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

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 5:02 pm**

ccralleo wrote:Weather you are a collector, maker, dealer, or player. Paper cards should just be art imo. I might use paper cards in a pinch or for games like solitaire and OFC where cards do not need to be kept a secret.

This place started as a forum called Decknique, and is now called unitedcardists. The original focus was on cardistry, xcm, and magic. Just look at the title banner at the top of each forum page. I get that the majority of traffic on this forum is now focused on collecting instead of cardistry, and that most of the newer members are collectors. But I must respectfully disagree with your opinion that paper cards should just be art. Until this place officially changes its name to United Collectors, I'm still going to champion the importance of how cards handle. The physical characteristics of paper stock, finish, and ink saturation is critically important to the vigorous manipulations performed by cardists and how magicians can perform certain sleights and flourishes. And paper cards are still playing cards, so they should be playable for poker or any other card games.

As for long term poker play, especially in casinos, your point is well taken and I agree that plastic cards are superior, but only in the aspect of durability. I am part of a weekly poker night group and I used to use exclusively plastic/acetate cards (Modiano and Dal Negro to be specific) because two packs of Bikes would be pretty much worn out after a 6 hour poker night session. But since the proliferation of custom playing cards, I will also use paper custom playing cards from Jackson, Uusi, Randy, Paul, Lotrek, Lorenzo, Giovanni and all the other great designers.

Paper cards can be art, but they shouldn't be limited to only be art, they should also be useable, whether its cardistry, magic, or poker. To each his own, but as a collector, I don't understand the concept of buying a beautiful deck but never opening it or using it (unless its an extremely expensive or truly rare item). You're basically a tuck box collector then. I'll always keep a few decks sealed for collection purposes, but I'll also open and use them for their true intended purpose. Custom decks should give you the best of both worlds - to be art and be useable.

As for the Legal Tender decks, I'm sure Jackson fully intended for them to be exactly what he advertised them to be to us. Maybe he was too ambitious, but unless costs get too prohibitive, I think there are better options than just scrapping the holographic strips as I mentioned in my earlier post on this thread and I hope Marcus or Jackson can at least consider other options that retain the holographic foil.

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 6:17 pm**

Was going to comment on the paper decks should be art statement, but - as usual - sinjin puts it more eloquently than I ever could.

Thanks, John. Agreed on all points.

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 8:50 pm**

Agreed... [emoji4]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:13 pm**

Two points which to tackle first

1. Jackson is a designer with amazing artistic talent. He however is not an artists.

sinjin7 wrote: Maybe he was too ambitious, but unless costs get too prohibitive, I think there are better options than just scrapping the holographic strips as I mentioned in my earlier post on this thread and I hope Marcus or Jackson can at least consider other options that retain the holographic foil.

Jackson's sole purpose is to make money/ make a living on his talent. He has stated so much.
This is not a criticism, it is everyones right to do this.
But we have gotten use to artists like Lotrek who will give up ends of profit to produce their artistic vision.
Jackson will compromise his artistic vision freely to maintain his profit margins. This has been shown multiple times in multiple cases were errors have occurred.
This is business to him and that is how businesses are run (well).
In Business Compromises have to be made and he will make them in the way that profits him the best or at least hits his bottom line the least.
ShinJin you know there will be no option to retain holographic foil.

2. On the idea that paper playing cards are just art.
This in my opinion is a dangerous slope.
The beauty of "The Art of playing cards' is that you are taking a thing with a purpose and making it more beautiful through the addition of the art, however you are not losing the functionality of the item itself.
If you read the forum on deck creation and all the advice that gets offered there you would see the importance on usability in so many of the posts.

As a collector many of my decks remain unopened and I do admire their beauty alone. But because the collection is cards I open many to play with. That is the difference between a card collection and an Art collection. The art hangs on my wall the cards get used as is their purpose.
I have many collections (as some may know). The reason I can differentiate them and not just call them all art is because of the functionality differences.

When an item loses it's functionality, for art, it is no longer that item.
Rene Magritte taught us that
Ceci n'est pas une Deck of cards

TL'DR
I have no clue where I was going with any of it

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:32 pm**

Nicely put [emoji4]

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Posted: **Thu Dec 08, 2016 9:35 pm**

sinjin7 wrote: This place started as a forum called Decknique, and is now called unitedcardists. The original focus was on cardistry, xcm, and magic. Just look at the title banner at the top of each forum page. I get that the majority of traffic on this forum is now focused on collecting instead of cardistry, and that most of the newer members are collectors. But I must respectfully disagree with your opinion that paper cards should just be art. Until this place officially changes its name to United Collectors, I'm still going to champion the importance of how cards handle. The physical characteristics of paper stock, finish, and ink saturation is critically important to the vigorous manipulations performed by cardists and how magicians can perform certain sleights and flourishes. And paper cards are still playing cards, so they should be playable for poker or any other card games.

As one of the newer collector members who just "collects tucks" as you said accurately, my thoughts are thus. The relationship between cardists (et al) and collectors is a mutually symbiotic one. Cardists need/want collectors so that more money and interest is brought into custom deck creation; i.e. more people buying = more decks being made. Collectors need/want cardists so that the integrity of the custom decks is maintained.

If no one opened up decks, an artist could just fill a tuck with sand and no one would ever know. The quality and integrity of the art, because it is a physical medium, must be maintained. The people who hold the artists to a high standard on the physical aspect of it, they're the heroes. Otherwise collectors shouldn't be upset if they find out a tuck box contains printer paper cutouts of the design they wanted, which of course they would be upset, because you do still want the cards to function. So where do we draw that line of function? Well, if we're paying some of these ridiculous premiums (particularly FROM the artist themselves), then that line better be way up there in terms of quality.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 4:29 am**

A couple of us noticed this problem early on

"The feather is a nice touch, but the writing in the background does not have a border nor does the holographic stripe. It can't be used for poker. I might be able to tell if you see an old Franklin being tossed and ppl like to bet real money when playing poker. It's now an Art Deck. A collectors deck if you will.,. "

"The deck can also be unusable if the design element that bleeds to the edge is visible in a stack by the edges as well (these decks are classified as edge readers). For instance, if only the courts get the holo strip treatment and it is visible on the edge, you would be able to tell how many court cards still remained in the stack or if one will be dealt soon. Hopefully this deck doesn't turn into an edge reader."

"It's not about breaking the border, it's about bleeding over the edge. The green, "KING" strips at the top about the K and the orange text that bleeds over on the sides make the deck LESS usable. I think by ending your comment that it's very much an art deck washes out the usability aspect. I'm guessing the cards are 100% finished and you probably don't want to go back to them, but I think it would be a disservice to the cards and the backers.

Suggestion: Remove the "NG" green strip that bleeds across the top and bottom edge and the squeeze the orange text a few millimeters and everyone wins. You've mentioned before that your art is about cards. Those suggestions are important for playability."

This was Jackson's reply:

I think the change makes the design less dynamic but it's an easy enough change to make, and I don't mind making it. Thanks for the thoughts everyone.

The main reason I had the holo strip on the edge was because I was trying to replicate the way the current $100 bill's holo strips placement. However the tweak is totally fine and I'll keep it. I would rather have my cake and eat it to when it comes to haveing a more playable deck.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 1:01 pm**

UtterFool wrote: He however is not an artists.

He is a very talented artist and I find it insulting for you to say he isn't, both as someone who respects him as an artist and as an artist myself. I would argue that he is an incredibly talented artist and that it is evidenced in the work that he does, even long before playing cards.
The fact that you use financial means to back up your first point, that an artists sole purpose wouldn't be business or money, is profoundly ignorant. There are many incredible artists for whom art is merely a business they use to make money, and they only create art so far as it furthers their financial goals. That doesn't make them any less an artist, and it doesn't make them any less artistic. You clearly have a very romanticized view of art, and that's adorable. But you are wrong, and whether you intended it as a criticism or not, others, myself, feel criticized by this statement.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 3:45 pm**

The bottom line is, before you launch a campaign and showcase your idea, you do your homework.

JR leads people to believe he can do something out of this world and what ends up happening time and time again? It's the same old "oh sorry, can't do it now. But your going to love the end product".

This is an ON-GOING ISSUE that many of the backers are tired of hearing, especially after taking our money and we're lead to believe the cards we get are the same from his photo renderings from the campaign.

Most of us support JR based off his initial design and concepts and most appreciate his "out-of-the-box thinking" but theoretically his idea's don't work.

It's time for JR to get a real job, and design playing cards as a hobby instead of a full-time job.

I fully support UtterFool's comment that JR is not an artist. True artists don't continue to make mistakes and expect their paying customers to accept it for what it is.

From the campaign page:
"I will use my experience of running over 15 successful Kickstarters to make sure that you are fully informed of the complete process and also get exactly what you pledge for."

It only took numerous comments starting in October requesting an update to actually receive one and on-top of that, an update that most are not happy with.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 3:55 pm**

Cardician_82 wrote: I fully support UtterFool's comment that JR is not an artist. True artists don't continue to make mistakes and expect their paying customers to accept it for what it is.

True artists make mistakes constantly, and most people are non-the-wiser for it, and when you can get away with making a mistake, most people do, artist or no, even if you continue to make the mistake. And you bet your sweet ass they will charge for it even when they do.

The problem Jackson is making is that he is changing his mind midway through about design elements he is promising.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:00 pm**

Whenever I back a KS campaign I am backing a concept. We see the vision in the renders, we back that vision and hope for it to be achieved. As we have seen over and again, things are going to change before the final product is achieved. For me, this has always been an acceptable fact of the crowdfunding process. If the product already existed and there were photos of the final product, I would be picking them up retail.

I backed these decks as well and I'm fine with the decision made by Mr. Robinson. A high quality end result is what he's shooting for and it's acceptable to lose something that would impair that result. MetalLux is clearly not the answer here, There isn't enough foil on the cards for it to work. We all know the issues USPCC faces with card centering and how difficult it is for them to pull it off with consistent results. They are simply working to print decks at break neck speeds, the number of decks they pound out per day is very impressive, some things will slip through like what we saw on the black tally-ho for example. Given that the Chinese deck is full bleed and would not receive heavy foil, the US deck would not receive heavy foil, I agree that EPCC is the right printing choice.

I am not defending the choices made to alter the design, merely accepting the choices made. Pushing the envelope within the limitations of current technology is going to end up flawed one way or the other. I personally don't think anyone who pops open their tucks would be happy with holofoil at the cost of marks from the manufacturing process. I think this end was reached after many sleepless nights and not come to easily at all. Sure, there is a little at fault here for Shooting for the stars, but most of us are not new to playing cards and should realize how difficult it would be to achieve if it was achievable in the first place. Hopes vs reality will always be something to deal with on both ends of the process, designer and consumer.

Just my opinion on the changes. These will be made to a very high quality and I'm sure the end result will be beautiful decks. I'll live with it and the world will go on spinning as it should.

The comments about Mr. Jackson Robinson not being an artist.

I'm so not on the hate train.

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 6:56 pm**

Justin O. wrote:
UtterFool wrote: He however is not an artists.
He is a very talented artist and I find it insulting for you to say he isn't, both as someone who respects him as an artist and as an artist myself. I would argue that he is an incredibly talented artist and that it is evidenced in the work that he does, even long before playing cards.
The fact that you use financial means to back up your first point, that an artists sole purpose wouldn't be business or money, is profoundly ignorant. There are many incredible artists for whom art is merely a business they use to make money, and they only create art so far as it furthers their financial goals. That doesn't make them any less an artist, and it doesn't make them any less artistic. You clearly have a very romanticized view of art, and that's adorable. But you are wrong, and whether you intended it as a criticism or not, others, myself, feel criticized by this statement.

I stand by my statement

for each of us it is purely semantics it seems. because everything you say about the "for profit" artist is what takes them out of the category of artist for me.
I did not say that Jackson does not have amazing artistic talent. in fact I clearly said that he does.
And yes perhaps I have a romanticized, adorable view of artists. But it is one that I gained from knowing a lot of artists and designers and one that many of them hold as well.

This is not to say that a designer can not also be an artist and I certainly spoke a little harshly by saying that Jackson was not an artists. (And it has nothing to do with continued mistakes)
Jackson may be an artist is his life but what he does with playing cards is not art. It is design. The differences IMO are far from subtle. Design is using your artistic talent to create a product solely for profit. With the ability and possible want to sacrifice creativity and concept for that bottom line.
Though none is intended you may take offense to my "understanding" between art and design (though none is intended) and that is your right.

I know of artists who you describe who only make for money (as you described) and to me they are not artists. They may be very talented or they may be hacks. But they are not artists in my book.

But as I said in the beginning this comes down to semantics and my adorable view of the true artist.
I feel there needs to be a soul in something an uncompromising view that makes someone something truly an artist.

this being said I am not holding this light up to Jackson alone. It just came up here because of the numerous compromises he has been willing to make recently.
I do not believe that most of the card creators are artists, at least in their card deck creation world (which is the world I have had the pleasure to view them in).

Posted: **Fri Dec 09, 2016 7:53 pm**

Art is subjective, and so by extension what defines an artist is also subjective. Just because you argue someone is not an artist by your personal definition or standard doesn't mean he's not an artist. Just because you argue someone is an artist by your personal definition or standard doesn't make him one, either. And to accuse one another of being "wrong" or argue over a subjective, personal interpretation is pointless and unconstructive. Let's just agree to disagree while respecting each others' opinions and minimize the hijacking of this thread.

As for the Legal Tender deck, it appears that Jackson may not be completely scrapping the holographic foil on the (U.S.) court cards after all. According to one of his posts in the comment section of his most recent Update, it appears the issue of the marking came about because he had the words "King" "Queen" and "Jack" in the holographic strip, so not only was there an indentation of the backs of the court cards, they also read King, Queen, or Jack, which even further gave away the value of the court card. Jackson's considering removing the wording on the holo strips to reduce the impact of the marked cards.

I don't know that will completely solve the issue of marking, because even without the wording to give away the specific court card, the court cards in general will still be marked. But at least the holo strip is still on the table and Jackson is still working on a way to keep this critically important feature.

Posted: **Sat Dec 10, 2016 11:38 am**

Thanks, John! I was promulgating something along these lines, but as usual - you always are able to state things more elegant and eloquently than I could ever.

Art is always subjective, as you stated. Thus what is art and who is an artist is also subjective. I will stop there, since I am already repeating your post.

No question that Jackson is an artist who has taken some challenges on the chin. Those that think "outside the box" are always subject to being brought back to reality.

Posted: **Sat Dec 10, 2016 7:32 pm**

I agree with John on the above except the following:

sinjin7 wrote: And to accuse one another of being "wrong" or argue over a subjective, personal interpretation is pointless and unconstructive. Let's just agree to disagree while respecting each others' opinions and minimize the hijacking of this thread.

It is what personal interpretation is that help us make the sense of the world, and UC as a community gives the voice to the members to share their personal interpretation with others here. So, saying personal interpretation is pointless and unconstructive is again....um...a personal interpretation.

Now, if I go back to the thread and the issue in question, it is still not over yet and JR is still working and will be experimenting with a simpler design. One of the biggest benefits of Kickstarter is it gives creators time & money to experiment and produce a good outcome than what has been possible if they were going alone.

: Screen Shot 2016-12-11 at 11.28.51 AM.png (100.37 KiB) Viewed 2636 times

Another area to look at is the card stock being used. EPCC's Master or Classic finish would have this issue but the Robusto stock with its high thickness might minimize the marking issue. Given JR's experience, I do understand this would be in consideration already.

Posted: **Mon Dec 12, 2016 7:57 am**

Well, it seems I kinda late for the boat, but still would like to throw my 2 cents.
It seems that Mr. Robinson is having too much troubles late with his KS campaigns. He went from 100% deliver on time (that he loved to brag about), about 20% deliver on time. It seems, to me that he clarely can't handle more than one project at time, and so he should have stick with it. Also he aquired a status where he can just write something up and give us one or two mock-ups and we will happely throw him our money. Unfortunatelly for him, and us, lately he can barely deliver what was promised. But that's ok, after all, if you're not happy he will always give you a refund, this way we can get the best of the two worlds, if he manage to succeed and achieve what was promised, we will end up with a great decks, if not, well, give me my money back, please.
I never asked a refund from him on his latest projects, but on this one I may, lets hope he can somehow turn this situation on his favor.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 2:09 pm**

Here is Jackson's latest overdue Update:

"Hello everyone. Today most people in China (where the cards are being produced) are returning from their breaks for the Lunar new year. We have gone through a few rounds of physical production proofs to make sure the quality of everything is right. Everything has been finalized, since the end of November, and we are right smack in the middle of production. The tuck cases are finished and look amazing and the cards themselves are printed and just waiting for everyone to return to get finished up. We are very close to finish line and only a month behind the delivery date. Thank you so much for your patience and support. When I have an update on production I will be sure and update the entire project. As for the timetable of fulfillment, we are very close. Once the products have been shipped and are in transit to me I will be able to give you guys a more solid date. Once again thank you for your patience. If you have a specific question please email directly at jackson@kingswildproject.com and I will do my very best to answer your question."

Here are 3 things that bother me about this update: First, I don't like the casual attitude towards his late delivery. He's only a month behind...as of now. But he's still not done with production yet (very close to the finish line/waiting for everyone to return to get finished up, in his own words), and that doesn't factor in the month long boat ride for the decks to arrive once they do get produced, plus the logistics of fulfillment and shipping. So its not only a month, but multiple months. Yeah, yeah, I know there are some of you chanting, "KS delivery dates are only an estimate, blah blah", but this isn't Jackson's first rodeo, he has 20 campaigns under his belt and he's still not on time, not even close. I don't know why he doesn't take a page out of Uusi's handbook and post conservative, realistic delivery dates further out into the future and then come out like a hero when he's able to deliver ahead of schedule like Peter and Linnea have done so many times. There's no question he will eventually fulfill, but I think the natives are finally getting restless over his habitual lateness and his cavalier attitude towards being late, as evidenced by comments from other backers who are expressing these same feelings on his campaign comments section.

But the bigger thing for me is that he didn't even address the biggest issue for this project: what the hell is the status of the holographic foiling? Did he scrap it? Did he manage to incorporate it after all? And if so, how? Again, by his own words, everything was finalized since the end of November! That's over two months ago, so why not the courtesy of an update on one of the most important features that was promised for this deck? Even if these decks have the holographic foiling, at this point it will be soured for me and somewhat bitter-sweet due to the Eric Mana-like level of communication Jackson has sunk to.

Finally, these are made in EPCC Chinese factory? Not even their Taiwanese factory?

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 3:06 pm**

sinjin7 wrote:But the bigger thing for me is that he didn't even address the biggest issue for this project: what the hell is the status of the holographic foiling?

He just responded to that

@Justin Olson Unfortunately the holofoil wasn't successful. I'm very sorry for this issue and am wiling to do as much as I can to make it right with anyone who is unsatisfied.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:22 pm**

So no holographic foiling. Damn. Jackson went with EPCC because they can do things the USPCC can't. Oops. Now we have the ridiculous situation where a deck celebrating United States currency got printed in China, with the justification being that the Legal Tender deck will have a technological feature (holo foil) that can only be done by the Asian printer, and sold at a premium price point of a deck having that exclusive feature. And now we learn (over two months later after the fact) there will be no exclusive, only-can-be-done by EPCC holographic foiling. I guess we had the privilege of paying for Jackson's failed experiment with EPCC. Screw Kickstarter, I'm only buying decks that are already produced so that I will know exactly what the hell I'm getting and actually paying for.

Marcus wrote:Both holographic foil and regular foil will be used. As to how it will be used I can't answer just yet as Jackson is still working on the designs.

So at least regular foil was used on these cards, right? So fine, Jackson tried to experiment with a super exclusive feature (on our dime) and it just didn't work out. At least he tried, and crap happens sometimes. But tell me, at the very least, that at least regular foil is used on the cards so that Jackson can salvage some of this mess and partially justify the higher selling price. Please tell me this didn't end up being a bait and switch for a naked cash grab! I don't give a damn about intent at this point and time, just final results. I asked about the regular foil in Jackson's KS page, hopefully he can have a positive answer for us....

* EDIT - I just checked the KS page, and here's Jackson's answer:

"@John Ahn, unfortunately, all the foil complications were interrelated so there is no regular foiling on the cards."

This is unbelievable.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:23 pm**

ecNate wrote:
sinjin7 wrote:But the bigger thing for me is that he didn't even address the biggest issue for this project: what the hell is the status of the holographic foiling?
He just responded to that

@Justin Olson Unfortunately the holofoil wasn't successful. I'm very sorry for this issue and am wiling to do as much as I can to make it right with anyone who is unsatisfied.

Would have been nice if he let us all know that via a KS update. Disappointed. That was a huge selling point for me. I won't be going in "big" on any of his future campaigns.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:41 pm**

sinjin7 wrote: "@John Ahn, unfortunately, all the foil complications were interrelated so there is no regular foiling on the cards."

That is incredibly disappointing. I know Jackson has offered backers in the past a refund where changes have been made and they have not been happy with the changed version, perhaps you can get a refund for these? I have reached out to Jackson requesting a refund for my pledge given the circumstances with this deck and am waiting on a reply. There is still some exceptionally beautiful artwork here, and the legacy cases still impress me everytime I see them. despite the foiling and higher than average deck cost there is a still a lot of value here for backers. But I understand your frustration Sinjin, and recent projects, not just on Kickstarter, and not just with Jackson, have had me really reevaluate the way in which I choose to be a consumer.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 4:59 pm**

I agree there is still some value here, but if I knew from the beginning how this deck would turn out, there's no way I'm putting down $170.00 like I did for a brick. Not for non-foiled EPCC decks. Under any other circumstances, I absolutely would be asking for a refund. But Jackson still has a large base of fanboys, so I expect I'll be able to easily unload these decks and get my money back, if not more, some months down the line when these decks finally get delivered.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:05 pm**

Jackson issued the refund and was very gracious about it. So I won't be getting the Legacy sets for this project but I think that people who stick with it will be pleased with the final product

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 5:58 pm**

No foil at all? That REALLY blows. I'm going to ask him for a partial refund. I don't want a brick of non-foiled cards.

EDIT: Jackson promptly issued me a partial refund with no fuss.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:05 pm**

I also have to say that this information about the holographic seals and the foiling should have been included in the update. And should have been disclosed in November. I miss Marcus.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 6:53 pm**

Darn. That's really disappointing.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 8:03 pm**

Had to go back and check, but I never pulled the trigger on pledging for these. Glad I didn't now, would've asked for a full refund if I did.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 9:20 pm**

sinjin7 wrote:I agree there is still some value here, but if I knew from the beginning how this deck would turn out, there's no way I'm putting down $170.00 like I did for a brick. Not for non-foiled EPCC decks. Under any other circumstances, I absolutely would be asking for a refund. But Jackson still has a large base of fanboys, so I expect I'll be able to easily unload these decks and get my money back, if not more, some months down the line when these decks finally get delivered.

Believe me the fanboys numbers are dwindling but you are probably right. I am glad I simply pledged for 1 deck of each. More than enough for a normal deck

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 9:35 pm**

Believing Jack$on's claims during a campaign. Or pretty much anywhere...

What's sad is people still think they'll get pearlescent gilding too.

Posted: **Thu Feb 02, 2017 11:54 pm**

PrincessTrouble wrote:I also have to say that this information about the holographic seals and the foiling should have been included in the update. And should been disclosed in November. I miss Marcus.

hmm....this should have been included in the update. As far as I know, their Chinese factory does have advanced foiling capabilities, so if the project is completely backing out of holo and regular foiling, it means a serious blocker has come up. I do understand and empathize with how you all would be feeling, but let me tell you this, foiling does increase risk exponentially for any project. I used to think that it may be dependent on printer's experience, but lately I saw that even if you have done similar projects before, it is no guarantee that a new project will come out with flying colors after first print run. And, if there is an issue in foiling, the whole set of sheets just go to waste paving the way for another print run.

I remember seeing another thread few days back with low print run, double foil and a few folks complaining about high per deck cost. Double foil is an experimental technique and the risk it carries is way high than normal decks, and may be it is also a factor in cost determination apart from the usual factors. Similarly, this project by JR seems to have encountered issues with foil which is disappointing to all backers but JR will also be having similar feelings for not being able to achieve his vision. I do hope and wish JR will be lot a wiser with his next projects.

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

Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar

Re: Legal Tender - By Jackson Robinson -- LIVE on Kickstar