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

For anyone not aware the USPC is currently working on a new 808 member's deck. Any current gold members who participate in any part of the process will get the deck free when it is produced. It seems their current timeline is to have the art done and revealed by the end of May. The art will be done by an artist named Georgia Young. Currently members have submitted themes and 3 potential themes were selected; astronomy, medieval/knight, and Hollywood/art deco. At the moment the USPC is holding a vote for the theme and currently astronomy is leading the pack and medieval/knight is not far behind. Members will be able to vote on the ace of spades May 9-12, the card back during May 18-22, and the pips during May 27-31.

Personally I think this is a pretty cool thing for the USPC to do.

jerichoholic wrote:At the moment the USPC is holding a vote for the theme and currently astronomy is leading the pack and medieval/knight is not far behind.

Ugh, I would pick the INVERSE order of that. Somebody vote 10x for me!

It is neat that they are doing something with this again and getting involvement to make more decks. Sad it's now limited to gold members, which is based on volume of purchases, instead of a standard membership fee like before though.

Actually I believe the deck will be available to all members but only gold get to vote and get one free.

There can be never enough Art Deco decks because there can never be enough Art Deco.

Give Art Deco some more love.

Art Deco was my theme suggestion, and while it pretty much has no chance to win I still voted for it. Probably should've voted for Astronomy though as I'd rather see that than knights

Did they have any more details or art work samples? Just going off a theme isn't really much to vote on here, all can be awesome or total crap depending on implementation.

I do realize it will be made available to all, but sad only gold members get to vote (I suppose they should have some benefits, but if you want to sell to the entire group...), so please keep us peons updated on what happens.

ecNate wrote:Did they have any more details or art work samples?

Nope.
I was thinking the knight/medieval theme would be cool if they did some sort of armor (or armored knight) for the backs and gave it the MetalLuxe treatment on the armor. I have a feeling I'm dreaming too big, though. Imagining a knight in shining armor but will end up a with a retard in tin foil. LOL

Astronomy is in the lead this morning.

And Astronomy won by one vote.

PrincessTrouble wrote:And Astronomy won by one vote.

So disappointing art deco wasn't even close, but any of these themes has the potential to be awesome if done right.

Hmmm, astronomy one by only one vote huh? Sounds like a conspiracy to me by those with a vested interest, probably:

Where can we go to vote on the Ace of Spades? I became a gold member after the initial voting round and I didn't receive any email.

Michelle wrote:Where can we go to vote on the Ace of Spades? I became a gold member after the initial voting round and I didn't receive any email.

Here I think: http://bicycleplayingcards.cmail19.com/ ... hihcuhk-n/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Thanks for the link! I voted, hopefully I'm eligible.

I just now got the email to vote, so I would check your inbox again in a little bit.

I voted for Idea 2. I don't like the idea of a "face" on the ace, so I discounted Idea 1. And Idea 3 is too rough for me to imagine.

Same, it resembles a king too much. I also voted for the second.
I just got the confirmation email for my vote so at least I know it registered.

PrincessTrouble wrote:I just now got the email to vote, so I would check your inbox again in a little bit.

I voted for Idea 2. I don't like the idea of a "face" on the ace, so I discounted Idea 1.

I agree. I don't even understand how that's an option? If there's a FACE on a card, it should be a FACE card... self explanatory.

Yeah, I almost feel like #2 was the only one that was going to make from the start. #1 and #3 seemed to be there as just "other options" and weren't as fleshed-out as #2.

I can't imagine anyone picking #3, and as everyone has already said, #1 looked more like a court card than an ace with the face on it.

Idea 3 was definitely a no for me on the ace of spade.

I was actually a bit tempted to vote for number 3, as it was the most "on theme", but it was also a little cheesy, so I voted for number 2 instead.

#3 reminds me of the perspective deck. Looked rubbish there, not much better here. Very little detail.

I felt the crowns on the first two designs seem out of place - it's like Georgia is trying to make a face card for the Ace (as Vasta41 said).

A vote for #2 seems only logical - it's interesting that we all seemed to do the same. The 808 idea is interesting, but the spade itself needs to be made the centrepiece - very plain. Of course, the 'all seeing eye' thing is here.. not sure about it's astronomical links.

In summary, none of this is making me optimistic about the design of this deck - I know it's only a rough concept as this stage. These designs remind me of something I might come up with if someone forced me to design a deck - and that ain't a good thing! Hoping we see a cohesive finished design (and deck) at the end of all this.

Everytime I see this thread title, I can't help but think of this:

Card back voting is underway.

What did everyone vote for the back? I think I went for option 3. Thought the back designs were generally much better than the ace designs.

1 and 3 were the stand-outs for me (although 2 could have been great if it had been sufficiently developed). In the end, I chose 1. But, yeah, 3 was a good choice, too.

I really loved #1. The last few seemed too plain to me, but maybe I just like more non-abstract designs.

Pip voting time now. I'm on the fence between 2 and 3. Which one do you like better?

I choose 2, thought it was much more interesting

I went for #3 as I wasn't sure which aspect they're after with #2. Plus the second option just seemed a bit "too much" for what is shaping up to be a nice deck.

chach wrote:I went for #3 as I wasn't sure which aspect they're after with #2. Plus the second option just seemed a bit "too much" for what is shaping up to be a nice deck.

Likewise.