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

You can also use XE.com for historical rates

In the comments section

Rick wrote:Also for those with an interest, I'm considering having the cards cut traditionally, which means they'll be flipped over.

Does anyone here know what that means?

I can never remember which is which, but if standard cut is done from face to back (meaning the sheets are face up when being cut), then "traditionally cut" would be the opposite (sheets face down). This has implications for which way the cards faro most easily, something primarily gamblers and other similar card handlers are concerned with (traditionally cut cards are better for table faros).

Magik, your example is reversed. A traditionally cut deck will be cut face to back. This means the uncut sheets will be stacked face up and the cutting blade will come down onto the faces and through to the back. Card mechanics who perform gambling sleights definitely prefer a traditional cut.

Back in the day, the only way the USPCC cut their decks was face up for the traditional cut. Then for some reason, about 25 to 30 years ago, the USPCC flipped their uncut sheets over so that the face is down and the back design is on top for the cutting blade. Maybe it helped with alignment and registration, I don't know. There's no cost difference in either method. I think the standard now is still non-traditional, but I've seen a trend from the Kentucky plant to occasionally go with a traditional cut sometimes, it almost seems random. The only way to make sure your decks are cut traditionally is to specifically request it.

Most people will never know the difference (collectors for the most part don't have a clue about the actual physical characteristics of the cards, magicians usually won't have a preference, only cardists who like to faro a lot want to know which direction will be easier to faro). I think card mechanics are the only ones who really care. If this is the case, then I think you should always go with a traditional cut to make as many people happy as possible.

That's interesting, I always get confused as well.

You know that reminds me of something. Sometimes when I open a brand new deck, the back of the cards are hunched up. I guess that's non traditional cut indicator?

If the blades are sharp, you shouldn't be able to visually tell easily if a deck is cut traditionally or non-traditionally. You almost need a magnifying glass to see the subtle differences in the cut angles on the edges of the cards. If your card backs are hunched up, you may have different manufacturing issues going on!

Like I said, I can never remember Thanks for the correction, sinjin!

Eoghann wrote:That's interesting, I always get confused as well.

You know that reminds me of something. Sometimes when I open a brand new deck, the back of the cards are hunched up. I guess that's non traditional cut indicator?

Yep, precisely! Think about it: the edges were smacked with the blades while face down, thus the crimped down edges. If they had been cut face up, the crimp would be facing the opposite way or with the flexed faces upward instead and edges towards you (well, perspective is everything, but I'm sure you get what I'm saying).

I see what ya'll saying about people wouldn't know the different. On the stripper machines at USPCC, the uncut sheets were faced up. After the sheets are cut into strips, I don't know the process afterwards.

Bikefanatic wrote:I see what ya'll saying about people wouldn't know the different. On the stripper machines at USPCC, the uncut sheets were faced up. After the sheets are cut into strips, I don't know the process afterwards.

They're moved to the cutting dies. The cards are cut individually in separate dies for a clean cut, and the cards are pressed down into the die to make the cut. A "face down" cut is the traditional cut, when the card is facing the sharp edges of the die when it's cut from the strip. A "face up" cut is the modern cut, where it's the back of the card that hits the die first.

Traditional cuts are better for shuffling, but (or so goes the rumor) the modern cut was developed as a time-saving measure in card manufacturing - the uncut sheet needs to be flipped between printing and cutting to make the traditional cut, while this isn't necessary (and thus eliminates a step) for the modern cut.

I always wondered about this. Seriously, what if I ordered a deck where the "faces" were all card backs and the "backs" were all card faces? I'd have a traditionally cut deck without having to flip paper anywhere, right? It doesn't seem to make sense about this whole extra step of flipping the uncut sheet. But don't look at me, that's just how USPC does things...

Okay guys, I'm confused.

sinjin7 wrote:Magik, your example is reversed. A traditionally cut deck will be cut face to back. This means the uncut sheets will be stacked face up and the cutting blade will come down onto the faces and through to the back. Card mechanics who perform gambling sleights definitely prefer a traditional cut.

From this, what I'm getting is that traditionally cut = face up, blades come down and cut face first.

Don Boyer wrote:A "face down" cut is the traditional cut, when the card is facing the sharp edges of the die when it's cut from the strip. A "face up" cut is the modern cut, where it's the back of the card that hits the die first.

From this, traditionally cut = face down, with the blade coming from below and pushing up to cut face first.

Discrepancy between face up and face down, but consensus on traditional having the blade cut face first.

I'm a bit confused too, Shermaine. From what Don posted I am assuming that the blades are beneath the surface? Always thought it was opposite. He makes a good point about them just printing faces on the back and vice versa if they wanted to reproduce the old style without adding a flip to the process.

I'll try to clear up any confusion.

Every deck of cards starts off by being a part of a giant roll of paper stock that has over 10 thousand decks printed on each roll. After this printing, there are actually 3 cutting process, with only the final cutting process that really matters.

The first cut is where the roll is cut into large squares that contain all the cards for one deck - this is your standard uncut sheet (that most people grossly overcharge for). In my earlier post, I was talking about this first cut for some reason, but now that I think about it, I realize this cut has nothing to do with traditional or non-traditional cutting because the actual edges of the cards aren't made in this step.

The second cut is where stacks of uncut sheets are cut into strips that hold a single row of cards. The first and second cuts are rough cuts that don't involve the actual edges of the playing cards. It doesn't matter if there is a giant blade that comes down or goes up through the card stock, or if they're torn by hand for that matter.

The third and final cut is where all the difference is made. Each card is individually cut from the strips. I've seen this process and I'm not sure what the exact orientation of the stock is at the time of actual cutting, it may even be vertical. All I know is the strips are fed through the cutting machine and get cut at some point as it winds through the machine.

The key is regardless of which direction the blade comes down or up on the cutting die, or which way the strip of stock is facing, if the blade goes through the card from the face first and out through the back, then you have a traditionally cut deck.

Thought I'd share this update I received this morning.

Hi,

I hope your week has begun well. I wanted to update you on progress with production of the Origins First Edition and Grail Limited Edition decks.

You may already know by updates on the Kickstarter page, that the USPCC has had a huge workload and there has been a delay on completion of the Origins. I apologise for the time i'ts taken. The good news is that the Grails are complete and the Firsts are due within days. I am confident we will be shipping shortly.

Thank you very much for your support over the course of the campaign. I will be in touch when the packs begin shipping.

Looks like we'll be getting these pretty soon.

Cbkimble wrote:Thought I'd share this update I received this morning.

Hi,

I hope your week has begun well. I wanted to update you on progress with production of the Origins First Edition and Grail Limited Edition decks.

You may already know by updates on the Kickstarter page, that the USPCC has had a huge workload and there has been a delay on completion of the Origins. I apologise for the time i'ts taken. The good news is that the Grails are complete and the Firsts are due within days. I am confident we will be shipping shortly.

Thank you very much for your support over the course of the campaign. I will be in touch when the packs begin shipping.

Looks like we'll be getting these pretty soon.

It's about time, what a letdown form USPCC this time around! Anyway, gratz Rick and good luck in packing all the orders

One of the mysteries of Kickstarter for me was how this deck didn't exceed $100,000 in funding. I put this deck on par with Alex Chin's Primavera & Seronda decks, which is high praise indeed. From the glimpse of the tuck box I got in my email today, I'm really happy this project is so close to being fulfilled. I have a feeling once people get these in their hands and word gets out on how beautiful this deck is, Rick is going to enjoy robust post-KS sales.

sinjin7 wrote:One of the mysteries of Kickstarter for me was how this deck didn't exceed $100,000 in funding. I put this deck on par with Alex Chin's Primavera & Seronda decks, which is high praise indeed. From the glimpse of the tuck box I got in my email today, I'm really happy this project is so close to being fulfilled. I have a feeling once people get these in their hands and word gets out on how beautiful this deck is, Rick is going to enjoy robust post-KS sales.

I agree. It's a beautiful deck and I'm sure he'll get plenty of hits to make more, but I don't think it'll be soon. Seems like this whole process has had a negative effect on Rick. If it had had the Bicycle logo and had been in US dollars instead of NZ dollars, it might've cleared 100k.

sinjin7 wrote:One of the mysteries of Kickstarter for me was how this deck didn't exceed $100,000 in funding. I put this deck on par with Alex Chin's Primavera & Seronda decks, which is high praise indeed. From the glimpse of the tuck box I got in my email today, I'm really happy this project is so close to being fulfilled. I have a feeling once people get these in their hands and word gets out on how beautiful this deck is, Rick is going to enjoy robust post-KS sales.

Totally agree, it's a top 10 easily without even having it in hand. In fact right up there with Reserve Note which is my favorite non transformation deck. I'm just sad I didn't get more, I'll likely be a post KS buyer as well!

We agree one hundred percent, we think it is one of the best KS funded deck of cards ever!

Why it did not go beyond $100K, here are our 2 cents about that :

- Maybe a bit too expensive (although INT shipping was fairly priced)
- It was in NZD, some people wrongfully thinks it is a dealbreaker
- Decks add ons could have been better
- Highest tier at $220 NZD, some wealthy people like to support projects by getting crazy expensive tiers
- It did not unfortunatly gets the buzz some other project gets

But on the good side, the teasing, marketing was top notch, Rick looks like a great guy that won't settle for anything but perfection.

I didn't pledge for this. Let me explain why.

For me, the theme is a huge thing. The importance of theme is on par with the artwork, and sometimes it's even more important. When you say this deck harkens back to the 16th century, that means nothing to me. I never lived in the 16th century, and it seems more abstract and foreign than more recent decades, such as the 80s or 90s.

That is the biggest reason why I didn't pledge for this. The price point + theme = a non-pledger. I could pay $12.50 for a 16th century themed deck that I don't completely understand, or I could spend more on the Requiem KS, which is a theme I can understand and can actually relate to.

In response to PlayingCardz...

PlayingCardz wrote: - Maybe a bit too expensive (although INT shipping was fairly priced)Price is fine. $15/deck is standard for international backers.[/color]
- It was in NZD, some people wrongfully thinks it is a dealbreaker Definitely wasn't a dealbreaker for me.
- Decks add ons could have been better I think there were too many add-ons available. T-shirts, coins... they're all bleh to me. Coins and artbooks were fine, but the T-shirts and postcard were a little bit much.
- Highest tier at $220 NZD, some wealthy people like to support projects by getting crazy expensive tiers This is actually a good point.
- It did not unfortunatly gets the buzz some other project gets Personally, I think this has to do with the theme.

Of course, I'm only one non-pledger. I was really interested in this deck in the beginning, because I really liked the artwork. Then I lost touch with this deck. For me, even if the artwork is fantastic, the lack of a relateable theme is a big negative.

I hope Rick comes out with more ideas, because I really do like his artwork. I just hope his next theme is something that more people can get behind.

I think Godzillian might be on to something, but I suspect it relates more to the average KS pledger than collectors. As in: the deck doesn't have a theme that Average Joe likes/has a personal connection to. Name of the Wind raked in over half a mill because of fans, not card collectors. The card collecting community is relatively small, and in it I think it comes down to taste more than whether the theme is relatable or not (for example, I LOVE this deck but did not care for Requiem).

Godzillian wrote:I didn't pledge for this. Let me explain why.

For me, the theme is a huge thing. The importance of theme is on par with the artwork, and sometimes it's even more important. When you say this deck harkens back to the 16th century, that means nothing to me. I never lived in the 16th century, and it seems more abstract and foreign than more recent decades, such as the 80s or 90s.

I don't think there are many people left alive from the 16th Century.

Norbie wrote:

Godzillian wrote:I didn't pledge for this. Let me explain why.

For me, the theme is a huge thing. The importance of theme is on par with the artwork, and sometimes it's even more important. When you say this deck harkens back to the 16th century, that means nothing to me. I never lived in the 16th century, and it seems more abstract and foreign than more recent decades, such as the 80s or 90s.

I don't think there are many people left alive from the 16th Century.

LOL. I just mean that it's harder for me to relate to. I've never studied the 16th century and I know nothing about that time other than those classic court cards. If the deck was based on the 80s or 90s, I could relate to that theme more. It all boils down to personal preference.

You have a point about the lack of theme, but I don't think it is the strongest factor. Does the monarchs, fontaine, madison decks, ... have more personality than the Origins ? I don't think so but those decks are huge success!

About the $NZD, I know this may sound odd but many people fear in paying in a different currency than their own, they fear the exchange rate or it is simply our of their comfort zone.

This is why on CartesMagie.com we accept both $USD and EUR, we could accept more but this is complicated enough already!

PlayingCardz wrote:You have a point about the lack of theme, but I don't think it is the strongest factor. Does the monarchs, fontaine, madison decks, ... have more personality than the Origins ? I don't think so but those decks are huge success!

Well, the Monarchs are easily found and are rather cheap since they're mass produced every year. Along with the Artisans, the Monarchs are T11's bread and butter. Because they're relatively cheap and easier to find, they're widely used.

The Fontaines are popular because of well, Zach Mueller. He has a ton of fans who are willing to buy into the hype. Additionally, the Fontaines are a deck meant for flourishing - it targeted an audience who's always hungry for more "flourishy"-type decks. They wanted something that was easily recognizable in their online vids and irl among their flourisher friends.

The Madison decks are popular because of Daniel Madison and Ellusionist's marketing strategy - hype, hype, secrets, hype, and more hype. Ellusionist is already a big name in the custom cards industry, so naturally, they also attract more customers.

All 3 of these decks do have theme. It's just a theme that more people can relate to and understand - these themes are staple, Zach Mueller, and Daniel Madison.

PlayingCardz wrote: About the $NZD, I know this may sound odd but many people fear in paying in a different currency than their own, they fear the exchange rate or it is simply our of their comfort zone.

This is why on CartesMagie.com we accept both $USD and EUR, we could accept more but this is complicated enough already!

I don't know much about the business, but I think you're right about the $NZD thing.

I really think the currency issue is limited to teh US.

ALL my pledged are in a foreign currency!

Persoanlly I think the theme was really clear - a reinterpretatin of one of the original court sets. There's even an art book that compares the two and gives some historical details; you don't NEED to be familiar with 16th century deck art any more than you NEED to be familiar with bicycles or 19th century deck art to enjoy a Bicycle deck with standard courts.
(IMHO)

Anyway, this deck is beautiful, the box is stunning. We rushed on the deck while it was available, it will be a hit that's for sure !

montecarlojoe wrote: Persoanlly I think the theme was really clear - a reinterpretatin of one of the original court sets. There's even an art book that compares the two and gives some historical details; you don't NEED to be familiar with 16th century deck art any more than you NEED to be familiar with bicycles or 19th century deck art to enjoy a Bicycle deck with standard courts.
(IMHO)

I agree. The theme was clear and wonderfully done. This deck should have been >$100k. I'm sure that the currency issue was the problem (even if I can't understand why). But NZD$69k is good too!

I can't wait for this deck (and the art book) to be in my hand!

The different currency might be an issue, but I don't think it should be. Google makes it so easy to convert currency. All you have to do is type, "165 nzd to usd" to get the approximate amount in dollars. I admit, I'm a little cautious on projects in £ or € but that's because the exchange rate would have me paying more dollars per £ or € (so seeing £20 means I'll be paying more than $20). With nzd, it's actually the other way around. You'd be paying less dollars per nzd (so 20 nzd means I'll be paying less than $20).

Sher wrote:The different currency might be an issue, but I don't think it should be. Google makes it so easy to convert currency. All you have to do is type, "165 nzd to usd" to get the approximate amount in dollars. I admit, I'm a little cautious on projects in £ or € but that's because the exchange rate would have me paying more dollars per £ or € (so seeing £20 means I'll be paying more than $20). With nzd, it's actually the other way around. You'd be paying less dollars per nzd (so 20 nzd means I'll be paying less than $20).

I think that's what it is. How many of you have seen a project in NZd before? This was my first. I took the time to see the conversion rate but a lot of people probably didn't. There may have been a lot of people that, after seeing the conversion of USD to POUND/EURO, just assumed that the conversion was going to cost them more. I still think it should've done much better but it was also around the first of the year and just before tax season in the US was in full swing. If he had waited two to four weeks, I think he would've done better. Timing is everything and can make the difference between 65,000 and 100,000.