Bellezza (live on KS)

[whaam]

I couldn't find this one here. Ain't it nice,....and not because I'm the designer 

https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/2104052526/bicycle-bellezza-playing-cards?ref=nav_search

Johnny

[Don Boyer]

No, it ain't.  I especially dislike the serious flaw that allows people to know which cards are red and which cards are black just by looking at the edge of the deck...

[whaam]

Oh yes it is 

Not a flaw,...I already explained this on another forum where I did an experiment with black and white backs (more difference than blue and red color then), but same courts.
In realistic play conditions you will not be able to tell which suit card is somebody holding in hand by looking at edges. I have played, I gave people a card fan to look at, put 5 cards on table (and more) and said..., (with faces up, backs down)..."now tell me which card has white, which has black back". Nobody guessed, nobody could detect,....impossible.

In a deck, dealing cards, in realistic conditions you won't be able to tell which card comes next, red or blue faces (inside edges, cause edges are actually cut, gray).
If you put the deck in your eye level, then yes, you'll see the "dirty" look of the deck from a side. Same will happen with any deck that has artwork extending to the edges, or patterns used or maps, dirty background etc. (decks live on KS, like Leonardo, Mythical etc.).

The difference is that here, half of deck has blue, half red faces (borders, two suits each color) so realistically,....you won't be able to guess in almost any conditions what card suit (!) goes to who at a certain time (and...what card, impossible !),....when cards are in hand...it is impossible to see the inside color of the edge.... IF..a player doesn't show card faces to the other player 

Johnny

[Don Boyer]

Oh yes it is 

Not a flaw,...I already explained this on another forum where I did an experiment with black and white backs (more difference than blue and red color then), but same courts.
In realistic play conditions you will not be able to tell which suit card is somebody holding in hand by looking at edges. I have played, I gave people a card fan to look at, put 5 cards on table (and more) and said..., (with faces up, backs down)..."now tell me which card has white, which has black back". Nobody guessed, nobody could detect,....impossible.

In a deck, dealing cards, in realistic conditions you won't be able to tell which card comes next, red or blue faces (inside edges, cause edges are actually cut, gray).
If you put the deck in your eye level, then yes, you'll see the "dirty" look of the deck from a side. Same will happen with any deck that has artwork extending to the edges, or patterns used or maps, dirty background etc. (decks live on KS, like Leonardo, Mythical etc.).

The difference is that here, half of deck has blue, half red faces (borders, two suits each color) so realistically,....you won't be able to guess in almost any conditions what card suit (!) goes to who at a certain time (and...what card, impossible !),....when cards are in hand...it is impossible to see the inside color of the edge.... IF..a player doesn't show card faces to the other player 

Johnny

I've done the same experiment.  With my glasses on, my vision is 20/15 - comparable to a fighter pilot.  I can see and identify the cards from their edges.  It's still a flaw.

Bear one thing in mind, though - it's a flaw in functionality of the deck, but functionality does occasionally get trumped by the design.  So it's not the perfect deck for poker or magic - so what?  There are a million other such designs ideal for those applications.  Some decks are more about the artwork, and there are times that such details will take a backseat to the deck's appearance.  As with any rule in design, you can bend or even break it - as long as you recognize that the rule is there and you're breaking it for a valid reason, something other than "I didn't know any better."

[whaam]

I can agree with most things said here, and of course, I know all the rules of design,...after all this is like my,...15th or so deck design. I wanted to do such deck, unlike any other I did.. So I bent 1 rule...a bit.

Only thing I don't agree with,...I say it's impossible to see the edge if cards are in hand, card fan, regular play,...or face down on table, 2 or 5 cards. I cannot see it...and I gotta have a perfect vision with what I do.

As Bellezza is very close to funding (will be funded for sure)...let's all just get ourselves 1 deck and see for real if it's possible to see the inside edge, blue or red... ( kidding, just kidding guys..., thanks to backers so far, if anybody else wants it...., we got 7 more days of campaign..., if not I appreciate if you've just looked at the design,...there'll be one that you'll like for sure (my designs, that is...)

Johnny

[Fess]

I backed this deck. I'm not a huge fan of the color changing faces. It limited the functional use of this deck for me. The card back is something that I really didn't like, but it grew on me over time. It's the hard line and jagged edge that's making an attempt to frame the card back that I feel is just too much and takes away from the overall effect. I would have rather that the work inside the frame be extended and resized to fit the card back a bit better.

On the face cards I like the jagged frame and I like the frame on the jokers where it really stands out. This deck for me is all about the Courts and Jokers. I like them both. How much do I like them? Enough to be a backer. No, I didn't go in heavy.

I'll enjoy playing solitaire and fun blackjack while having a chat. Is it for serious use? Absolutely not. Would I call the overall design elegant? Absolutely not. Are suits and values easy to distinguish? Absolutely are. Are the courts a lot of fun? Oh hell yeah. 

[Don Boyer]

Only thing I don't agree with,...I say it's impossible to see the edge if cards are in hand, card fan, regular play,...or face down on table, 2 or 5 cards. I cannot see it...and I gotta have a perfect vision with what I do.

You can't see air, either, Johnny - but it, too, exists...

Now, maybe I can't see air (well, occasionally I can - I do live in New York, after all!), but I can certainly see when a card's been printed to the bleed in a color by looking at the edge, even if it's the face that's been bleed-printed and the card is face-down.  Sure, it's not super easy, sure, I need to be wearing the proper glasses, and sure, I need a well-lit room, but it's indeed possible and I've done it many times.  It's VERY easy when the entire face edge is done in a color as opposed to just a single area (like the center band in the original "Empire" deck by Lee McKenzie).

[whaam]

@ Fes
Thanks for backing,...I understand what you mean.., regarding jagged edge (line) of the frame. I first went with much softer design, lines.., just slightly curved, then I tried what I have now and I liked it more, cards were more "vibrating" for me..

@Don
"I don't see air, but it exists", actually speaks in favour of my argument, doesn't it     "I don't see the inside edge"..., but I know it's there, existing,...of course.
(We kinda transcended the simple design debate into a philosophical discussion here, or maybe just a scientific..., depending on how you percieve the angle of expression of the sentence in question...   Just kidding, I believe I deserve at least 1 reputation point for this, don't I...?)

I guess we're gonna have to agree not to agree on this one..., and there's nothing wrong with that. We respect each other's position and that's cool with me.
It's now 6 people that I've tried this with (including me), 5 cards on a table and no one can tell which is which (black or white back, same courts, a Bicycle deck also)

[Don Boyer]

@Don
"I don't see air, but it exists", actually speaks in favour of my argument, doesn't it     "I don't see the inside edge"..., but I know it's there, existing,...of course.
(We kinda transcended the simple design debate into a philosophical discussion here, or maybe just a scientific..., depending on how you percieve the angle of expression of the sentence in question...   Just kidding, I believe I deserve at least 1 reputation point for this, don't I...?)

I guess we're gonna have to agree not to agree on this one..., and there's nothing wrong with that. We respect each other's position and that's cool with me.
It's now 6 people that I've tried this with (including me), 5 cards on a table and no one can tell which is which (black or white back, same courts, a Bicycle deck also)

Not seeing air doesn't really prove your point.  And as far as deserving a reputation point - that's up to the readers here to decide.  As far as they're concerned right now, you owe them six points!  Let's see if you gain a few, have no change or go deeper in the hole...

You can agree to disagree if you want - but why not simply see for yourself?

http://www.playingcardforum.com/index.php?topic=8629.msg117673#msg117673

(Includes VIDEO demonstration)

The methods I use are probably a little different than the ones you used, but they're still perfectly valid and demonstrate the flaws inherent in having variances in the faces of a card at the "bleeding edge" of the card where it's been die-cut after printing.  I can pull a black or red card out of the middle deck, I can cut to a black or a red card and with the deck I used for the demo (the original Empire deck by Lee McKenzie), I can pull all 12 court cards out of the deck by looking at the card edges and even cut to a randomly-chosen card after fully shuffling the deck due to an edge-cutting flaw created in part by a design feature he opted to include.  While my camera isn't the greatest (it's the built-in iSight camera of a late-model MacBook Pro 13" notebook), it's sharp enough that most of what I'm talking about and demonstrating is plainly visible, for those who choose to see, and the video is shot in 1080p resolution.

[whaam]

The choice of phrases and the way you use phrases Don, (such as the one with..air) to prove a certain point, was incorrect. Not a big deal, happens. Also, the phrase "for those who choose to see" in this context is...incorrect. If you wanted to imply that I...don't want to see what is visible, you should've said..."those who choose not to see", that's the correct phrase here.
     (Cause "choosing to see" might be interprated in the way that someone sees what is not there..., "so he chooses to see" (mind tricks him into seeing what isn't there but wishes it were, or thinks it should be there))    (some of you might find me to be nitpicky here, right?  )

Reputation points,...there's no way I'll get in plus (above zero) while I'm disagreeing with such proficient posters. I guess I'll just have to do what I am doing, tell it how I see it...and take the negative points 

And lastly,....I thank you for posting a link to the video (which is great, watched it all) and once again proving that we don't disagree on some points..., and that is a good thing.
1. I already acknowledged from beginning that the deck, if you look the side of the deck, yes..., it'll have a "dirty" look. Meaning, Yes, if you choose to pick a card from the deck (like you did on the video) you will be able to pick (face) red and/or blue card.
2. On Bellezza deck, picking from a side of the deck,...you can only pick red or blue (face) and that's 2 suits, 26 cards red or 26 blue.
You will NOT be able to say which is the court card as courts and numbers have same frame and colors (26 each)
3. In realistic play conditions, while shuffling and dealing the cards..., you can only try to guess what color (26 cards) comes next,....doubtful you could see even 1 coming to you or other player...

4. and finally..., the one that I'm talking about all this time: (assuming nobody could see what whas dealt (99% sure)), if you hold a card fan in your hands or you have 5 or 2 cards on the table, single cards, face down...or faces looking at you,...it is IMPOSSIBLE to say what card is (face) blue or red.
I see you don't have that experiment there, in video. Try it and let me know if you can detect the card. (truthfulness is my middle name  , I would say it if I could see the edge that way. After all, finally, Bellezza is over the funding goal so it goes to print !!! Yes!)

There are good things coming from this discussion, my future designs will probably have a mini frame (in some cases, when I want to do designs that extend to the edge), mini border that would prevent issues like this arising among card collectors (and others), though I still believe (I know it) Bellezza will be as playable as any other deck.

Johnny

[Don Boyer]

The choice of phrases and the way you use phrases Don, (such as the one with..air) to prove a certain point, was incorrect. Not a big deal, happens. Also, the phrase "for those who choose to see" in this context is...incorrect. If you wanted to imply that I...don't want to see what is visible, you should've said..."those who choose not to see", that's the correct phrase here.
     (Cause "choosing to see" might be interprated in the way that someone sees what is not there..., "so he chooses to see" (mind tricks him into seeing what isn't there but wishes it were, or thinks it should be there))    (some of you might find me to be nitpicky here, right?  )

Reputation points,...there's no way I'll get in plus (above zero) while I'm disagreeing with such proficient posters. I guess I'll just have to do what I am doing, tell it how I see it...and take the negative points 

And lastly,....I thank you for posting a link to the video (which is great, watched it all) and once again proving that we don't disagree on some points..., and that is a good thing.
1. I already acknowledged from beginning that the deck, if you look the side of the deck, yes..., it'll have a "dirty" look. Meaning, Yes, if you choose to pick a card from the deck (like you did on the video) you will be able to pick (face) red and/or blue card.
2. On Bellezza deck, picking from a side of the deck,...you can only pick red or blue (face) and that's 2 suits, 26 cards red or 26 blue.
You will NOT be able to say which is the court card as courts and numbers have same frame and colors (26 each)
3. In realistic play conditions, while shuffling and dealing the cards..., you can only try to guess what color (26 cards) comes next,....doubtful you could see even 1 coming to you or other player...

4. and finally..., the one that I'm talking about all this time: (assuming nobody could see what whas dealt (99% sure)), if you hold a card fan in your hands or you have 5 or 2 cards on the table, single cards, face down...or faces looking at you,...it is IMPOSSIBLE to say what card is (face) blue or red.
I see you don't have that experiment there, in video. Try it and let me know if you can detect the card. (truthfulness is my middle name  , I would say it if I could see the edge that way. After all, finally, Bellezza is over the funding goal so it goes to print !!! Yes!)

There are good things coming from this discussion, my future designs will probably have a mini frame (in some cases, when I want to do designs that extend to the edge), mini border that would prevent issues like this arising among card collectors (and others), though I still believe (I know it) Bellezza will be as playable as any other deck.

Johnny

You're being extremely nitpicky, but since you're also completely missing the point, it doesn't really matter.

People around here disagree with me on a regular basis and never lose a single reputation point for it - in fact, some GAIN points for it.  Consider that there might be OTHER reasons why your score is as low as it is.  The points are granted or taken away by other forum members using links that are entitled "Good Poster" and "Bad Poster" - this means that there are at least six members out there who seem to consider you a bad poster, for whatever given reasons.  (There might be more than six, but for each extra one, there's another one that thinks you're a good poster!)  Well, make that seven, since you lost another point.  In fact, I'll do you a favor - I looked at your profile as only an administrator can and saw that you have seven people who think you're a good poster and fourteen who think the opposite, hence your present score of negative-seven.

Has it occurred to you that people think you're not a good poster simply because you keep pushing a factually-incorrect position as valid with all the skill of a fair-to-middling Washington spin doctor rather than acknowledging and accepting the facts? 

As far as your four points:

1. That "dirty look" is the flaw in question, period.
2. That's precisely the point I made - you can spot a card's color from the edge.
3. In realistic play conditions, advantage players will take every advantage they can get.  The flaw in question is one such advantage, and it's exploitable.  The better the player's skill and vision, the easier it is to exploit.  If an advantage player at a Texas Hold 'Em table sees an opponent receive a red card and a black card down with three hearts showing on the table, any attempt his opponent had at successfully bluffing that he's holding a flush goes out the window - and that's just one way the flaw can be used.
4. Again, it's difficult.  But not impossible, especially when people unable to catch it with the naked eye can keep fun toys at the card table like cellphones with built-in cameras that allow you to zoom in on the subject...

You can believe that Bellezza is "as playable as any other deck" until you're blue in the face.  And you'll still be factually wrong.  Is it utterly unplayable?  No, of course not.  But it's not a serious, fair card player's deck - and that was the point I was making in the first place.  Spin that however you like, the facts won't change.  It is NOT the end of the world, nor does it make your deck a horrible deck - it's just not best for serious game play unless you happen to be an advantage player willing and capable of taking advantage of the deck's design flaws.  Many attractive and artistic decks AREN'T serious player's decks - and that's perfectly fine, 'cause there's hundreds if not thousands of serious decks out there that are perfectly suited for players, if somewhat boring and/or repetitive from an artistic perspective.

[whaam]

@Don
The fact is.., you're not reading my posts properly.
The fact is..., you're blowing things way out of proportion.
The fact is..., you're a spin doctor (deliberately overlooking what we agree on and pushing the thing that you haven't proven yet, only thing (1), that we disagree on)

And on reputation points, that's a semi-humorous subject for me, insignificant. We all know how that works. What is relevant is the fact that 249 people do like my design (if we're talking about numbers).
              What I do care about, here and everywhere else, is when someone has a constructive critique for me, words that can help me do better designs, designs that you'll be satisfied with ("you" meaning everyone..., or most).
       
Constructive critique,...on Bellezza design came from Fes here (example). That's how it's done. I responded well to that, didn't I?
I do the same on other people's designs, threads (read my posts on Mythical or Devastation, Beetles...).

When I posted this thread, I wrote 1 sentence, and said..."ain't it nice"(?). Then Don says, "no, it ain't..., and it's got a serious flaw..."
Not a word about everything else,....how about the pips, custom courts, tuck, back... Isn't it visible how much work is put into it? At least that.
    You only focused the negativity in one sentence...on one thing.

And there's only one thing we are disagreeing on (even though you make it sound it's everything and that I don't accept facts). OK, maybe two..., the other one is realistic conditions of play. I don't see how cameras and cellphones fit in there. That's cheating, ain't it?

The experiment that had this whole thing started has developed into another (same but with more cards): Today I mixed and shuffled 26 cards with black back and 26 with white back (design with same faces). I have placed 20 cards on the table (faces up), side by side (5x4 cards). Not looking at the cards from an inch of distance, but from where I sit,...I tried to guess (see)...over and over again and get it right on all 20 cards (which has white, which black back). I've done this for more than an hour...
    I cannot see the face down edge (in this case, back down). Period. That's the fact.

If anybody else can try to do this and tell me what they see (if they can guess, see the 20 cards face down edge color), the way I described it... If you can get it (see it), then I...(and 5 other guys) will have to go and see an eye doctor. Cause we surely can't. (maybe I need a reflective table?)
(now, would I really say this if that in fact is not what I see on my experiment ? Or am I still doing a spin thingy?)

(btw, the decks I've done this is Elegance, white back and black back)

I was hoping we can conclude this discussion until such experiments are done. I still respect Don's and everyone's position, opinion.
Thanks

Johnny

[Justin O.]

I can't read all of this, this is insane. The yellow on white is atrocious and is waaaay too visually loud. The separate colors into the bleed are a concern because practiced eyes (the ones owned by people that will abuse flaws) will be too readily able to use them to cheat and those two flaws are deal breakers here. Overall I really like the design and style however and will look forward to a less obviously freshman effort.

[whaam]

  I get you, too much text, I know. I don't expect anyone to read this but Don. We have a discussion going on and hopefully we're finally done, I hope.

Thanks Justin
I really toned down the yellow and made it look like gold, gradient. As I have much experience with printing 11 (or more) decks with USPCC and the printing always comes a little darker, I'm taking that in consideration while designing. The yellow (gold) color shouldn't be too bright (if that's how it looks on screen) when printed. There's some close ups on KS page, that's how I expect it to be.

Johnny

[Don Boyer]

I can't read all of this, this is insane. The yellow on white is atrocious and is waaaay too visually loud. The separate colors into the bleed are a concern because practiced eyes (the ones owned by people that will abuse flaws) will be too readily able to use them to cheat and those two flaws are deal breakers here. Overall I really like the design and style however and will look forward to a less obviously freshman effort.

I'm glad you agree on the flaw issue - but it shouldn't be a deal breaker.  It's on thing if you don't like the design overall, but when it comes to advantage play and card games for money, do you honestly think anyone's going to agree to use a deck like this in the first place?  It's more about the art, less about the play - and that's fine.

Johnny, I consider this a closed matter.  I've said my piece.  I will point out that, just like the cutting flaw in the Empire deck that I took advantage of in the end of the video, there's a chance YOUR deck can end up with that flaw because of the "flags" you have surrounding the indices.  If one side ends up cut just a little differently from the other, you have an exploitable deck.  The simple solution to fixing this (assuming you want to) while still keeping the color scheme and general design you have would be to make the "bleeding edges" the same all the way around, moving the gold away from the edge and a little closer to the index, thus making the entire edge of the card a uniform, solid color on the face of any given card.