Rogues' Gallery - poorly printed decks!

[kem-collector]

gallery.JPG (67.46 KiB) Viewed 10774 times

Post the worst deck offenders you run across here!

[kem-collector]

Ran across this on Reddit today. Really bad registration from USPCC. Shame!

[hsbc]

[Eric Lee]

Ran across this on Reddit today. Really bad registration from USPCC. Shame!

13nbr98bhig41.jpg

Damn, that's seriously bad. Probably the worst ever. Forget seconds, this shouldn't even be in a twenty secondth deck. You even get the printer code in the deck! Would like to see 1 worse than this from USPCC.

[Harvonsgard]

To add some tropical vibes

stolen from reddit

13D3E5DE-0CDD-4ED4-9968-ABCC86842967.jpeg (37.43 KiB) Viewed 10705 times

And to add some variation a nicely sealed tuck as well

stolen from reddit for sure

Forgot about these beauties

stolen from you guessed it :)

[Decknowledgy]

Gatorbacks incoming (from myself):

Also, I think this thread should be renamed as the "Bad USPCC Registration" thread since the main issue is USPCC's recent subpar registration that's annoying the heck out of user's experience. We need to get enough people to recognize the issue and to provide the feedback to USPCC through creators and producers who are at the frontline of communications with the printing giant.

[kem-collector]

Also, I think this thread should be renamed as the "Bad USPCC Registration" thread since the main issue is USPCC's recent subpar registration that's annoying the heck out of user's experience. We need to get enough people to recognize the issue and to provide the feedback to USPCC through creators and producers who are at the frontline of communications with the printing giant.

I can go along with that. If a thread can possibly get the attention of USPCC, I am all for it.

[Harvonsgard]

Change the title to mostly USPCC or keep it neutral! The Shin Lim Regalia with the misaligned foil are printed in Belgium by Cartamundi. Plus I have seen bad Copag Neos as well. It's not that the other companies never have something slipping through quality control.

[PrincessTrouble]

Monarch Mandarin Edition

[PrincessTrouble]

Kings Wild No. 13 Table Players

[markzero]

Wow. I generally open my decks, but I've just been enjoying the art, I haven't been on the lookout for printer errors. I guess I should check the more limited editions closely.

How likely is it for publishers to exchange these, nowadays? (If they even can, for those with small print runs.) Or is that something to discuss and track in another thread?

[PrincessTrouble]

How likely is it for publishers to exchange these, nowadays? (If they even can, for those with small print runs.) Or is that something to discuss and track in another thread?

Jackson saw my picture and replaced my KW deck. Lotrek has offered before to send replacement cards for the ones that were poorly registered in my deck after seeing my picture of one of his decks. But those are the only two publishers that have done that for me and both interacted with me here on UC. I have no idea if T11 or DB or any other "big dog" would care to replace a deck due to registration.

[Harvonsgard]

Jackson replaced them. From personal experience I can tell that Lotrék does this as well. Most creators will do, too. Problem with custom playing cards is that if they are pretty limited and already sold out, nothing to replace. USPCC replaces standard decks (Guarantee joker) but only the standard decks. So Walmart exclusive Bikes for example have to be replaced by Walmart themself.

[masagin303]

Not That bad but still off. 5th Kingdom playing cards, USPCC.




Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Harvonsgard]

Tilted irks me somehow more then just offset . If the tilt wouldn't be it looks like they would actually be perfect.

[masagin303]

Tilted irks me somehow more then just offset . If the tilt wouldn't be it looks like they would actually be perfect.

I can understand that, there's somehow more chaos in the tilt. But if it's a clean tilt the deck is at least still two-way.

Edit: not in this case tho cause it's one-way by design.

[Harvonsgard]

Time for a classic back design

Yummy borders...

[kem-collector]

The classics always bring a tear to my eye...

It also looks like it was clipped in the center on the left, or that card was the last card at the end of the sheet edge.

[RelativityCards]

Uncut sheets have partial cuts between each card, presumeably for registration / alignment. It looks like this one was so off that it was cut slightly beyond that registration cut!

[Kage X]

As Eric Lee mentioned in one of the other threads, I found an old Aladdin deck in my parents' house. Printed in Ohio with off-set blue seal. Even then the registration on the back was a bit-off. Can anyone identify what year this was printed based on the code on the AoS? There's no barcode or ad-copy on the bottom of the tuck box, just "1001 Aladdin".

Closer look

[Harvonsgard]

[RelativityCards]

Just for fun, here's a page from USPCC's custom card guidelines:

[STLBluesNut]

So that 3/64" is what they allow as fine? It looks awful.

Sent from my S10+ using Tapatalk

[RelativityCards]

Yeah. I think I've mentioned elsewhere that if you go beyond their recommended border, they charge $.25 per deck to hit higher tolerances. No idea how precise they get at the extra cost though.

[Harvonsgard]

If I converted correctley that is 0.12 cm. If that is the total margin, it would be fine. If that is what it is allowed to go one way and the other way than it's pretty much.

[Eric Lee]

Just for fun, here's a page from USPCC's custom card guidelines:

border limitations.PNG

So that explains why so many decks turn out like that with USPCC. It falls within their 3/64 range. That's pretty bad.

[PiazzaDelivery]

I wonder how much a designer would have to pay in order to enforce proper quality assurance. Maybe "mistakenly" pay an extra $100 and conspicuously hint at how much you'd appreciate accurate cuts?

Although I also wonder what kind of precedent that might set. "Limited time offer only $99.99 for perfect registration." Why can't they just get it right to begin with...

[Harvonsgard]

If you run smaller error margins either your production speed will have to go down (which costs you money) or you will produce more waste (which costs you money again). That's the main reason. I imagine that the profit margins per deck are tiny, therefore USPCC wants you to compensate for smaller tolerances.

[RelativityCards]

I was in contact with USPCC today about this for a deck I'm working on and they said that you can't actually pay more to get tighter tolerances... just that if you do thinner borders you have to pay more. They won't guarantee it will be more accurate. They just charge you.

Thanks for this question - there is a lot of miss-information out there. We’ve never offered tighter registration for a deck with thinner borders. We’ve charged more for a deck with artwork that goes past the thinner border line; however, we no longer allow this either (very recent change).

So now you can't do borders thinner than Monarchs anyway.

This is a weeeeiiiiird change, post-Cartamundi. Does Cartamundi have any problem with registration? Are their cuts always good?

Of course, Cartamundi has had their own issues (tuck boxes )

[kem-collector]

I wonder if what is going on is just a limitation on the printing equipment that they are using. I am sure with more modern printing equipment, registration can be more precise but how much would that retool cost? Just speculation though.