"Paper" version Rider-Waite

Frederik

Hey everyone
I just have a question for you.
To be honest, I do not like the "plastic" deck they are making of the Rider-Waite. Its like you are using the deck for years, and they will still look as they were bought yesterday. That not my taste. Do you know if there is a paper version of the Rider-Waite as they were made in the early years? So you will actually be able to see the natural aging with time? At the same time it must not be shiny.
Thank you :)
 

gregory

Look for a "Blue Box" copy on ebay.

ETA :bugeyed: and DON'T pay the prices that are up there now - it really isn't necessary !
 

Rhinemaiden

Yellow box, printed in Switzerland (USG)... I have a deck WITHOUT the copyright. Cards feel like paper; yellow box WITH copyright, cards feel a little slicker but not plastic. You have to read listings carefully and study the pictures (copyright is on the card face, lower right corner.) Good luck! :thumbsup:
 

decan

Look for a "Blue Box" copy on ebay.

ETA :bugeyed: and DON'T pay the prices that are up there now - it really isn't necessary !
Indeed, I just glanced at ebay and for this deck (blue box) it's about £150 :bugeyed:
 

Le Fanu

"Paper" version Rider-Waite

To be honest, in the last year or so, those Blue Box RWS decks - and I agree, that's the one you want - have gone through the roof. I can't remember when I last saw one for less that 100 pounds. They must be suddenly massively collectible. Keep looking, I'm sure one will turn up. This to me is the RWS that feels most like the 1909 ones; blissfully unlaminated and you can feel the touch of paper, which wears in like a comfy slipper.
 

EmpyreanKnight

I'm curious about these paper-like versions. I mean, I'm all for aging a deck to give them a vintage effect, but won't it mean that if you use them they'd easily get grubbier or more prone to stains than normally laminated decks? Or would that become part of their appeal?
 

gregory

Not as long as you wash your hands and don't have a glass of wine ready to spill.
 

EmpyreanKnight

Perhaps I just have to wash my hands more carefully. The front and back of my most-used deck is still clean, but its edges are a bit grimy. I was also thinking that paper-like decks would be more prone to fingerprints? If one does a series of readings and can't wash between them, or let their querents shuffle their cards it might become a problem. Best solution is to keep them for personal use I guess.
 

geoxena

I still have and use the same RWS deck I bought when I was a teenager in the 1970s, and it isn't grubby at all. I wasn't aware that they were now publishing RWS all laminated, slick, and shiny. That's such a shame, truly! To me, the old slightly larger matte-finish paper is what all decks should be made of. I'm not a collector and have only a few decks, but each time I've bought one and discovered that the cards are small, thin, and shiny, I'm always disappointed. Perhaps that's why I love my Wild Unknown so much - the cards are matte and about the same size as my old RWS deck.
 

EmpyreanKnight

Thanks for the insight, geoxena? That's four decades of use right there, so I guess it really depends on how people use their cards. That's why I sometimes prefer laminated, sticky stock - but I guess as per your testimonial paper-like aren't bad.