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

So, I've noticed in some reviews and comments that some people don't like when a back design is borderless, but with no explanation, what is your opinon? Borders are better for magic for some reason?
I could think about two explanations (besides simple personal taste): Custom backs draws could get damaged easily with time passing by and the other is to avoid print errors to be seen.
Personaly, I like borderless desgins especially if the back design is a pattern, so the fan looks nice (Bee's and Vintage Plaid for example)but I've seen Bee's (especially custom) with border, so I was wondering if this is some kind of universal preference.
(I only prefer borderless backs for these kind of decks, for others I don't mind if there is a border or not)

Any thoughts?

Not a magician but I heard it is better for magic since you can hide a turned over card better in a deck without flashing it.

For me personally I don't have a preference. It just has to suit the design. Some designs do look better with a thin border, some with a standard or thick border and some are made to be borderless/full bleed.
Virtuoso from the virts for example look - at least to me - better borderless. SS15 is still my favourite of all Virtuoso decks but only because of the supreme handling (which I weight in a lot) and the nice teal/light red colour combo. The design itself works better on the SS16/FW17, imo.

I agree with Harvey that it depends on the design, but I find myself leaning towards borderless more often just because decks with borders far outweigh the number of borderless decks. A type there's even less of is something in-between, where it has borders but elements stretch out across them or even bleeding off the edge.

I am also usually against very thick borders because it takes away so much valuable real estate that could be utilized by actual artwork.

I think it's because of the difference in use. A general look would be that collectors don't care as long as it looks good and pretty or fulfills the collectors aesthetic desires. For magicians they probably like borders because it has a lower chance of flashing and the whites blend in and slight mistakes are more forgiving. While on the opposite side borderless decks are meant for showing off movement generally more ugly in design but it makes moving the cards in non-smooth ways very apparent and ugly but if you do things correctly will look great.

Correct me if I'm wrong.

While I like the look of a borderless card, the utility takes a hit, as the deck usually looks worn around the edges a lot quicker than a bordered deck (depending on the border color).

As one who does gambling sleight of hand, I love me some borderless card backs. Helps with the false deals

I see no reason why a fully custom deck would have borders.

Harvonsgard wrote:Not a magician but I heard it is better for magic since you can hide a turned over card better in a deck without flashing it.

Thanks, that makes sense. I'm learning one or two tricks but I have a standard Bicycle just for that, so I won't be using any other deck for it.

As I said, for me it doesn't matter as long it looks good, but yeah, lately I'm going for borderless decks more often.
And I agree that tick borders are a waste of space