The Science Deck Playing Cards (KS)

[sprouts1115]

Have to agree with MagikFingerz. If you look at the history of playing cards, adding the suits to the back of the card is a reoccurring theme. I imagine they think "lets put the suits on the back of the card. That will look cool" I have seen a lot of backs, but most of the time they end up with a "1-way" back.

Time to make up some new words. There are 3 common backs. "No element back",

Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.08.22.png (330.31 KiB) Viewed 2506 times

"Double element back",

Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.07.31.png (378.71 KiB) Viewed 2506 times

and "Single element back""

Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.12.33.png (440.65 KiB) Viewed 2506 times

It looks like your going with a single element back. What I find neat about your back is that it has "text". In most cases, we bitch about it, but in your case you made it flow and actually looks pretty good. If you cut out the suits and put some artsy fartsy science symbol in its place your back could be "2-way" without a lot of work...

[MagikFingerz]

It looks like your going with a single element back. What I find neat about your back is that it has "text". In most cases, we bitch about it, but in your case you made it flow and actually looks pretty good. If you cut out the suits and put some artsy fartsy science symbol in its place your back could be "2-way" without a lot of work...

Well, ambigrams have been used several times before. IMO it's really just a way to "get away with" having text on the backs, and it's certainly better than regular 1-way text, but I still think it's a no-no. To me it serves as little purpose as the suits; we should be able to clearly see that it's a science themed deck without having the deck tell us.

[montecarlojoe]

You also need to be careful to make sure that the science is correct. The 9 of diamonds for instance has mistakes. F=ma is correct, and the labels for the vectors are nice too, but in the diagram the force and acceleration are towards the centre of the circle of motion. This force is known as centripetal force. Centrifugal force is a subject experience - it feels like you being pulled outward when in fact you are pulling it inward to maintain its circular motion. If you let go (and stop applying the force) then the object is no longer accelerating towards you and zips off in a straight line...

Okay so the ball on the end of the string is experiencing centrifugal force, and the person is experiencing centripetal force. I am trying to illustrate the force that keeps the ball up (the spinning action) google images https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Cent ... 67#imgdii=_" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
agrees with me that the arrow is pointing in the correct direction, or am I completely misunderstanding what you are trying to tell me? Thanks for pointing this out, I really need to reevaluate my diagram.

Well, the third image in that search sums it up quite well:


There is no such thing as centrifugal force. It is a trick of the perception of the person doing the spinning, but it isn't really there.

[chach]

It looks like your going with a single element back. What I find neat about your back is that it has "text". In most cases, we bitch about it, but in your case you made it flow and actually looks pretty good. If you cut out the suits and put some artsy fartsy science symbol in its place your back could be "2-way" without a lot of work...

Well, ambigrams have been used several times before. IMO it's really just a way to "get away with" having text on the backs, and it's certainly better than regular 1-way text, but I still think it's a no-no. To me it serves as little purpose as the suits; we should be able to clearly see that it's a science themed deck without having the deck tell us.

My trouble with ambigrams is that they usually don't look anything like what they're supposed to. The Ultimate deck is a prime example, I don't know if it's my eyes or what but I can not decipher the script on it. Conversely, the Shifters deck is a good example of ambigrams, easily deciphered forward and back and the design looks good.

Unfortunately the design on this one falls into the same category as the ultimate deck, in that it's hard to quickly see what it spells out. At least for my eyes it is, YMMV.

[Rose]

Have to agree with MagikFingerz. If you look at the history of playing cards, adding the suits to the back of the card is a reoccurring theme. I imagine they think "lets put the suits on the back of the card. That will look cool" I have seen a lot of backs, but most of the time they end up with a "1-way" back.

Time to make up some new words. There are 3 common backs. "No element back",

The attachment Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.08.22.png is no longer available

"Double element back",

The attachment Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.07.31.png is no longer available

and "Single element back""

The attachment Screenshot 2014-08-03 08.12.33.png is no longer available

It looks like your going with a single element back. What I find neat about your back is that it has "text". In most cases, we bitch about it, but in your case you made it flow and actually looks pretty good. If you cut out the suits and put some artsy fartsy science symbol in its place your back could be "2-way" without a lot of work...

Thanks I like the way you post pictures for me, it really helps me understand tradition, however I am not trying to say screw tradition...but while it might not be to everyone's taste is what I have done a deal breaker? Unless I completely redesign the back, (which in all honesty took me a while) I think there is value for money in the fronts, which is what I am generally looking at while playing poker.
Thank you for saying you like the text, chach mentioned it being as bad as the ultimate deck, (which I struggle to decipher, may I one day I posses the knowledge to achieve such glory) I can say with confidence I also like it, as do you which is what really matters.

[Rose]

You also need to be careful to make sure that the science is correct. The 9 of diamonds for instance has mistakes. F=ma is correct, and the labels for the vectors are nice too, but in the diagram the force and acceleration are towards the centre of the circle of motion. This force is known as centripetal force. Centrifugal force is a subject experience - it feels like you being pulled outward when in fact you are pulling it inward to maintain its circular motion. If you let go (and stop applying the force) then the object is no longer accelerating towards you and zips off in a straight line...

Okay so the ball on the end of the string is experiencing centrifugal force, and the person is experiencing centripetal force. I am trying to illustrate the force that keeps the ball up (the spinning action) google images https://www.google.com.au/search?q=Cent ... 67#imgdii=_" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;...
agrees with me that the arrow is pointing in the correct direction, or am I completely misunderstanding what you are trying to tell me? Thanks for pointing this out, I really need to reevaluate my diagram.

Well, the third image in that search sums it up quite well:


There is no such thing as centrifugal force. It is a trick of the perception of the person doing the spinning, but it isn't really there.

Excuse me while I go move an arrow...thanks

[volantangel]

Whilst F=ma technically isnt wrong for centrifugal force. F=mv^2/r is the more accepted (and more useful) form used in physics.

Also am I missing something, but you have LOVE on one of the cards? Im no biology/chemistry expert but love aint a science, and i think tom would know XD

[Sher]

Lol. The chemical structure on the card is oxytocin, sometimes referred to as the "Love hormone."

[chach]

Lol. The chemical structure on the card is oxytocin, sometimes referred to as the "Love hormone."

Well Oxytocin is better than OxyContin I guess.

[Aussie888]

Well based on the art in this deck I can shelve my plans for creating a science deck

edit: As an aside, I think the benzene ring look of the clubs pips might suit chemistry better than the spades you have.

[StanKindLee]

The current spades & hearts pips almost look like bad pixelization from raster based image reduction from a distance through my aging eyes.

[sprouts1115]

The current spades & hearts pips almost look like bad pixelization from raster based image reduction from a distance through my aging eyes.

I second that. Her Diamond, and club are fine, but I see where she is going with this. The spade is the flip side of the heart. All she needs to do is curve it out a bit. Problem fixed.


@Rose - In your first pic. Yes, you have to make the Hexagons "two-way" for your back to work, In your second pic. I would kept the atom symbol and kill the small suits. You can keep the bar just add some artsy fartsy symbols. You need to make a fan of your cards. This is the first part of your fan without your hexagons.

Screenshot 2014-08-04 19.32.43.png (19.44 KiB) Viewed 2822 times

@chach - That ultimate deck has some major flaws in it. The readable "Text" is on the bottom. It should be on the top. Just look at their cup on the top of the card. How 101 is that. When a single card is put on the table where should you eyes go. Top left I think Major Boo, boo

Screenshot 2014-08-04 19.00.58.png (285.86 KiB) Viewed 2822 times

But the Shifter deck looks flawless. Don't you agree MagikFingerz? And look it has "Text" on it.

[Rose]

Lol. The chemical structure on the card is oxytocin, sometimes referred to as the "Love hormone."

Sher, your knowledge never fails to impress me, yes I know 'love' is not technically chemistry but I really wanted to keep the deck fun, cards are made for games after all.

[Rose]

Well based on the art in this deck I can shelve my plans for creating a science deck

edit: As an aside, I think the benzene ring look of the clubs pips might suit chemistry better than the spades you have.

Oh, now I feel really bad, sorry Aussie888, yeah, I had to have the Ace of Spades be a special card, to try to stick to a little tradition, so the atom incorporating the spade (after much thought) was really the best fit.

[Rose]

The current spades & hearts pips almost look like bad pixelization from raster based image reduction from a distance through my aging eyes.

I assure you these are vectors, the images on Kickstarter are jpegs decreased dramatically in size.

[Rose]

Sprouts, I see where you are going with this...but I like hexagons... LOL

[Aussie888]

Well based on the art in this deck I can shelve my plans for creating a science deck

edit: As an aside, I think the benzene ring look of the clubs pips might suit chemistry better than the spades you have.

Oh, now I feel really bad, sorry Aussie888, yeah, I had to have the Ace of Spades be a special card, to try to stick to a little tradition, so the atom incorporating the spade (after much thought) was really the best fit.

It's all good. Your Einstein actually looks like Einstein rather than a cross between a stick figure and a spiky sun like a kid would draw like it would if I got any further than deciding a card was going to be Einstein

[ivan]

Less than 10 more days to go and 75% funded. Here's our interview with Rose:

http://www.kardify.com/2014/08/kickstar ... -rosy.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

[Rose]

Thank you to everyone that backed the Science Deck project, just a quick update the decks have almost finished printing and will begin shipping in the next few weeks. So you should have your decks in December!

First person to answer all 3 questions correctly will win 2 Science Decks.

It is common knowledge that the main inspiration for the Science Deck was Science, but for 3 cards their style also derived from,

1. TV Series.
2. Video Game
3. Album Cover

What 3 cards are they? Post your answer here and the first person to answer all 3 correctly wins!

[Sher]

EDIT: I was answering a question that disappeared. Lol. Something about which TV Series, Video Game, and Album cover inspired which card.

1. TV Series: The Big Bang Theory - Ace of Spaces
2. Video Game: Portal - Five of Clubs
3. Album Cover: Pink Floyd Dark Side of the Moon - Six of Diamonds

[Rose]

Congratulations Sher! You win 2 Science Decks!
Nice referencing with the pictures! LOL
PM me your details.

[jerichoholic]

Oh sure the moderator wins

[volantangel]

Oh sure the moderator wins

dafug !? are you claiming for some form of biasness ? Sher won because she posted the right answers, did you post anything?

[MagikFingerz]

Oh sure the moderator wins

That's just sad, dude.

[Sher]

Yeah, I would understand if it was something like a random drawing out of several names, and I somehow got it, but I did answer the question.

Anyway, since it was up for only a short amount of time (the question disappeared just as finished editing my post to include pictures), I know not a lot of people got a chance to see it and provide answers. Rose, if you like, you can host another contest. I'm okay with not receiving the prize, so you can use them for another contest.

[Eoghann]

Keep the prize Sher. I doubt anyone here besides Victor will lose sleep over not having participated.

[jerichoholic]

Geez Louise, I was only being sarcastic, glad Sher won.

[volantangel]

Geez Louise, I was only being sarcastic, glad Sher won.

I see sarcasm isnt your forte, perhaps its better to be a little more straight-forward given the how the tone of things are easily lost in words.

[ecNate]

Geez Louise, I was only being sarcastic, glad Sher won.

Pro tip, these exist:

[rousselle]

I want a sarcasm font. In my case, that font would be any font I use, ever.

Back on topic: where might I pick up a couple decks of these Bad Larrys once you've fulfilled your Kickstarter pledges, Rose?

(And that wasn't sarcastic. Even though I did mention Bad Larrys.)