To Border, or Not to Border

[Callistabell]

Since there has been a lot of talk about trimming decks, I wonder if tarot lovers prefer a deck without borders. I love the idea of full card images set against a reading cloth on a table, but what do most readers prefer? It would be good to know in my tarot creation process if most people like cards with or without borders. What do you think?

 

[annabubble]

Honestly? I don't notice the borders at all, unless they are really big and bright. There's one deck in particular I'm thinking of, but I don't remember the name. I think it's RWS-based (maybe not) and it has really wide borders. It says on the little description bit on here that its "tunnel like" if that helps.

Anyway, other than that, I really don't care about them.

 

[Annabelle]

I prefer decks with borders, definitely. But I like minimal borders that are just there to provide a "frame" for the art . . . borders with keywords and symbols and so on annoy me to no end.

Why do I like borders? Because they take the wear and tear and nicks and chips over the years . . . instead of the card images.

 

[Dean]

This is an hard choice i have both types of non and bordered decks, but i would go more for a bordered deck as long as it was minimal and was useful in providing keywords to the images or numbered cards. I have some that have got very big outer borders and just makes the whole card look to big and useless.

 

[stella01904]

I mostly agree.

Very minimal borders are best.

But I'd rather none at all than big borders. Big borders are horrible.

I don't really like keywords, either. Either you like a deck and you use it enough not to need them, or you don't.

 

[AJ]

You left us no middle ground for voting!

Well done borders form a nice frame for the art, those decks I don't even notice the border.

Decks that resemble place-mats I trim just to make them usable.

Noisy borders are too distracting, those I trim.
This week I'm trimming the Enchanted by Lerner. The borders were simple off white, no problem, but the card stock is so stiff I thought my hand size would be able to shuffle better with less card stock involved.

So I vote for the option we don't have.

 

[gregory]

I didn't vote.

Because it depends so much on the deck

 

[Callistabell]

I left no middle ground on purpose. I hoped that you would elaborate on the particulars of your likes and dislikes in a post, as you have. So the posting becomes the middle ground. I knew that if I added a button called "depends on the deck" that everyone would select it, because I know that in truth, it does depend. Some borders are nice, some are yuk, that's the way it is. But I wanted to get to the heart of the matter. Sight unseen if you had to choose borders or no borders, which way would you go? That's what I'm trying to find out. Which way would most people go?

 

[greycats]

I prefer borders

So long as it's not huge, I prefer some kind of border. If it's done well, a border adds to the deck, separating it from its background and focusing the eye on the card.

And, if nothing else, a border actually protects the image. Some of my borderless decks have become chipped a little at the edges. And, since many of today's decks have dark backgounds, tiny tears and minor wearing really show up.

I do have a couple of decks whose border is distracting, but I still like having a border.

 

[Alta]

I prefer small neat borders that effectively work with the art. Not a fan of borderless decks, though I have seen some that I do like. But, as you give us the choice, I do prefer an attractive thoughtfully designed border.