ask them. They are also quite heavy, despite each card in separate layers, due to large amounts of points.

 

59
OK, so here is one of my designs for the DDDC. I must warn you, This will be a long post, but I'll do my very best to keep it as short as possible. This is a tale about what not to do when designing a deck.

It was some years ago, when I bought my first decks from Ellusionist. I liked the Artifice and the Infinity decks, but the standard Bicycles I had really never been very fond of. Remember, I live in a country where most decks look like this: http://www.wopc.co.uk/sweden/standard.html
I was quite perplexed when I later found out that I could actually have my own design printed on a deck of playing cards. I researched this for some time, and so, one particularly rainy day in September, I set out to create my own set of cards.

From the beginning I wanted them to have the Swedish design, with the colorcoded suits and the more clothing-like bodies, but in the style of the standard Bicycle design. That idea failed before even hitting the preliminary-sketch stage. I realised that my ability to draw on the computer wasn't quite up to par for a project of that magnitude. Thus I abandoned the suits for now, and decided to work on the pips instead, I am kind of fond of pips, I like the simplicity of the shapes.
 I wanted the basic shape intact but with a more "flowing" feeling, and thus, I came up with this:

I am rather pleased with them.

On to the font, I first tried to edit the standard font but then opted for the Birch std font,

 allthough I might have to change that, since I've seen at least two other decks with that font recently.
It was at this point in time I somehow thought that I had enough of cool designs to send it to Ellusionist as a design for a deck... Oh, how naive can you be? I hope that they never saw it.
Feeling stuck, I abandoned the project and went on to design the X-ray deck: http://www.playingcardforum.com/design-development/x-ray-deck/msg67306/#msg67306
Almost six months later I was ready to look at my failed attempt again. This time I changed direction regarding the court design. Knowing my weaknesses, I opted to use the standard courts design but simplify it to only use two printed colors, yet keeping it fairly interesting. After some fiddling with colors, this is what I came up with:










See that ace of spades? It looks like that because of the back. Ah, the back...The beginning of the end.
I began fiddling with the back and ace of spades after the courts were finished. I like the back and ace to have a unified design, so that one can see that the ace and back is from the same deck, don't ask me why because I really don't know, I just do.
I downloaded some free ornaments and stuff from the net and began fiddling with them to create a back and ace. I mean, how hard can it be? Smack on some nice stock design and you're done...  So I did several different versions, some of which I kinda liked... And then someone here on this forum mentioned that stock designs looks sooo merz67... I quietly disregarded these designs and set out to create my own back and ace. Looking back, I'm glad I saw that line about stock designs, because truth be told, they didn't look all that great. I won't bore you with those designs unless you really want to see them.

However I will show you my first attempt at my own back design:

I tried to get in some of the flowing style from the pips.
Suddenly, I got stuck, I felt as if I had no real vision, no aim, with this design.There was nothing in my mind that had to be spilled onto the paper, It was a cold, desolate place. A chilly wind howled through the empty chambers. Frustrated, I looked around me at the desk, and spotted, out of the corner of my eye, an old cigarette box,  Halpaus Privileg, Halpaus cigaretten fabrik, Breslau u Köln, that I had gotten from my father in law, many years ago. (Hmmm, I have to check if there is some copyright issues with that box.) It was an interesting design that I tried to mimic, but failed miserably, thus I resorted to take some photographs of it and cleaning the pics up and trying to get it symmetrical.
This is the end result:


There, I was finished!
I was just about to post it to the forums when someone mentioned that a deck design should have a strong theme to stand a chance today... A theme??? What the bleeping bleep in the bleep with a bleep??? I looked at my design, there was, of course, no theme in sight.
But as I sat there, dreary with the impending doom looming overhead, I noticed that the more I looked at the back, the more, in my state of utter despair, it looked like some kind of whirlwind or maelstrom, dragging me down into the depths of lunacy, down, in a sea of madness.
I came to some time later, my clothes in rags, clawmarks on my chest, and on the screen before me, in bright shining images, were this:

and this:

Ouch, that box lost some stuff in translation, and I need to learn how to do to get that box to look like a box.
Anyway, I need some help here, so if anyone can provide any advice, please do.

60
Playing Card Plethora / Re: Crimson Arrow by the Kings Wild Project
« on: May 22, 2014, 04:22:44 AM »
I like them, everything except the dots in the corners. They seem a little detached from the rest of the back design to me. Maybe it is something for all the flourishers, I imagine they'd look good in a fan. Awesome box, though, with that star thing.

61
Congrats, John! And thanks to Rob for a great contest!

62
I also prefer the narrow J in Joker, but I also like the stretched out R, is it possible to use those together or would that look strange?
I really admire your work on this deck, courts as well as pips. I do agree that the pips on the standard bicycle cards look inconsistent. I also wondered why they would look that way in today's world of micrometer alignment and stuff. I thought it might be that they want them to look kind of a little more "handdrawn", the standard courts also looks unsymmetrical, with varying linewidth on the border and one half different from the other.

I also like the way you show the work from the beginning, and hopefully to the happy end. You have done great with this deck.

63
Design & Development / Re: "Hard Angle"
« on: May 08, 2014, 05:17:14 AM »
Hey Shebhnt,
  Great work so far.  Hate to show up late to this convo but here are my suggestions to help improve your deck:
First is color - you're getting what is called 'vibrating boundaries' with all your super bright and saturated colors.  This is usually something to avoid unless you are specifically going for an op art look.  A great tool for picking out colors is https://kuler.adobe.com/create/color-wheel/ (Super free / Super awesome)  So, because you related them to Casino Royal, I took some spot samples and replaced the colors with the movies.  For the grayscale card, I simplified the number of shades from 7 to 5 - only having 3 shades of gray helps boost contrast and readability.

Second is consistency - Keeping the same stoke width helps unify a set of pips and prevents uneven amounts of detail.

Again, solid design. Looking forward to where it ends up'

I have seldom learned so much from one single post, thank you.

Shebhnt, you are doing great. Can't wait to see the rest.

64
What an awesome contest! The King of Hearts was my pick.

65

Official Contest Rules:

3. PRE-ENTRY (STAGE ONE) - Post your design in a new topic on the Design and Development Board ("Design/Dev") to work on and solicit comment from the membership of the Forum.  The topic title must bear the tag (DDDC) at the beginning to specify that it is for a possible entry in the Discourse Deck Design Contest.  You may only post your final, completed design on the contest topic {see Section 4, "Entry (Stage Two)"}.  You may also post questions on the rules topic to the Head Administrator of the Forum regarding how they specifically apply to your work.  Refrain from using Private Messaging to reach the Head Administrator unless your question posted in the Forum remains unanswered for exactly seventy-two (72) hours after you posted it, unless there are fewer than seventy-two (72) hours remaining before the start of Stage Three.



OK, I have a question. If I have two different deck designs, and want to see which one garners the most interest, can I post both to the Design board, and tag both posts (DDDC), and then, when I see which design is more wanted, submit that one to the Contest topic? It is a little unclear to me, probably due to me not being native English speaking.

66
Design & Development / Re: Retro Card Box Design
« on: April 10, 2014, 08:55:02 AM »
I agree with Randy, top right looks best. And his even more colourful version also works great.

67
Glad it worked out great. Enjoy!

I think sooner or later I have to get into vintage decks, but not just yet.

68
Playing Card Plethora / Re: Court Card Beginnings
« on: March 21, 2014, 04:52:05 AM »
Wonderful art! I really love it.

And Judith, certainly a crafty girl. If you look very closely on that card, and squint a little, you could see that her left hand is lifting the hem of her skirt a little, revealing what looks like a scabbard, no doubt containing the sword with which she beheaded Holofernes. Or am I just making this up? Seeing things where there are nothing to see?

Nevertheless, that is some beautiful art.

69
Congratulations! Tell us how it worked out.

70
Hmm, i looked at that earlier Buy-it-now, clicked "see other items", and this came up. I thought that it ended unsold before, because I didn't see anything about any buyer. Doesn't it show when something is really bought, as opposed to just ended?

But, you're right, it seems strange if it indeed was sold in the first auction. But lets say this was som kind of shill-sell to raise the price, why would he sell the next, with TWO decks, for a lower price?

71
A Cellar of Fine Vintages / Re: Early Standard Court Cards
« on: March 19, 2014, 07:10:12 AM »
I love this kind of discussions. Living in Europe, Sweden to be exact, and since childhood having seen the Swedish courts, these discussions give me an understanding for how the courts from different parts of the world correlate to eachother. I see the differences, but also the similarities. Maybe, with all our combined knowledge, an interactive "family tree" with courts from different countries someday could come true.
Thank you for these posts.

Perhaps with a little help from you, it will indeed become that family tree!

Why don't you post images of the traditional Swedish courts for us?

I would love to be able to help, although I have come to understand that some people here knows a lot more about European decks, even Swedish, than I do.

I think I have shown the Swedish courts before, but this is the link to the Swedish page on the WOPC http://www.wopc.co.uk/sweden/standard.html. I will, next time I'm in town, buy a pack of spanking new Öbergs playing cards (they are manufactured by Esselte now, somewhere in Europe, I think.) and take some photos for you. I'll also look for some Offason decks.

 Maybe I'll do a review if there is any interest, but I'm not really knowledgeable about that stuff.

72
I don't know about these things, so forgive me if I'm doing something wrong.

Is this more close to what these are worth, or is this a bargain?

http://www.ebay.com/itm/2-decks-1800s-A-DOUGHERTY-Playing-Cards-AS-ISSUED-RARE-Hochman-WOW-/321353800290?pt=LH_DefaultDomain_0&hash=item4ad22dda62


73
A Cellar of Fine Vintages / Re: Early Standard Court Cards
« on: March 19, 2014, 05:20:57 AM »
I love this kind of discussions. Living in Europe, Sweden to be exact, and since childhood having seen the Swedish courts, these discussions give me an understanding for how the courts from different parts of the world correlate to eachother. I see the differences, but also the similarities. Maybe, with all our combined knowledge, an interactive "family tree" with courts from different countries someday could come true.
Thank you for these posts.

74
Design & Development / Re: The Olympians
« on: March 18, 2014, 06:53:24 AM »
I like it.  I like your idea for the back. When I think of Greek pottery, I think of black and orange colours, meandering patterns and spears.
It's gonna be interesting to see how this evolves. I agree with the others on the spades pip needing some tweaking.

Keep up the great work.

75
Hi this is my first go at the history.



L-R and top row first
Faucil, France, 16th cent., lovely drawing.
Unknown found with Hewson, around 1680, France or England.
McEvoy, 1765, England.  Design now much cruder.
Hall, 1815, England, this is very standard full length card of the era.
Samuel Hart USA, 1850, quite similar to Hall.
Levy, USA 1865 two ended
Eagle USA 1877 note experimental indexes
Union USA 1875 although old, these are instantly recognisable to modern eyes

Very interesting, especially the sudden decline in craftmanship between the second and third picture. From the elegant Faucil into the almost childish McEvoy. Maybe it has something to do with the Seven Years' War that ended 1763, maybe McEvoy was knowingly depicting the cards crude, to mock the French? Or maybe he was just not as good with the woodcarving tools.
Thank you very much!

Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5 6