UnitedCardists.com - The forum for Cardistry, Magic, Custom Decks and All Things Playing Cards.

It really doesn't matter what colour you print it in*, it looks great!

The more colours you show, the more I'm "I'll have some of them, a few of them, and one of them, and ooh a pile of them". Please stop now..

* Possibly excluding the Pink.

Put the pink in a drawer for the 60k stretch. The other three colors (newest purple included) to Cartamundi yes, now! These look like little presents just waiting to be opened.

Seems like 2 different versions is in the minority? 3 times the same deck only with different colours ? Sounds like something that specific brands get constantly bashed on for...

montenzi wrote:
On Instagram, some of my followers commented about this "purple" color. It's almost blue. And I agree - it will be blue when printed (similar to NEO).

Forget your color blind Instagram followers! That's Royal Purple not blue. Go with purple NOT blue please. A lone blue deck will cry out for a red one for the usual red/blue combo. This is a UC deck and should be unique.

RichK wrote: Forget your color blind Instagram followers! That's Royal Purple not blue. Go with purple NOT blue please. A lone blue deck will cry out for a red one for the usual red/blue combo. This is a UC deck and should be unique.

Yes, it's Purple now after comments I received on Instagram You can scroll up to review the first version of the color (which is almost blue). The power of community!

Harvonsgard wrote:Seems like 2 different versions is in the minority? 3 times the same deck only with different colours ? Sounds like something that specific brands get constantly bashed on for...

They are good as a set. But the most crucial part of it - costs. One example - If I print 1000 with cold foil at Cartamundi, I should sell this deck at $45-50 to get the same profit vs. a standard deck. But there is a catch as always That's why it is much better for your wallet if I print three decks Oh well, three times better

You should know - I love the original back design!!! It will be produced, but not in this campaign!

I got the updated quote from Cartamundi. Now I know what to do. I'll work non-stop this weekend to launch next week.

Here is the same Queen in saffron color. BUT now I can use different colors for the artwork. Most likely I'll be using different colors on A/K/Q/J for all three decks! It should not be a background recolor only. Back designs are already different. Now I can do the same for courts.

What ever you decide to print from this campaign, I will be buying three of each, so....as De La Soul says, Three, that's the Magic Number

montenzi wrote:You should know - I love the original back design!!! It will be produced, but not in this campaign!

Awesome news.

montenzi wrote:I got the updated quote from Cartamundi. Now I know what to do. I'll work non-stop this weekend to launch next week.

Let's get ready to rumble, folks!

NOW I NEED A DOCTOR Who knows why I tested my 1st back design in purple??? And then in yellow?

I'll show you another queen as it's the only queen at the moment with an updated color palette for two different decks (green + yellow). WIP.

All sketches are quick, foil pattern is not perfect, colors should be updated for yellow/purple ... if we produce this back

Ideas? I thought that my 1st green back design was only good in green. Now I don't know. The colorful back might be much better for this deck.



[IMG removed]

OMFG SOMEONE STOP HIM!

STOP THIS MADNESS!

Montenzi you've gone too far!



.

I will back for any and all of these but please, please be kind... my credit card weeps and so will I

PipChick wrote:OMFG SOMEONE STOP HIM!

You should stop me! But I'll explain what is wrong. I like the same density of lines/colors on both sides of the cards. That's why I tried my 1st back again Any ideas are welcome. We should produce one back or another, but not two.

Whatever you choose, these are going to look great. I think I prefer the new back design. It seems a bit more sophisticated or something Also, I like the purple back, but it looks really close to the Neo Wave Ultra back color to me.

PipChick wrote:OMFG SOMEONE STOP HIM!

STOP THIS MADNESS!

Montenzi you've gone too far!

https://media.giphy.com/media/XazTKKTogKXQI/giphy.gif

^mod magic request.

Seemed appropriate.

portcullis wrote:^mod magic request.

Seemed appropriate.

Your wish is my command...

*waves magic mod wand* (click)


EDIT: mod-magic undone for reasons stated in posts... sorry everyone

Both look great.

While I understand that you're thinking of using similar line weights in both face cards and backs, I think that the previous version (the "new" version; the one with the thinner line weights) still works better than the "original version" that you just posted with the thicker line weights. While I get where you're going with this, the previous ("new") version holds it's own better.

Keep in mind that *most* successful playing card designs tend to have thinner line weights and more intricate designs on the backs than on the faces. They should still work in harmony with each other, certainly, but backs do not tend to be quite as simple as the faces. The backs need to work with/unify *all* the face cards and incorporate the theme of the deck. The faces only need to convey the information of one face card and the meaning behind that one card.

Heavier line weights certain can and do work well on card backs, but you've created a masterpiece with the latest "new" iterations that holds the theme together very nicely and complements the faces very well without needing to be as thick/simple as the faces.

So, yeah. I do prefer the thinner-lined version of the backs.

Thank you, Allan! I almost agree. I'll show you both versions to compare.

I am very limited in using colors on my 2nd (classic) back design. But I understand that classic back is also good

It's almost 50/50 for me. Both designs are two completely different approaches.

I'll finish everything and then decide.

[IMG removed]

I'm 52/48 for the original, since I prefer the original ornament. But the newer (classic inspired) design is a bit more stunning with details.
Maybe you could... ... JUST KIDDING, DON'T!

PipChick wrote:

portcullis wrote:^mod magic request.

Seemed appropriate.

Your wish is my command...

*waves magic mod wand* (click)


EDIT: mod-magic undone for reasons stated in posts... sorry everyone

Well, that was pointless. Why would you design a gif only to ... ?? *sigh*

At least I thought it was funny.

Now that I see the courts with the backs, I do see how the original backs really match better with the courts, so now I am like completely torn. I might even be swayed to go a bit more to the original design. Either way you go the result will be stunning.

I can't handle six versions, so you gotta choose mate.

I like the one with the "border" on the back (one with the 7 dots). Your fan mock up looks great and I'm sure cardists will like it too.

Bradius wrote:Now that I see the courts with the backs, I do see how the original backs really match better with the courts, so now I am like completely torn.

Yes, that's why I needed a doctor as I always see a bigger picture. As an isolated case the classic back is usable for this deck. I have a couple of ideas, and most likely, I'll be using selective foiling for classic. I'll also change colors as dark green does not work for this design. Yellow and Purple colors are ok for classic, green should be less saturated.

50/50

p.s. 07 Sep 19, 7:07 pm for No.7 UC19 deck?

YASSS!!
Btw, what timezone is this?

UTC - 7 obviously

hsbc wrote:UTC - 7 obviously

Decknowledgy wrote:YASSS!!Btw, what timezone is this?

NZ Local time: 07/Sep, 07:09 AM

It's not official and should be confirmed later!

For your reference:

https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/ ... 40&p12=264

montenzi wrote:For your reference:

https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/ ... 40&p12=264

https://everytimezone.com/



Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

After savoring the visual feast, I say go for the classic design. My reasons:

1) The original back designs on the left look like a natural development /evolution of your wave design; maybe even Hello Tiki 1 and 2. It's so Montenzi. This can be saved for your next KS project.

2) The classic design fits the UC 7 theme so well, with all the hidden 7s. That seems more in line with a UC deck.


However, (yes, Alex Montenzi is influencing me now) 1) can also be argued that it really shows off Alex's design, to the point that anyone familiar with Montenzi decks, will know that UC 7 was a Montenzi design.

So it really depends on how you want to present the deck. A Montenzi UC deck or a UC deck by Montenzi.

I'll lean towards the classic 7 deck if you need a vote.

I think it's great that you posted them both side-by-side to compare. I love them both. I still prefer the "classic" or thinner-weight design for this round.

I'm in for either one, and I'm backing for at least four of each color, either way.

The side-by-side was very useful. I prefer the classic but will buy quite a few of either.

To me the classic looks really nice if you zoom in for the details. Zoomed-out it looses a lot of oomph, looks muted and there the orange from the original kicks in and is more appealing. Plus line density ties the front and back together better, like pointed out by Montenzi. It's a 60/40 for the original for me.

Still both look absolutely amazing, thanks for all your effort. Will be backing either design.

Cheers