User Experiences of Tarot Card Design

[rylla]

Art isn't standard - so cards can't be standard either if you want to make the art justice (and you just can't restrain or expect an artist to create art being boxed in a given size - that just can't be the artist's main consideration; a part of the artist's creativity would be lost - and it would be our loss too).

 

[Gwynydd]

It's always the artwork that stops me from buying a deck, not usually the size. Okay, maybe the shape, I'm so over the round style decks and have been since around 2003. Got my first round deck in 1995 and used it to pieces, then gave what was left of it to my toddler daughter.

Every deck has a different feel to it, and a different aesthetic, I am very willing to adapt to each one that works with my reading style and abilities.

I agree.

 

[G6]

Bummer, just had to pass on Jay Lincoln's Rochestarot in the trade section because the deck is oversized 3.5 x 5.5. Tis a shame, I really liked the art. ��

 

[G6]

Your main point has changed since the beginning of the thread.



Ciro was addressing this, and other concerns you had earlier in the thread.

Doesn't mean I agree with either of you. There can be multiple main points per topic. You and Ciro are not authorities in my world and everyone's opinion is valid.

 

[G6]

I used to buy decks primarily because I liked the artwork. Now I don't buy them unless I know I'm going to use them, even if I love the art. So I don't buy overly large or odd-shaped decks (my large-format 1969 Thoth is, of course, an exception). But that's my personal choice, not something I would try to force on everyone. I couldn't be bothered with trimming or trying to come up with a way to awkwardly shuffle them. There are too many decks that are excellent right out of the box to make that worthwhile. I'm a believer in "the right tool for the job;" I wouldn't try to use a screwdriver to pound a nail (although I have to admit I've occasionally used a rock!)

Yes, BW, most of us buy decks to use them and if we can't use them because they cannot be handled with ease and comfort we won't buy them.

I agree. Even if I love the art I won't buy it if I am not going to use it.

 

[gregory]

Bummer, just had to pass on Jay Lincoln's Rochestarot in the trade section because the deck is oversized 3.5 x 5.5. Tis a shame, I really liked the art. ��

Your loss - it's awesome. Someone else's gain, though.

 

[G6]

Your loss - it's awesome. Someone else's gain, though.

It is my loss, I'm bummed, I'd like to use that deck. It's also very much the artist's loss because their work will be in less hands. If artists/publishers make an arbitrary decision to go bigger I hope they will all consider the iPhone test for future decks.

 

[gregory]

But most people will just do whatever it takes to shuffle. It would actually lose enormously by being smaller. It wouldn't be the deck you wish you had.

 

[FLizarraga]

It is my loss, I'm bummed, I'd like to use that deck. It's also very much the artist's loss because their work will be in less hands. If artists/publishers make an arbitrary decision to go bigger I hope they will all consider the iPhone test for future decks.

Gosh, I hope not. Mass production is a necessary evil, not something to hold as a standard. And this thread has made abundantly clear that one size does not fit all, and never will.

 

[CrystalSeas]

It's also very much the artist's loss because their work will be in less hands.

Nah, it's a limited edition. It's going to be in exactly the same number of hands no matter what you choose to do. They won't lose anything