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

Justin O. wrote: It seems like people have been really quick to condemn Jackson on this, where it sounds like he has made the best decision he could at each point with the information he had at the time.

I'd have to disagree on this, it does not sound like he made the best decision he could. We spend lots of money back so many of Jackson's project based on the record of him producing awesome decks. If he approved the print just to avoid delays and complication, that to me isn't the best decision... I know 99% of the backers (if not all) would have been fine with the delay to get the deck they pledged for. I doubt he would have made the same decision 3 years back.

vasta41 wrote: though explanations were clearly given neither one said, "sorry" for what happened to the deck. I know it may seem trivial at this point but that kind of irked me.

And I think it does matter that they don't feel sorry that they've failed their backers. We all understand that delays/mistakes can all happen, but they chose the easy way of hiding that from the backer and say NOTHING (when they already know the problem) and delivery something different from what we pledged for...

Marcus wrote: Agreed, keeping KW's backers in the loop better is on top of the priority list going forward. While I personally like this subtle contrast it would've been a better decision to make sure everyone is aware of any larger changes like that. It tends to be a balance act deciding which design changes to inform about and which ones are irrelevant, but the combination of the lowered contrast in the design and then the darker print than expected made this something that should fall into the former of the two options.

Marcus,

I don't know how busy Jackson is but in my opinion any design change/delay/etc. should be updated, major or minor. I didn't know USPCC needed a wider border for safer gilding. The darker back should have been an update and with the USPCC being made to correct the error with the update showing the dark back and corrected coloring. I'd rather wait for something Jackson is proud to put his name on than settle for less. Until I get my decks I won't honestly know the true subtle contrast. But it is certainly not what I expected.

As for the need for card reprints I have a suggestion. I don't know if it's legal to do or if Jackson wants to keep his courts unseen until delivery but how about posting the digital proof image, massively watermarked, in one of these forums asking for extra eyes to look for any errors? If one is found then edit the image circling the found error so you don't get lots of posts about the same error after it's been found. Many new eyes might see something missed. Just a thought.

Thanks.

4.of.Clubs wrote: I'd have to disagree on this, it does not sound like he made the best decision he could. We spend lots of money back so many of Jackson's project based on the record of him producing awesome decks. If he approved the print just to avoid delays and complication, that to me isn't the best decision... I know 99% of the backers (if not all) would have been fine with the delay to get the deck they pledged for. I doubt he would have made the same decision 3 years back.

I'm just saying he probably reached a point where he had to make a decision, go back to the company for a reprint, or accept that the colors were darker than the digital mock up, and that the boarders were wide, still a good looking deck despite the difference, and in that moment the right choice for him felt like going ahead with production to get people their decks, I'm not saying it was universally the best decision anyone could have ever made with infinite time and perspective to make the choice, I'm just saying that I feel like he felt like he was making the best decision at the time and is probably just as disappointed to see so much vehemence as people are that one color on one side of the deck is darker than a prototype mock-up. I understand your frustration, but I feel like no one is giving Jackson the benefit of the doubt, and are instead condemning him for his ego and getting awfully close to accusing him of not caring about his backers.

I'm not trying to devalue your opinion, or downplay your frustration, I'm just playing Devil's Advocate because I feel like Jackson has earned a little slack from the community

vasta41 wrote: failed their backers.

This feels a little harsh

A little more for Jackson's defense - there is Update #9 (Dec. 04, 2015). The update is mostly to talk about the reprint of the AoH, however there is a pretty clear picture of the back of the card. I, like many others apparently, missed this picture and focused more on the message of the update. Based on that update, I feel like I, as a backer, should take at least a little responsibility for not taking the time to thoroughly read the update and express my concern about the back of the card then. Yes it is easy to miss and overlook, however there are 613 backers and every comment on that update is in regards to the AoH reprint and not about the back.

I really only brought it up because I wanted to know the reasons why the back looked different (was it by design, overlooked, etc) or was there an update I missed. I feel like Jackson and Marcus have answered the initial questions I had. In the end it is still a beautiful deck of cards. It sounds like there are some things that can be/have been learned from this project and that KW is looking to take some steps to addressing some of the issues. I still have plenty of faith in KW and in the talent of Jackson.

vasta41 wrote: Well what's done is done- there isn't much KW can do at this point except apologize. Let's face it- in the category of playing card mistakes the color rendering issue here is pretty low on the list. However in both Jackson and Marcus' responses, though explanations were clearly given neither one said, "sorry" for what happened to the deck. I know it may seem trivial at this point but that kind of irked me. Some big egos at KW I guess.

Perhaps it's for others to judge and not me, but I would say it's not so much a case of big egos as it was that both Jackson and I were focusing on explaining the different steps that lead to where we are now with the project. Of course we're sorry that the results are not up to par with the expectations backers had going into the project, but here we were laser-focused on explaining any and all issues and overlooked actually expressing our apologies. Mea culpa.

4.of.Clubs wrote: I'd have to disagree on this, it does not sound like he made the best decision he could. We spend lots of money back so many of Jackson's project based on the record of him producing awesome decks. If he approved the print just to avoid delays and complication, that to me isn't the best decision... I know 99% of the backers (if not all) would have been fine with the delay to get the deck they pledged for. I doubt he would have made the same decision 3 years back.

And I think it does matter that they don't feel sorry that they've failed their backers. We all understand that delays/mistakes can all happen, but they chose the easy way of hiding that from the backer and say NOTHING (when they already know the problem) and delivery something different from what we pledged for...

In our defence, the print was not approved "just to avoid delays and complication" as you phrased it, it was rather a decision that the results were good although not what we had expected. With the option of going forward with what we considered an unexpected but still good print without added delays or reprinting it for a lighter color result and added delays, the decision was made to go with the former of the two.

As for the information about it, there was no covering up or hiding it going on. However we failed to inform the backers about it which we should have done. I have no interest trying to shift any blame away from Kings Wild for the decisions that has been our responsibility, that much should be obvious by now in these last few posts. There's however quite a difference between actively hiding something and failing to inform about it due to not having considered it a big issue. We did not look at the color difference as that big of a problem and therefore failed to realize that we should have informed about the change. That's on us, and that's something we will be taking with us for future projects. And you have our sincere apologies for these problems.

RichK wrote: Marcus,

I don't know how busy Jackson is but in my opinion any design change/delay/etc. should be updated, major or minor. I didn't know USPCC needed a wider border for safer gilding. The darker back should have been an update and with the USPCC being made to correct the error with the update showing the dark back and corrected coloring. I'd rather wait for something Jackson is proud to put his name on than settle for less. Until I get my decks I won't honestly know the true subtle contrast. But it is certainly not what I expected.

As for the need for card reprints I have a suggestion. I don't know if it's legal to do or if Jackson wants to keep his courts unseen until delivery but how about posting the digital proof image, massively watermarked, in one of these forums asking for extra eyes to look for any errors? If one is found then edit the image circling the found error so you don't get lots of posts about the same error after it's been found. Many new eyes might see something missed. Just a thought.

Thanks.

Thanks for the feedback! Yes, there will be better and more detailed updates in the future. And the suggestion about the digital proofs is a very good idea that I'll talk with Jackson about.



To sum up a bit - this project has been far from perfect and we take full responsibility for our part in that. Once again, you have our full apologies. Unfortunately at this point there is little else to be done than to explain what has happened, why, and how we will work to make sure it will not happen in the future. Hopefully the future should be brighter as the artwork for the latest two projects has been proofed closely card for card by three different people, yours truly included as these were the first two I've been involved in from the start. Jackson and I will also be discussing the next few days how we can implement steps along the way to ensure quality control to a higher degree, and I'm positive we'll find solutions.

Thank you for your explanation. I actually do feel better now (not sarcastic).

Most playing card designers post a disclaimer in their KS campaigns relating to the intended accuracy of the renderings for the campaign versus the finished product. And going back to the Texas KS campaign page, Jackson has in fact posted the following:

"All images and descriptions are representation of the intended final product. Final products may very from images and descriptions."

Relatively minor changes are judgement calls that designers have the right to make, for whatever reasons they deem necessary. Unfortunately, it appears a significant number of backers are a bit disappointed with the lack of contrast in the back design, which is reasonable and understandable. But Jackson posted the appropriate disclaimer, and made a judgement call, so I have zero issues with that. He also fixed the major issue of the playability of the deck as well.

I think the main issue is the lack of notice of the changes, so the darker backs took most people by surprise. I think Marcus, as the KWP rep here at UC, acknowledged the oversight and have made the appropriate apologies. I think if people don't want to risk minor deviations from their expectations of the final product of any particular deck, then they should avoid KS and only buy decks at regular retail, that's the only way they'll know exactly what they're getting.

Hey Marcus !
Who belongs to the Elephant with **No UnCut Sheets !!** festooned all across it ?
He's a placid and demure ol' feller.

Bruno, if I understood even half of your posts sometimes I'd be a happy man!

Which Formosan so 'n' so authorised the non-pulling of the Wasteland and Crazy 8 uncuts ? Surely that has to be addressed ?


Ah well, now I understand how allan rousselle felt.

Marcus wrote:Bruno, if I understood even half of your posts sometimes I'd be a happy man!

If I'm deciphering his posts correctly, I believe he's wondering who is responsible / how three projects across two printers failed to have someone verify that there were uncut sheets ordered. An order that is rather common with projects nowadays and pretty much seems like a "gimme" for printers.

The Elephant in the room ....
That no-one wishes to talk of or about .... but are quite prepared to ignore, manoevre around, duck, dive, dodge or weave, anything but approach the difficult subject/scenario/concept ....
The foregoing fullsome and comprehensive open-ness neglected to address the failure to pull some quite decent art when required/contracted ....
I do not want a name .... I just have a need for this crap to be seen to, addressed, formally highlighted and fixed so we can .... be fulfilled ?
(I know the sheets are history ... ! Is this ever happening again ? Is it ? )
Is that ok ?
The Elephant in the room.
Its a thing !

As we can't force either company to remove a clause like that all we can really do is place the order and on top of that remind them about it as printing gets nearer. And even then it is dependent on everyone in line remembering to forward the message as we do not have contact with the people doing the actual printing - in other words we can remind EPCC/USPCC reps, but then they have to in turn remind the printing crew (or worse, if there are even further steps in between as often is with corporations).

As with us missing out on uncut sheets for three of our last projects, we placed our orders so I would assume it's one of those odd coincidences. Very unfortunate for us and for the backers affected, and hopefully both companies will be able to follow up to ensure that this is addressed with the printers. There'll likely never be a bulletproof solution, and I know from experience that this same thing has happened with the larger card companies in the business as well. I guess ordering uncut sheets remains an odd request for the printing crews despite the growth in custom card projects - we're still a tiny part of the clientele compared to casinos and whatnot.

Thanks Marcus, I know it was not evasion, that this got lost in the meleè, but it needed clarity .... certainly, if uncuts being organised is sometimes an impost, a step too far, a hold up to production/processes or even not something that can be expected for a client who is so far down the pecking order .... well let us be thankfull at least of a place there in the order of stuff ....
Still pissed, but hey, I'll get over my little first world issue, easy.
Out.

Almost.

Thought JR's Limited Crazy 8's uncuts were almost dangerous, yeh.
I'd advance the assumption that a certain designer of experience was more distraught than I wuz.
Hnn ?

Latest KS update...A second printing was done for the Gold and Legacy decks so that there would be no error cards! WOO HOO! Legacys are being hand gilded at the moment!

shermjack wrote:Latest KS update...A second printing was done for the Gold and Legacy decks so that there would be no error cards! WOO HOO! Legacys are being hand gilded at the moment!

Actually he didn't print a second run of the deck, he just printed the error card, and since the Gold and Legacy editions needed to be took out of the box in order to get gilded, he replaced the incorrect card with the correct, and then gilded them...

sms69x wrote:

shermjack wrote:Latest KS update...A second printing was done for the Gold and Legacy decks so that there would be no error cards! WOO HOO! Legacys are being hand gilded at the moment!

Actually he didn't print a second run of the deck, he just printed the error card, and since the Gold and Legacy editions needed to be took out of the box in order to get gilded, he replaced the incorrect card with the correct, and then gilded them...

That would make sense, but based on what Jackson wrote in his last update, I read it as the entire deck was reprinted...

Legacy Editions

The Legacy edition are still being hand gilded in 24K gold leaf by my friends at Thornwillow Press. So for you few great backers who backed for Legacy decks thank you so much for your patience and support. The decks we used for Legacy edition had to be out of the second printing so they would have all the correct cards.

Gold Editions

When you receive your packages, if you order Players or Premium Editions, you will notice the extra corrected cards at the bottom of the box. The Gold edition and Legacy Edition do not come with an extra card as the Gold and Legacy Editions were from the second reprint in which all the cards were corrected.

If they just used the reprinted cards, I don't think he would have written it that way.

Jackson/Marcus, care to comment?

@shermjack: Yep I read the exact same thing! But since it was not mentioned before in any place, I'll guess that it was easier for him to write a "reprint" than to write "the error card was removed and replaced with the new reprinted one".
But I'm sure Marcus or Jackson will soon clarify this.

@shermjack and @sms69x,

I read some previous updates and found this on the April 11 one:

" -The newly printed (and correct) blue decks are in the middle of being hand gilded and I have been given a completion date of mid May.
-The hand gilded 24k gold Legacy decks. "

Apparently he/USPPC did reprint the 800 correct decks to be gilded, 750 Gold and 50 Legacy. As I read the June 30 update the non gilded decks will get the corrected cards in the bottom of the shipping box. Gilded decks are all error free.

The Gold and Legacy Decks were a 100% new print run and are error free.
The replacement cards are from a third separate reprint of just the one card.
All the reprints were one of the main reason for the long long long delay.

The gilded decks were reprinted due to KW ending up with too few decks to fulfill the project after USPCC botched too many decks in their gilding process. They reprinted just enough to cover the decks meant to be gilded.

(This has all been quite a confusing project with all these twists and turns, especially for me as I joined in media res and wasn't involved from the start.)

Thank you JR & Marcus for clearing things up! Look forward to receiving my decks, especially the Legacy of course!

I missed that update! Thank you for clear that.

Got my decks today. I'm somewhat disappointed. I think Jackson is a great guy and amazing artist, and I love his work (and Texas!). But with the too dark blue backs, huge ass uneven borders (thanks USPCC), and misprinted card, I can't help but feel let down after opening my decks.

Any word on when Legacy decks will go out? I've received some decks and 1 of 2 gold editions, still waiting on some stuff though.

I'm with chach, still waiting on my Legacy deck. No kickstarter updates since August 27.

I just got my pair of Legacys just yesterday, so they shouldn't be long!

EDIT
My SINCERE apologies...I thought I was in the Black Diamond thread ...I just got my Black Diamond Legacies...SORRY for the confusion and stir I may have caused

My Legacy decks arrived today in Texas, but I must say I'm very disappointed in the final product. The tuck and wooden box are great (love the magnets), but the cards themselves are "eh" at best. I went and opened one up to give the usual eyeing over and I've come up disappointed. The gilding is uneven and already falling off in several areas. Many of the cards have stains seeping well into their interior and some just straight up have gilding streaks (glitter-like) running through them. This gilding looks no different than what USPCC did in-house (before discontinuing). I decided to pull out some of my Uusi gilded decks just to compare and they're leagues apart in quality.

As a native Texan I'll be keeping the cards, but man, I wish the quality was there.