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

I first saw this deck on Behance a few days ago, and now you can buy it here

The design's inspired by Kathakali, the classical Indian dance drama of Kerala.

Here are some pics both from Behance and the site:

I have to say that I like these a LOT.

I don't have any criticisms based on the images shared.

Edit: At first I didn't pay attention to the text of the post, because of the OP's tendency to pun me to death, but since they're available to purchase right now I will have to buy a couple.

Also - ₹1,200.00 is USD $17.80.

TwoPieceFeed wrote:I don't have any criticisms based on the images shared.

What's the matter, Kat(hakali) got your tongue? Let me help you out: The render of the cards in that person's hand make these look bridge-sized- do we know for sure these are poker-sized? It doesn't seem to say anywhere. It also doesn't say who printed these, short of the "Made in Kerala" statement but as far as I know, no good printers exist there. Lastly, I like the backs but it should be two-way.

vasta41 wrote:

TwoPieceFeed wrote:I don't have any criticisms based on the images shared.

What's the matter, Kat(hakali) got your tongue? Let me help you out: The render of the cards in that person's hand make these look bridge-sized- do we know for sure these are poker-sized? It doesn't seem to say anywhere. It also doesn't say who printed these, short of the "Made in Kerala" statement but as far as I know, no good printers exist there. Lastly, I like the backs but it should be two-way.

I did some research, and they are poker-sized.

I currently cannot find who they're printed by. Still researching.

I like the backs enough that this doesn't bother me, but you're not wrong.

The King of Spades looks like Blanka from Street Fighter.

I don't have anything else to contribute to this discussion

I do think that if you're going to put a face on the back - and I think it works and is appropriate here - you almost have to do a one-way back. I've never seen a mirrored face on a two-way back that looked good.

Merlebird wrote:I do think that if you're going to put a face on the back - and I think it works and is appropriate here - you almost have to do a one-way back. I've never seen a mirrored face on a two-way back that looked good.

But there's ways to do it. For example, take the 4 little circles outlying the face- the upper and lower circles could be swapped with the image of the face and made a little larger. Then the symbol inside the circle could be the center image.

TwoPieceFeed wrote:I have to say that I like these a LOT.

I don't have any criticisms based on the images shared.

Edit: At first I didn't pay attention to the text of the post, because of the OP's tendency to pun me to death, but since they're available to purchase right now I will have to buy a couple.

Also - ₹1,200.00 is USD $17.80.

yea, what can I say; I'm an oppuntunist I really try to keep the OP as neutral as possible so you can usually bet I'm not going to pun in the OP; but yea, it's also probably a good idea to keep your expectations very, very low lol in that regard

Merlebird wrote:I do think that if you're going to put a face on the back - and I think it works and is appropriate here - you almost have to do a one-way back. I've never seen a mirrored face on a two-way back that looked good.

I agree; mirrored faces look off and the one-way back doesn't bother me as much as wishing the back design of the cards had been the same awesome back design of the tuck case - I don't even know why the artist decided to make a different design at all when the back of that tuck is perfection as is! They should've just thrown that on the card backs! God I wish they had! lol

Anyways, the cards themselves are also only one-way - if you look closely, you'll see on one side, the name of the character depicted is in English, while on the other side, in Hindi. I like having the two languages so this doesn't really bother me much, but I would agree that it would've taken very, very little effort to make the faces two-way - but again, this really doesn't bother me much since the overall concept and design are so well executed.

PipChick wrote:

Merlebird wrote:I do think that if you're going to put a face on the back - and I think it works and is appropriate here - you almost have to do a one-way back. I've never seen a mirrored face on a two-way back that looked good.

I agree; mirrored faces look off and the one-way back doesn't bother me as much as wishing the back design of the cards had been the same awesome back design of the tuck case - I don't even know why the artist decided to make a different design at all when the back of that tuck is perfection as is! They should've just thrown that on the card backs! God I wish they had! lol

Oh my god, you're right. I didn't even notice that the back design was different from what was on the tuck. Why the hell would they do that...?

Merlebird wrote:

PipChick wrote:

Merlebird wrote:I do think that if you're going to put a face on the back - and I think it works and is appropriate here - you almost have to do a one-way back. I've never seen a mirrored face on a two-way back that looked good.

I agree; mirrored faces look off and the one-way back doesn't bother me as much as wishing the back design of the cards had been the same awesome back design of the tuck case - I don't even know why the artist decided to make a different design at all when the back of that tuck is perfection as is! They should've just thrown that on the card backs! God I wish they had! lol

Oh my god, you're right. I didn't even notice that the back design was different from what was on the tuck. Why the hell would they do that...?

OMG, RIGHT!?!?! lol

....

The first thing I thought when i saw the tuck is this

Now it makes me wonder from which deck were the aces knocked off?? and what other designs or parts of the designs have been stolen?? like, damn - this is deplorable

The card backs are literally the back of the citizens box.

"the Aces, Jokers, and court cards,were designed from scratch"

Well, at least they're being honest by not mentioning the tuck and back design? Lol. This is crazy though, apart from a couple changes the designs are perfect recreations down to the last detail! It's a shame, the courts are both unique and interesting, I wanted this deck for a brief moment, if you're able to do that much, why can't you design your own tuck and back?

This is just a ripoff of Medallions and Citizens...

edit: I see people already posted that..

SInce it's been mentioned, this whole thing has really been bothering me; so, not only did I comment on the designer's Behance page, but also spent an inordinate amount of time (more than I would've cared to) to spam up any sites even mentioning this deck including the designer's personal IG and the company's IG as well about the clearly ripped-off designs that he should be ashamed of claiming as his own and profiting from. I had also contacted both JC Desevre and Kevin Cantrell through Behance to make them aware of this art thief as well.

As of right now, both his profiles on Behance and IG have been deleted and JC has been messaging back with updates that he's already contacted Behance and Dribble (another platform where he has a profile featuring "his" work) and filed copyright infringement complaints through the sites against him. As of this post, his Dribble profile is still currently up, but JC posted a comment himself and I'm sure it won't be up for much longer.

What a shameful, inexcusable disgrace... thanks everyone for bringing this to light and I hope this ordeal that he's brought upon himself makes him think twice next time before stealing another's work.

EDIT: Designer's own site is now also down

That's why we are all here to discuss, complain, have fun and expose hehehe. When I first saw the pics it was instant recognition but weirdly enough I almost didn't say anything as I thought all would see it immediately. Then after a few days I could not resist

It's bound to happen that some tucks show similarities to others but this one is such a carbon copy ....

Wow, I didn't notice this. I'm not buying these since I already have the Medallions and Citizens decks.

badpete69 wrote:That's why we are all here to discuss, complain, have fun and expose hehehe. When I first saw the pics it was instant recognition but weirdly enough I almost didn't say anything as I thought all would see it immediately. Then after a few days I could not resist

It's bound to happen that some tucks show similarities to others but this one is such a carbon copy ....

I guess whenever I see new work posted on Behance by artists and designers themselves to showcase what they've been working on, I automatically take their word for it and assume it's their own - it's a shame, because now I'll be more wary of such blatantly obvious knock-offs

This is just gross misrepresentation of the designer through fraud and forgery by his own hand and I just hope that this matter of such egregious copyright infringement can be rectified before he and the company profit off the time, effort and work of designers that truly deserve the recognition. Now that the rightful creators/owners of the designs have been made aware that their art has been stolen, reproduced, and are currently being sold without their permission or a licence to do so, I can only imagine that the next legal course of action would be to demand the product is taken down from the site and have any remaining stock destroyed.

The fraudsters should be held accountable but it just sucks for the legitimate designers to have to spend their own time, effort and often money for legal costs to defend what is rightfully and legally theirs.

ugh, why can't people just not suck...?

PipChick wrote:

badpete69 wrote:That's why we are all here to discuss, complain, have fun and expose hehehe. When I first saw the pics it was instant recognition but weirdly enough I almost didn't say anything as I thought all would see it immediately. Then after a few days I could not resist

It's bound to happen that some tucks show similarities to others but this one is such a carbon copy ....

I guess whenever I see new work posted on Behance by artists and designers themselves to showcase what they've been working on, I automatically take their word for it and assume it's their own - it's a shame, because now I'll be more wary of such blatantly obvious knock-offs

This is just gross misrepresentation of the designer through fraud and forgery by his own hand and I just hope that this matter of such egregious copyright infringement can be rectified before he and the company profit off the time, effort and work of designers that truly deserve the recognition. Now that the rightful creators/owners of the designs have been made aware that their art has been stolen, reproduced, and are currently being sold without their permission or a licence to do so, I can only imagine that the next legal course of action would be to demand the product is taken down from the site and have any remaining stock destroyed.

The fraudsters should be held accountable but it just sucks for the legitimate designers to have to spend their own time, effort and often money for legal costs to defend what is rightfully and legally theirs.

ugh, why can't people just not suck...?

This is why people think UC is bitter. If you don't have your guards up you might get duped. Some may think we're negative but I beg to differ- scam artists like this are negative! Don't kill the messenger I say...

vasta41 wrote:This is why people think UC is bitter. If you don't have your guards up you might get duped. Some may think we're negative but I beg to differ- scam artists like this are negative! Don't kill the messenger I say...

agree; I myself, still being pretty new to the hobby, would not have instantly recognized the similarities had it not been pointed out and I'm sure many others might not have either; I had only shared this designer's work because I genuinely liked it and thought it could be of benefit to share with others who might also appreciate it - I honestly like cheering on the lesser known, little guys, but there's absolutely no respect in stealing.

And in all honesty, I think this also shows UC in a really positive light to all other deck designers; that there are people here that care enough to take measures in helping to defend and protect the integrity of their work when we see that it has been stolen or is being used without their knowledge or permission.

vasta41 wrote:

PipChick wrote:

badpete69 wrote:That's why we are all here to discuss, complain, have fun and expose hehehe. When I first saw the pics it was instant recognition but weirdly enough I almost didn't say anything as I thought all would see it immediately. Then after a few days I could not resist

It's bound to happen that some tucks show similarities to others but this one is such a carbon copy ....

I guess whenever I see new work posted on Behance by artists and designers themselves to showcase what they've been working on, I automatically take their word for it and assume it's their own - it's a shame, because now I'll be more wary of such blatantly obvious knock-offs

This is just gross misrepresentation of the designer through fraud and forgery by his own hand and I just hope that this matter of such egregious copyright infringement can be rectified before he and the company profit off the time, effort and work of designers that truly deserve the recognition. Now that the rightful creators/owners of the designs have been made aware that their art has been stolen, reproduced, and are currently being sold without their permission or a licence to do so, I can only imagine that the next legal course of action would be to demand the product is taken down from the site and have any remaining stock destroyed.

The fraudsters should be held accountable but it just sucks for the legitimate designers to have to spend their own time, effort and often money for legal costs to defend what is rightfully and legally theirs.

ugh, why can't people just not suck...?

This is why people think UC is bitter. If you don't have your guards up you might get duped. Some may think we're negative but I beg to differ- scam artists like this are negative! Don't kill the messenger I say...

UC is a great community with vast collected intelligence and knowledge. I love that we can all 'look out' for designers and collectors alike.

Something did seem oddly familiar about the tuck, good catch badpete.

Also, took a closer look at the court cards, I believe that may have been lifted from somewhere else, as the only variation between the courts is the Queens have oddly larger hands that don't match the illustrative style of the rest of the line art (might have been lifted from other work). That is to say the Kings, Queens and Jacks all share the same basic vector line-work for the head/body-- it's just colored differently. Don't believe me? Look hard at the images again. The Kings and Jacks are basically identical, the only difference between them and the Queens are the hands. This might be thematic as I believe the traditional Kathakali was typically performed by men and, in similar fashion to Japanese Noh theatre, relied heavily on the use of make-up and masks (or distinct, standardized facial expressions to express the character's emotion). But, still, I think that's kind of lazy. One design recolored 12 times counts as "fully custom courts"? I wouldn't be shocked at this point to find that they lifted the line art from another designer's deck.

Wow, this has got to be the worst case of "original" art since the "Persian Empire" deck: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1972&start=20&hilit ... ying+cards

For those unfamiliar... the good stuff starts on page 2.

th4mo wrote:Wow, this has got to be the worst case of "original" art since the "Persian Empire" deck: viewtopic.php?f=8&t=1972&start=20&hilit ... ying+cards

For those unfamiliar... the good stuff starts on page 2.

Now, after reading the whole thread (more or less), I want to know whether Mike got his deck.

th4mo wrote:For those unfamiliar...

Oh damn, I have that deck, I never had a clue about this kerfuffle :/