Got My Scissors Out Again - this time, the THOTH gets it!

Imagemaker said:

Do you have an old deck (of any kind) that you don't care so much about? One you could try trimming and not mind learning on? I did that with the New Palladini--gave me huge confidence to cut the new Rohrig! And I never would do a deck I couldn't replace.

Click to expand...

I just read a post by Gardner where she had chopped her Haindl deck.
(or maybe it was Dan's.)
I dislike my Haindl deck the way it is so maybe I'll start with that one.

Why not let the manufacturers do the job, and print a "new, borderless" version of some of these decks? Then more people can have a keyword-free, borderless deck without having to overcome their fear of applying the scissors themselves

Click to expand...

Somewhere, in the deck creation threads, I think, Baba-Prague (co-creator of the Bohemian Cats deck) and Jeannette of Tarot Garden wrote about why and how difficult it is to get publishers to publish as we'd like them to.

Production is easier if there are borders for trimming cards en masse. And publishers won't reprint even popular decks unless there's a super high demand, and to convince them to change the format of the cards for manufacture would be very hard indeed.

It's so much easier just to make the deck like YOU like it!

shelikes2read said:

One idea I've had, though, is this: if any of the decks prove to be vastly improved once they've had a border-ectomy, the publishers of said decks should be sent scans of the new, improved cards... along with readers' testimonials, if possible.

Why not let the manufacturers do the job, and print a "new, borderless" version of some of these decks? Then more people can have a keyword-free, borderless deck without having to overcome their fear of applying the scissors themselves.

It's just a thought.

Click to expand...

It is, and a good point at that, Shelikes2read!!!

I am always put off by those darn keywords. As someone said in an earlier post that I read, the place for keywords are in the accompanying book.

There are so many different versions of decks on the market -
Large Thoths, Mini Thoths, Keychain Universal Waites, Radient RW's, Large Rider Waites, even Glow in the Dark Rider Waites ...

You can get the cards in so many sizes and styles; why not have a choise between whether you want a keyword and border or whether you want to go it alone without. I am surprised that this has not been considered by the publishers before. I wonder just how much input to this kind of thing the artist has. My other peev is when I see a deck where the font used on the deck is in no way in keeping with the subject; for example, an ancient looking deck or deck with an antique style to it that has some kind of modern text splashed along the bottom.

Yaboot

I'm creating a Tarot of Celtic Antiquity - hey, the name just struck me, I think it's inspired! I honestly don't know what might be done to it in the name of borders, etc. - nothing *too* drastic, I hope!! If they do, it won't be *my* fault!

Just thought I'd report on the results of chopping my Haindl. I love the new size, it's just a wee bit shorter than a Lo Scarabeo, and feels real nice in my hands. Fun to have them so easy to riffle too! The images become much stranger without the keywords and borders. The suit tokens are floating above the earthy paintings to begin with, and now freed from the border, they are even driftier and more surreal. I find them as tricky to read as the Marseilles, in that you don't really have narrative pictures any more, just symbols that require you to sink into a deeper kind of looking, to find meaning in colors and delicate details of placement. I hadn't really noticed how abstract the pips were, distracted as I was by the keywords.

One note on trimming. The person who first suggested it (sorry, I've forgotten who) mentioned that s/he cut along the front, leaving the backs with a grey line across the top. I hated the way that looked, so I sacrificed a very thin line of color across the top in order to take all the grey off the backs. That was quite tricky, and not ideal, but the results are great. I don't notice the tightness of the tops, and the backs are beautiful. Go for it, Lark!

Yaboot, I might be able to do scans tomorrow night. I'm waiting for some software...

Simone just gave me her big Thoth, so it gets the scissors tomorrow, when she's not looking. Still wavering about the Voyager.

Thank you Gardener you have given me fresh courage.
The Haindl is out sitting next to the scissors and will be chopped at the light of day....

By the way you looked absolutely RADIANT in your hand fasting pictures.
Congratulations.

Yeah

Go Lark!

Let us know how you get on.

~

Yaboot said:

My other peev is when I see a deck where the font used on the deck is in no way in keeping with the subject; for example, an ancient looking deck or deck with an antique style to it that has some kind of modern text splashed along the bottom.

Click to expand...

Depends what you mean by "modern." Some typefaces that look modern to us are actually Roman styles that were first seen in the 15th century. Also humanist script or oblique typefaces were developed from handwriting first seen in Venice in the 15th century.

Often, I think typefaces have a modern "look" because they are so regularized when done on the computer. Some of these have been reconstructed in the 20th century to standardize them, which also lends a look of modernity.

Have you ever seen an old newspaper or book where lead typesetting was used--they are always a bit jaggly, like someone hiccupped when printing. That too makes a font look ancient when actually we are still using the typeface today and it is considered modern looking.

A lot of Renaissance typefaces do have a blobby terminus much like you would get with pen and ink. Some don't, they loved style as much as we do and fiddled around with all kinds of typefaces.

Examples of Renaissance Roman typefaces: the font Centaur was designed in 1914 after Nicolas Jenson, Venice 1469. Bembo was cut by Monotype in 1929, based on the design of Francesco Griffo, Venice 1499. Adobe Garamond (which is quite prevalent today as typefaces go) was designed in 1988, after Claude Garamond, Paris circa 1540.

They are hypothetical reconstructions because the earliest punches existing are probably for Garamond. Our reconstructions of older typefaces are based on books from the 15th century, and there are subtleties that make them replicas.

Now, if you saw a font like (my favourite name!) Zing Diddly Doo on a Marseilles deck, I might wonder at the taste of the Publisher. I don't think the artist would have much say in it, it's probably the decision of an art director of the Publisher's choosing that makes such decisions.

Yaboot, your Thoth is lovely! How did you do the corners? I might be tempted to give my Thoth a second chance. I have the medium sized US printing which is lighter and brighter than the large AG Muller one. I will have to look at how large the cards will be if cut.

--Myrrha

I will have to look at how large the cards will be if cut.

Click to expand...

This is the Thoth size that I trimmed. Final cards are now 3.5 inches long by 2.25 inches wide (sorry, this ruler doesn't have metric on it).

I love the size! And the way the images are energized is just amazing.

Still working on the Robin Wood. It's tricky--the images are not the same size! When I trim along the border lines, some cards are just a trifle wider or taller than others. So I'm going back to trim a sliver off. Loving the size of the result, though.