PlayingCardForum.com - A Discourse For Playing Cards
Playing Card Chat ♠ ♥ ♣ ♦ => Playing Card Plethora => Topic started by: hecrob on November 17, 2015, 01:00:48 PM
-
ADMIN NOTE: This topic developed from a tangential discussion on the Black Diamond Tally Ho deck topic about what is or isn't a recolor or a redesign of a particular deck. I separated the topic into two separate topics as best I could to preserve the original discussion on the deck while allowing the new topic to continue. - Don Boyer
Wow i wasn't expecting this to create all this backlash.
Please don't take my comments too deeply as harsh as they might sound. I respect Jackson a lot, though i have never been a fan of his projects, i do respect the fact that he has been pushing the boundaries of how decks should look and feel. Quality on his projects shouldn't be questioned (from a designer point of view, I am an architect and do understand the complexity, time and effort he put into his work)
My real issue has been addressed by Don, on how KS was originally intended and how its used nowadays.
I do understand the Metalux technology is not cheap and that Bicycle is charging more for his foil deck with his classic design than Jackson, He is indeed offering way more than that with this project.
The risks of KS can be discussed even more, (as im also an avid video gamer and have been exposed to KS "riskless" projects more than once) but i will leave that for another topic but i would like to mention that there are plenty of articles telling stories of how people just disappear with the money or how they promise something and then never deliver.
The other issue is that this is kind of a recolor ???
If the metalux tech is the only real difference aside from small tweaks in the design, then its not enough for me to pop $27 on 1 deck (my opinion guys), its still a beautiful deck, I like the design and the new color scheme, but after the scarlet tally ho, and the emerald tally ho and the normal tally ho, i guess i will pass on this one.
-
Wow i wasn't expecting this to create all this backlash.
Please don't take my comments too deeply as harsh as they might sound. I respect Jackson a lot, though i have never been a fan of his projects, i do respect the fact that he has been pushing the boundaries of how decks should look and feel. Quality on his projects shouldn't be questioned (from a designer point of view, I am an architect and do understand the complexity, time and effort he put into his work)
My real issue has been addressed by Don, on how KS was originally intended and how its used nowadays.
I do understand the Metalux technology is not cheap and that Bicycle is charging more for his foil deck with his classic design than Jackson, He is indeed offering way more than that with this project.
The risks of KS can be discussed even more, (as im also an avid video gamer and have been exposed to KS "riskless" projects more than once) but i will leave that for another topic but i would like to mention that there are plenty of articles telling stories of how people just disappear with the money or how they promise something and then never deliver.
The other issue is that this is kind of a recolor ???
If the metalux tech is the only real difference aside from small tweaks in the design, then its not enough for me to pop $27 on 1 deck (my opinion guys), its still a beautiful deck, I like the design and the new color scheme, but after the scarlet tally ho, and the emerald tally ho and the normal tally ho, i guess i will pass on this one.
None of the Tally Ho series has been a recolor, the back designs and tuck are from scratch and completely different than the previous ones and courts also change color scheme and design motif depending on which deck it is.
-
The other issue is that this is kind of a recolor ???
If the metalux tech is the only real difference aside from small tweaks in the design, then its not enough for me to pop $27 on 1 deck (my opinion guys), its still a beautiful deck, I like the design and the new color scheme, but after the scarlet tally ho, and the emerald tally ho and the normal tally ho, i guess i will pass on this one.
None of the Tally Ho series has been a recolor, the back designs and tuck are from scratch and completely different than the previous ones and courts also change color scheme and design motif depending on which deck it is.
He did say 'kind of' a recolor. And while I would agree with you semantically, that technically yes, they are not the same deck, I think for all intents and purposes, these are just recolors, especially with the courts being virtually the same.
While changing the tuck and backs can be argued as being a new deck, they are still all KW Tally-Hos with abstract back patterns, just in different colors.
I don't know that there is anything wrong with color variants, but I am excited for what the next KW deck theme is going to be after the Tally-Ho series..
-
To be blunt, if new people find it difficult to compete then the market is working. There are too many people putting out shoddy work and their respective games need to be stepped up, experience needs to be gained and their effort raised. I'd wager that most of the "top" card designers had decades of experience (which has both a value and a cost) before they got into cards and folks with a week of experience in Photoshop should expect to be crushed. Those with humility and a willingness to learn will try again, and those who don't will go away. Which is exactly how it should be. Nobody starts in the mailroom and is CEO the following week, though it seems that culture has developed this insane notion that everyone is entitled to instant success.
I wouldn't argue for a minute that there are shoddy projects out there by inexperienced designers that deserve all the crushing that they get. But at the same time, there's also some quality projects out there that have difficulty making a splash in the marketplace that KS has become because not only are they elbowing artists just like themselves for room, they have to compete with repeat artists who come back to KS over and over. Imagine what a different marketplace KS would be if someone like USPC decided to put a little skin in the game and produce decks there, or Ellusionist, or Theory11.
I was under the impression that KS was meant for taking someone who normally would have a hard time finding funding and giving them a chance to get their work off the ground. I have absolutely nothing against Jackson personally - I've met him and found him to be a great guy, deserving of his success, not to mention a real firecracker! But he's among the last people who NEEDS Kickstarter to get a project off the ground and funded. A project like this, so costly and so limited by a popular artist, could easily have been self-launched - and without KS taking a cut, he could have even lowered the price. I guess I feel that at some point, a company has to take off the training wheels that is KS and start riding that bike on their own. Again, just to be clear, this is simply my opinion on this - KS clearly isn't what I thought it was, or it wouldn't be what it is now, and Jackson's free to launch whatever projects he wants as long as KS's rules don't change.
The other issue is that this is kind of a recolor ???
Here, I must patently disagree and side with Jackson. None of the TH decks he's made were "recolors" - each had a unique if similar design. Having the same faces is common, especially when modeling one's deck after a standard - and Jackson himself has his own standard, one that appears not only in the TH decks but in the 52 Plus Joker club decks from last year. And even there, aren't there some modifications to the color scheme to match the deck?
A recolor is when someone takes a back design and makes the same, exact back design, to the final detail, but changes the overall color scheme from one set to another, or from a single color to a different color. The Monarchs, the Fontaines, the Artifices, versions 4 through 6 of the Smoke and Mirrors series - these were recolors. Jackson's TH series is most certainly NOT a recolor, and not "kind of a recolor" either. "Kind of a recolor" is like being half-pregnant - it's a recolor or it isn't, plain and simple, there are no "shades of gray" in-between.
-
The back designs here are ubiquitous, they are all versions of the same deck, the KW Tally-Ho, with the significant difference between them being color, to me that is a re-color, even if the design isn't a carbon copy of the deck before it.
It's subjective, and for me, doesn't make them any less desirable.
I'm refreshing my pledge manager page every chance I get hoping I can get the F1.
This will be the first KW Tally-Ho project I am not a part of and it is killing me, I really don't want to end up with a partial collection.
Fingers are crossed
-
The back designs here are ubiquitous, they are all versions of the same deck, the KW Tally-Ho, with the significant difference between them being color, to me that is a re-color, even if the design isn't a carbon copy of the deck before it.
It's subjective, and for me, doesn't make them any less desirable.
I'm refreshing my pledge manager page every chance I get hoping I can get the F1.
This will be the first KW Tally-Ho project I am not a part of and it is killing me, I really don't want to end up with a partial collection.
Fingers are crossed
Thank you for the kind words.
However, there is nothing I hate more as a card designer than a recolor. I guess we just have different definitions of recolor and that's ok.
(http://www.jacksonbrobinson.com/sth/backs.jpg)
(http://www.jacksonbrobinson.com/sth/agree.jpg)
-
The back designs here are ubiquitous, they are all versions of the same deck, the KW Tally-Ho, with the significant difference between them being color, to me that is a re-color, even if the design isn't a carbon copy of the deck before it.
It's subjective, and for me, doesn't make them any less desirable.
I'm refreshing my pledge manager page every chance I get hoping I can get the F1.
This will be the first KW Tally-Ho project I am not a part of and it is killing me, I really don't want to end up with a partial collection.
Fingers are crossed
Thank you for the kind words.
However, there is nothing I hate more as a card designer than a recolor. I guess we just have different definitions of recolor and that's ok.
recolor
re·col·or
ˌrēˈkələr/
verb
verb: recolour; 3rd person present: recolours; past tense: recoloured; past participle: recoloured; gerund or present participle: recolouring; verb: recolor; 3rd person present: recolors; past tense: recolored; past participle: recolored; gerund or present participle: recoloring; verb: re-colour; 3rd person present: re-colours; past tense: re-coloured; past participle: re-coloured; gerund or present participle: re-colouring; verb: re-color; 3rd person present: re-colors; past tense: re-colored; past participle: re-colored; gerund or present participle: re-coloring
color again or differently.
I won't agree to disagree as Jackson has. These are NOT a recolor. A recolor by very basic definition is taking the same design and changing the color. Here's an example of recolors, Bikes. Orange, Turquoise, Purple, Yellow, etc etc, whether they call them trace decks or just Orange doesn't make any difference. Those are recolors, the same design recolored. You can add in to this group the reverse backs, those are more bikes that come in a huge variety and are all recolors. Tally-Ho recolors are all over the place too mostly done by Aloys Studios, we've all seen them and many own them. This isn't subjective, it isn't up for debate, nor is it open to interpretation. A recolor is a recolor. A new design is not, nor can it be a recolor.
:mindf-ck:
-
So this is what I see (below) and why I consider this a recolor. I don't consider the first KW Tally-Ho as part of this collection, and maybe that is a mistake on my part. The decks are even named by color.
(I apologize for the crappy MS paint draft-up, but I think you get the idea. Obviously I'm not a golfer)
And I do want to stress the unbelievable respect and appreciation I have for Jackson and the entire KW brand, these decks are no exception.
... there is nothing I hate more as a card designer than a recolor. ...
I don't mean to be rude, and I hope I am not offending you.
-
Justin you know that just adds to the :mindf-ck: right?
I'm leaving it alone. I clearly can't argue the point made there. That cracked me up haha.
-
Just to jump in here, Justin I think that what you are seeing is what would be termed "familial resemblance." As siblings tend to share features and can look similar at a glance, so too do these cards. However, whether cards or people, all of the many details that make up the design vary considerably when you look at the design carefully and that makes them unique.
Recoloring is taking 100% identical art and ONLY changing the color. That is just a fact, the actual definition of the word. These various decks Jackson has done do not fit that definition.
Now, I think that everyone would agree that they are similar and if you only take a split second glance from a distance, then yes, they can all look "the same." But, that doesn't make them recolors in any way whatsoever. If Jackson started doing actual recolors, I would beat his sorry @5& for being a lazy good-for-nothing, as no friend of mine is going to get away with such hideous behavior.
-
Recoloring is taking 100% identical art and ONLY changing the color. That is just a fact, the actual definition of the word. These various decks Jackson has done do not fit that definition.
I feel like people throw the word fact around a little carelessly.
Let me clarify my opinion with what I feel are facts: The dictionary definition of a word never encompass the scope of the use of the word. There is an entire linguistic spectrum that takes into account colloquial context and conceptual association that makes it moot to point at a dictionary definition and claim 'Fact!'.
That said, a recolor of a playing card deck is not a fact, it is a concept that is absolutely subjective, regardless of how you feel about it. Things aren't black and white for everyone like they clearly are for some, and while you feel like this is fact, I feel like you are wrong. What you may think of as unbiased logic isn't universal.
That said, I obviously can't just put an argument down, because I love arguing too much.
I just want to say that I feel that this is a recolor, I don't think it is a lazy 'paint bucket tool' job, and I don't even dislike 'paint bucket' recolors per-say.
Jackson has created three amazing decks, regardless of how you view them, and I am still really butt hurt that I missed the window on this one, and I still blame the alarm I set on my phone for not alarming.
-
The whole word "recolor" kind of gives it away, doesn't it? Recolor means to change the color. If the design is changed, it's a redesign. And with that said, I must agree with Paul here - it's more of a familial resemblance. The decks, after all, make up a series and that usually means that they have some kind of theme or design elements in common.
Compare the designs inch by inch and write down all parts where they are identical and where they aren't. I'm quite positive you'd end up with a very short list of identical parts compared to the other, and if that's the case you can't really make the argument that it's merely a recolor.
-
Compare the designs inch by inch and write down all parts where they are identical and where they aren't. I'm quite positive you'd end up with a very short list of identical parts compared to the other, and if that's the case you can't really make the argument that it's merely a recolor.
I guess what it comes down to for me is that it doesn't matter whether the patter in a squiggly line or jagged line, the composition of that design is virtually identical. The pattern changes, sure, but 'sharp edged lattice work' = 'soft edged weave', 'interlaced circles' = 'helix stripe' etc, to me, same thing when the layout of the design is identical. The major change I see her is that it is a different color, the designs are, like I said, ubiquitous to one another.
If the red Fontains' 'F' had hard edges, and the blue Fontains' 'F' had round edges, it would still be a recolor to me, even though the design was different.
Conceptually this is the same thing to me, (independent from the level of quality of design) it's a series of starburst patterned disks over a thatched background with a swirly corner accent. In different colors.
Still no new open slots on my watch, I have been refreshing several times every couple of minutes on the pledge management page, feeling like I am a few seconds too late or a few seconds too early for that one person that drops out. Maddening. Hoping if I don't get in by the end of the project someone would be willing to trade one of their BD Legacies for a Scarlett or Emerald Legacy. Hope Jackson is going to number match on these as well..
-
I fear that no one here will convince Justin that he's utterly confused about what a redesign is and what a recolor is.
A recolor is someone taking the existing design, pushing a few color sliders, and voila, new deck.
A redesign does MORE than just move a few color sliders. It could be a lot more, it could be a little more. It could be a similar design, it could be a completely unique design. But no matter how you slice it, it's a REDESIGN, not a RECOLOR.
A trained monkey can move color sliders. I could make a recolor, giving the original files and the right software, and I'm no artist. Your (insert relative here) could do a redesign if they know how to operate a computer with minimal proficiency. A redesign requires at least a little more talent.
One could argue that Jackson's designs are based on each other, or based on the original Circle Back design, or that they're of the same family. But by definition, they are not recolors, period. There's no gray area here - just like you can't be half-pregnant, you can't alter a design and describe it simply as a "recolor."
Let me give you a visual example. I'm going to design a sentence. Look at it, below, in italics.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
Now, I'm going to recolor my sentence. The design remains unchanged, only the color(s) are altered.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
Now, I'm going to REDESIGN my sentence, Yoda-style...
Jumped over the lazy dog, the quick brown fox did.
See that? The sentence is different. Something changed. It's similar to the original sentence, even says the same thing, in a certain way, but it does so differently. That's a REDESIGN... I had to actually click on keys in a different pattern, not just use the cut and paste commands.
Now here's a radical redesign of the sentence...
This is not a lame-ass recolor, but something NEW and DIFFERENT, bitches!
See? Another redesign. Very different; doesn't even say the same thing, does it? This is a redesign, but so is the "Yoda style" sentence, because it's different, too. It's not AS different, but it's different. So yeah, it's a redesign.
Do you get it now, Justin? :))
-
It doesn't really matter if one considers two designs to be "virtually identical" or not - if the design has been altered it is a redesign (or if created from scratch - a new design). In some cases, such as the one mentioned above where the edges of an F has been altered, you may consider it a lazy or hardly existent redesign, but it is still a redesign because the design has been changed. If the color is the only thing changed, it is a recolor.
This is really about as debatable as if our planet is round or not.
-
I fear that no one here will convince Justin that he's utterly confused about what a redesign is and what a recolor is.
...
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
...
Now, I'm going to REDESIGN my sentence, Yoda-style...
Jumped over the lazy dog, the quick brown fox did.
...
Do you get it now, Justin?
I'm not confused, I don't appreciate that. "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog." and "Jumped over the lazy dog, the quick brown fox did." are the same sentence to me, because the words you use don't define what the sentence is.
I know it's frustrating when you feel like you are stating a universal truth and someone doesn't agree. You wonder how that person can not see the obvious and simple, rudimentary logic behind the facts you are providing and how they lead to a single glowing answer that is the only possible answer in all the realms of all possibility.
Let's all just agree that we are right, that the other person is entitled to be wrong, and that's ok, because we know, deep down inside, that we are the most right of all rights, and anyone who says otherwise is either stupid or ignorant, because we have facts on our side, and an arsenal of universal constants that bolster our resolve.
-
This thread has cracked me up. I've really enjoyed it. :))
Round two, Sideways tuck vs Vertical tuck? ;D
-
This thread has cracked me up. I've really enjoyed it. :))
Round two, Sideways tuck vs Vertical tuck? ;D
Side open
Verticle
They are all top open tucks you DON'T EVEN KNOW!!!!
-
:bosswalk:
So much knowledge has been exposed in this thread...
Im glad my little comment sparked so much healthy discussion.
Just to clarify, I did say "kind of a reacolor" because i have always considered them like sibling decks just like the "family" idea that Paul introduced.
yes, this are different designs, and yes they are also of different color.
I cant make myself have more than 1 of them because of... i dont know "reasons" or maybe i just dont love the tally ho design but theres no denying that this are gorgeous.
-
So here's a conundrum for you. Considering the cars on the left and right below, are they "recolors"? They look mostly the same to most people with just minor different details, they are from the same maker, they do pretty much the same thing, and to make it even more mind-bending, they are even the same color.
-
So here's a conundrum for you. Considering the cars on the left and right below, are they "recolors"?
Car manufacturers don't issue recolors, they release a range of colors for every model. I see the point you are trying to make, but I think you are looking at the parts of my concept's whole and trying to apply them to a likeness that doesn't work because it is too far out of context.
I think maybe more appropriate to what I am trying to say is if you have 3 2002 Ferrari Enzos, one has leather seats, one has fabric seats, and the last has plastic seats, then the way I see it you have three of the same car, not 3 different versions of a family of cars.
-
Paul had to go and post some Fes Porn! I love Ferrari's. 8)
I'm trying to ignore Justin's post about fabric and plastic seats in an Enzo.
Something Jackson said earlier in this thread I agree with. The bubble has already burst. It's done. If we take a look at the funding issues many quality designs have had recently it's plain and clear. That bubble exploded. The bubble was a great thing while it lasted. I'm not an aftermarket seller, I've never sold a deck in my life. I can't comment on that side of things. I can comment on how many more people are enjoying playing cards because of the bubble and because of the interest in kickstarter decks. I think it was a wonderful thing for playing cards in general.
It's been nice to bring up a deck by name in some conversation and have a friend say "I've heard of that deck". Instead of me needing to explain. While it's not a common wide spread thing, the general population really couldn't give a damn. There are many more people who do today than there were even two years ago. I really hope in a couple years we see another bubble happen some how. The bubble we did see is definitely over now. We're still going to see great designs and we're going to see more of them struggle for funding.
-
Paul had to go and post some Fes Porn! I love Ferrari's. 8)
I'm trying to ignore Justin's post about fabric and plastic seats in an Enzo.
I promise it was just for the sake of the example and I would never dream of disgracing the name of auto royalty with tawdry accusations about materials.
-
I like recolors...
-
Apologies but did the entire thread for the Black Diamond Tally Hos just get hijacked and renamed "What is a re-color"?
If so poor form Playing Card Forum.
-
So this is what I see (below) and why I consider this a recolor. I don't consider the first KW Tally-Ho as part of this collection, and maybe that is a mistake on my part. The decks are even named by color.
(I apologize for the crappy MS paint draft-up, but I think you get the idea. Obviously I'm not a golfer)
And I do want to stress the unbelievable respect and appreciation I have for Jackson and the entire KW brand, these decks are no exception.
... there is nothing I hate more as a card designer than a recolor. ...
I don't mean to be rude, and I hope I am not offending you.
I'm really sorry but it is useless at this point to argue about this topic any further. There are so many design elements and principals you are missing and deleting by just creating large circles over 90% of my design. I'm not offended at all. Each one of the these designs has a different design languages. The shapes and forms are different, the rithym and flow is different. The scale and size of those shapes is composed differently. They each take their shape ques from that overarching suite that represents each deck. IE Scarlett/Spades, Emerald/Clubs, Diamonds/Diamonds, ect. If you believe that my designs are in the same ball park as the 11th recolor of the madison decks then we will always disagree... and that ok. No hard feelings.
-
It's so obvious these aren't recolors. I don't know why it's so hard to see that. However, I see no problem with recolors either. I love them. All the monarch recolors are great in my opinion (except for the green one).
-
Apologies but did the entire thread for the Black Diamond Tally Hos just get hijacked and renamed "What is a re-color"?
If so poor form Playing Card Forum.
I'm going to try teasing these two apart into different topics. It got way out of hand.
-
I'm going to try teasing these two apart into different topics. It got way out of hand.
Good call
-
Apologies but did the entire thread for the Black Diamond Tally Hos just get hijacked and renamed "What is a re-color"?
If so poor form Playing Card Forum.
I'm going to try teasing these two apart into different topics. It got way out of hand.
Oooh waaay past out of hand haha. It got ridiculous when the paint marker hit the card backs. Even so it's been hilarious! I've had a lot of fun reading these posts.
-
Apologies but did the entire thread for the Black Diamond Tally Hos just get hijacked and renamed "What is a re-color"?
If so poor form Playing Card Forum.
I'm going to try teasing these two apart into different topics. It got way out of hand.
Oooh waaay past out of hand haha. It got ridiculous when the paint marker hit the card backs. Even so it's been hilarious! I've had a lot of fun reading these posts.
Hell, I'm just warming up... :))
I fear that no one here will convince Justin that he's utterly confused about what a redesign is and what a recolor is.
...
The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog.
...
Now, I'm going to REDESIGN my sentence, Yoda-style...
Jumped over the lazy dog, the quick brown fox did.
...
Do you get it now, Justin?
I'm not confused, I don't appreciate that. "The quick brown fox jumped over the lazy dog." and "Jumped over the lazy dog, the quick brown fox did." are the same sentence to me, because the words you use don't define what the sentence is.
I know it's frustrating when you feel like you are stating a universal truth and someone doesn't agree. You wonder how that person can not see the obvious and simple, rudimentary logic behind the facts you are providing and how they lead to a single glowing answer that is the only possible answer in all the realms of all possibility.
Let's all just agree that we are right, that the other person is entitled to be wrong, and that's ok, because we know, deep down inside, that we are the most right of all rights, and anyone who says otherwise is either stupid or ignorant, because we have facts on our side, and an arsenal of universal constants that bolster our resolve.
You're very confused. But you're so confused that you don't even realize how confused you are!
Like I said, it's like being half-pregnant. Either it's a recolor, or it isn't. None of these Tally Ho decks from Jackson are recolors of anything - actual design elements had to be changed to make the new design. Call them patterns, call them whatever you want - but it's more than merely colors.
BTW: those two sentences you said are the same? They don't even have the same number of words in them... They convey the same idea, but do so in different ways. If all you see is that they're the same, I can imagine what you see when you read the works of a real author like Shakespeare.
Where I see
But, soft! what light through yonder window breaks?
It is the east, and Juliet is the sun.
Arise, fair sun, and kill the envious moon,
Who is already sick and pale with grief,
That thou her maid art far more fair than she:
Be not her maid, since she is envious;
Her vestal livery is but sick and green
And none but fools do wear it; cast it off.
You would see
Hey, looky-there - it's Juliet in that thar window! She's purty...
Both passages "say the same thing," from a certain point of view - yours, to be precise. But you need not be a Rhodes scholar to see there's a drastic difference between the two. It's more accurate to say they convey the same idea, but one does so with poetry and elegance while the other does so with all the delicacy of jamming one's hand into a blender set to "liquefy."
Seriously, to shrug off the changes made from deck to deck and categorize them as "recolors" is an insult to the designer and the concept of design itself. Jackson's simply being gracious enough to gloss over it and not be bothered by it.
So no, "we" are not right, but there is a way to put this into perspective.
- If a deck's design goes unaltered but the colors are changed, that's a recolor.
- If a deck's design changes, even if only a little bit, that's a redesign.
- If a deck's design changes in less than some handful of ways personally defined by you, that's a "minimal redesign." You've called it a "recolor" all this time, but it's the wrong term, leading people to think you don't know what you're talking about. But to say the design is in your opinion "minimally changed," or that it's "extremely similar" gives people the impression that you have a more accurate grasp of the situation - even if the parameters of what constitutes said minimal state of change is defined by you and for you alone. Because once you start talking about degrees of change, unless you're going to measure the percentage of area changed and declare some standard, it will always be up to the individual as to what constitutes a true, full redesign and a minimal redesign.
-
Apologies but did the entire thread for the Black Diamond Tally Hos just get hijacked and renamed "What is a re-color"?
If so poor form Playing Card Forum.
That was my fault Jackson, I apologize, I started the BDTH thread originally and just edited to title so people knew what they were c licking into, Don got the thread split up so the BDTH has it’s own spot.
You're very confused. But you're so confused that you don't even realize how confused you are!
Like I said ... BTW: those two sentences you said are the same? They don't even have the same number of words in them... They convey the same idea, but do so in different ways.
...
Both passages "say the same thing," from a certain point of view - yours, to be precise. ...
Seriously, to shrug off the changes made from deck to deck and categorize them as "recolors" is an insult to the designer and the concept of design itself. Jackson's simply being gracious enough to gloss over it and not be bothered by it.
So no, "we" are not right, but there is a way to put this into perspective.
...
You've called it a "recolor" all this time, but it's the wrong term ... But to say the design is in your opinion "minimally changed," ... Because once you start talking about degrees of change ... it will always be up to the individual as to what constitutes a true ...
Seriously don’t need to be telling me what I am, that’s not your place, right, or privilege. Please keep it impersonal. You are culpable for how people take your words, regardless of what you mean by them.
The Shakespeare example doesn’t work for me, the entire core structure of the two sentences is completely different, not just most of the same words in a different order that say the same thing.
For me it isn’t just about what is being said, characters in a line that make a sentence, but how it is being said, and I don’t mean the words used and the order used therein, I mean the structure that is used, when you look at the overall composition, not the arrangement, the intent, not the words, the quick fox example is the same thing to me, where the Shakespeare example is very different. I feel like the above Ferrari example I made was decent to express where I am coming from.
And I would expect Jackson to be honest, not gracious, if he was offended. My suspicion is that he believes I am wrong and, can’t see it, and that takes any substance out anything I say that might offend him otherwise.
But I believe he knows that I am a fan of his work before anything and there is no criticism meant by my argument.
-
Justin, I think I understand why think it is a "Recolor" rather than a new design. I believe you are referring the KWTH somewhat a recolor of "Circle Back" design tally ho.
If you think that is the case, what do you think of rider back and madolin back?
they both have the same exact layout, but 1 has an angel riding bicycle and 1 has a maiden. Would you consider this a different design or recolor?
-
Justin, I think I understand why think it is a "Recolor" rather than a new design. I believe you are referring the KWTH somewhat a recolor of "Circle Back" design tally ho.
If you think that is the case, what do you think of rider back and madolin back?
they both have the same exact layout, but 1 has an angel riding bicycle and 1 has a maiden. Would you consider this a different design or recolor?
I'm about to really shoot myself in the foot here, but I don't consider this a recolor. :mindf-ck:
-
I'm about to really shoot myself in the foot here, but I don't consider this a recolor. :mindf-ck:
And this is why it makes sense to use the definitions Don and I have presented, because they don't involve any arbitrary decisions. If any design element has been changed, it's always a redesign. If the color is the only thing that has been changed, it's a recolor. There's no grey zone and no room for confusion.
-
I'm about to really shoot myself in the foot here, but I don't consider this a recolor. :mindf-ck:
And this is why it makes sense to use the definitions Don and I have presented, because they don't involve any arbitrary decisions. If any design element has been changed, it's always a redesign. If the color is the only thing that has been changed, it's a recolor. There's no grey zone and no room for confusion.
This is why I opted out of the actual conversation when the marker hit the card backs. The reality of standards was spoken of here at length, never made a dent. Opinion is everywhere and Justin enjoys his, good enough. Haha, it's still been a fun thread. As far as comedy goes, intentional or not, this one's been the win! In my opinion at least. :))
-
Seriously don’t need to be telling me what I am, that’s not your place, right, or privilege. Please keep it impersonal. You are culpable for how people take your words, regardless of what you mean by them.
When you're right, you're right. It's not so much a matter of keeping it impersonal as keeping it civil, and I may have cross that line. I apologize for that. I got carried away - I'm as imperfect as the next guy and never too big to admit when I'm wrong. Finding the truth is more important to me than having my ego stroked.
Justin, I think I understand why think it is a "Recolor" rather than a new design. I believe you are referring the KWTH somewhat a recolor of "Circle Back" design tally ho.
If you think that is the case, what do you think of rider back and madolin back?
they both have the same exact layout, but 1 has an angel riding bicycle and 1 has a maiden. Would you consider this a different design or recolor?
I'm about to really shoot myself in the foot here, but I don't consider this a recolor. :mindf-ck:
To be fair, it's more than simply an angel riding a bicycle versus a standing maiden with her arms spread. The cherubs in the corners are replaced with maidens and the border patterns are almost the inverse of each other in many ways. There's a lot of differences between the two designs, and I personally find the Maiden Back more attractive and of closer similarity to the Rider Back than its closest competing design, the Mandolin Back.
The intent behind the Mandolin back and Maiden Back designs was to create a design was different enough to be unique and thus eligible for a copyright, while at the same time similar enough that spectators wouldn't realize it's not the same design as the cards they have at home. Because Rider Backs have an expired copyright, USPC can only protect the designs as trademarks, and for a trademark to be enforceable, the owner can't allow it to become "diluted" by allowing altered versions of it in the marketplace. It's why USPC stopped permitting changes to certain key design elements of their decks - mostly the card backs, unique Aces of Spades and unique Jokers. Copyright protection allows for alterations without dilution of legal protection of intellectual property.
In plainer terms, USPC can allow magicians and others to make changes to the Mandolin Back and Maiden Back designs like reveals, markings, gaffs, etc. and still be protected legally against counterfeiters of their merchandise. However, only the backs can be changed - they still use the standard Bicycle jokers and Ace of Spades, neither of which is protected under copyright, but instead only under trademark. Both would be redesigns of the Rider Back, not simply recolors, and you arguably could say they're more different from the Rider Back than Jackson's last three Tally Ho Circle Back designs are from each other.
-
Both would be redesigns of the Rider Back, not simply recolors, and you arguably could say they're more different from the Rider Back than Jackson's last three Tally Ho Circle Back designs are from each other.
That's a very difficult argument to make in my opinion. How much more different one is than another isn't an easy conversation to have. Hoyle Shell backs vs Rider back vs Jacksons Tally Ho's that's still not an easy argument but one better suited to the point you're making I think given the elements of the card back designs.
(https://i.gyazo.com/668f483ebbf907fc0ba62f7720634c45.png)
-
Both would be redesigns of the Rider Back, not simply recolors, and you arguably could say they're more different from the Rider Back than Jackson's last three Tally Ho Circle Back designs are from each other.
That's a very difficult argument to make in my opinion. How much more different one is than another isn't an easy conversation to have. Hoyle Shell backs vs Rider back vs Jacksons Tally Ho's that's still not an easy argument but one better suited to the point you're making I think given the elements of the card back designs.
Like I said, "arguably." There's one somewhat scientific way of measuring it - determine the precise area of the pattern change and calculate the percentage difference from the original. But it's not an easy measurement to make and more effort than it's worth, considering the nature of the debate.
The key here is that there's a subjective line, different from individual to individual and possibly from comparison to comparison, as to what constitutes "new design" and what is "slight alteration of existing design." My line in the sand will be in a different part of the beach than yours or anyone else's. But as far as "recolor," there's no arguing that - unaltered design except for changes of an entire field(-s) of color from one color to a different color, or all instances of a color from one color to another color.