Card Sizes

Thread originally posted on the Aeclectic Tarot Forum on 17 Aug 2004, and now archived in the Forum Library.

cirom	17 Aug 2004
As usual, the tarot communty seems to be split it in its opinions regarding their preferences for the size of their decks. Various people have commented that the Gilded would have been better at a larger size. In other cases I've noted several posts indicating that larger cards are difficult to handle and shuffle (obviously for those with smaller hands). I'm interested in feedback, as I'd like to take it into consideration for my next project. What takes priority, would the appeal of a larger deck overide any difficulty with shuffling etc, or the opposite, does the physical ease of use take priority. The eternal question....Does size matter :-)

lunakasha	17 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by cirom The eternal question....Does size matter :-) Well......when it comes to tarot cards, I personally prefer a medium-sized deck that is easier to shuffle....although larger cards are nice for looking at detail....I guess it really depends upon personal preference and whether or not the deck is expected to be a "reading" deck versus one used mainly for study, meditation etc.... I really like the size of the Gilded cards...although in the case of the Limited Edition deck, it is the thickness of the cards (rather than length/width) that makes them tricky to shuffle!!! :P :) Luna

darwinia	17 Aug 2004
I like BIG cards. 3 x 5 inch or close to that seems to be a standard for large cards but I would love 4 x 6.

WolfSpirit	17 Aug 2004
For decks with a lot of detail, like the Gilded seems to be, I like cards that are bigger than average. I like the size of the Baroque Bohemian Cats Tarot, a bit bigger but still manageable.

Moonbow*	17 Aug 2004
When it comes to art decks there is no doubt in my mind that you have to be able to see the art properly. :) I think it's a great shame for the artist not to have their work shown off to it's best advantage. Ok, stuffling is difficult with some larger decks, but not impossible. I think the reader would be able to cope with it better than a client. I tend to arc the cards and choose anyway so if the deck isn't shuffled too well, it really doesn't matter. I personally like to see as much detail as possible. I love the Rohrig and it has never caused me problems with shuffling. Some decks have too much border too which means the artist's work is even smaller. So.... yes...... size DOES matter :)

Aun	17 Aug 2004
I think that larger decks (take the large 'green' Thoth as reference) are terrible for conventional shuffling. However, I don't use the 'conventional shuffling method'. I spread the whole deck on a table and mix the cards all around (with the help of the querent when reading for others). It takes more physical space, but i think it provides with a better mix, also allowing more accuracy on reversals. With that in mind, I always vote for larger decks, since it provides a better level of graphic details.

full deck	17 Aug 2004
I realize that it may not be practical but how about two sizes: one smaller and the other larger. Personally, I like larger cards since they can fill my hands and it allows the artwork to breathe. The only problems I get are shuffling larger decks like the Minchiate.

Sulis	17 Aug 2004
I prefer medium sized decks - think the standard US Games size. I just don't end up using decks which are oversized. Love sulis xx

babyd	17 Aug 2004
Having seen some samples of this new project I would safely say that a slightly larger than standard card size would help greatly in this case. The depth of imagery of this project can only be aided by a larger card. I feel a lot of the wow impact would be lost on a card the size of the standard Gilded tarot. It would be a better choice for meditation also. A happy medium needs to be reached though as really large cards can be a nightmare to some, though i do like larger cards personally. Same as Lunakasha, I think the card thickness is more of an issue as thicker cards are far more of a problem than larger cards. Can't wait to see more Ciro, what I have seen is breath-taking. hugs babyd

fairyhedgehog	17 Aug 2004
Small is good! I like Hanson-Roberts and playing-card sized decks myself. Not just for the shuffling - they just feel right to me. Oh, and the Shakespearian is the very best deck ever for the feel of it :)

Rose	17 Aug 2004
Borderless cards are one way to increase the size of the image without making the cards to large to handle or to expensive for the publishers to produce. Personally I like slightly larger cards--my favorite size is about 3 x 5 inches.

Majecot	17 Aug 2004
I like BIG decks too. I like borderless. big decks. Rohrig is the first deck I ever saw up close and has long been my favorite. Gilded is a beautiful deck, it would have been stunning as an oversized. But is a personal preferance. I think most people perfer the easier to carry, eaiser to shuffle size.

Dakota	17 Aug 2004
BIG deck fan here.............. but not surprisingly since I first got interested in tarot because of the beautiful artwork in the decks. And I find that a BBBBIIIGGG magnifying glass is a must too! I might never actually shuffle some of these decks.........

Niomi	17 Aug 2004
I'd rather have no borders than big cards. I have very tiny hands, and decks like Thoth are impossible to shuffle, getting rid of the border on the Thoth would help me some. I already have a hard time with my Ancient Egyptian which is a bit thicker, wider and shorter than average. But, if my family would let me, I would love to put Thoth on my bedroom wall. ^_^

Alta	17 Aug 2004
I didn't realize it until I held it but I find that the 2nd edition of Tarot of Prague is the perfect size. It is 128mm X 78 mm. (It is slightly larger than the 1st edition). As far as size, I find the really larger decks, e.g. Victoria Regina and Rohrig very difficult to handle.... and keep in mind I am nearly 6 feet tall and have very long hands. 128mm X 78 mm is a reasonable size even for an art deck, the is enough space for detail. But after all these are decks, meant to be used, not just looked at. Other things: Finish/varnish, whatever coats the cards. I prefer slightly matte and thick enough that I feel secure using the cards. But not too thick, like the Doreen Virtue cards which are awful that way. The feel of the card stock. Osho Zen for example. Now I love this deck, but the cards are so stiff that that it is impossible to riffle shuffle, which is what I do. The cards should be flexible, not thin and not thick, but flexible.

littlehermit	17 Aug 2004
Another vote for small - I have small hands and find it very cumbersome to shuffle larger decks; besides which, querents have an awful time with anything much larger than the average playing card deck, and I find that when they have a hard time shuffling I have a hard time reading the throw. A larger deck, or accompanying book with bigger pics, would be a nice addition for study purposes, but for regular readings I'd pretty much insist on a deck that's small enough to handle easily.

Red Emma	17 Aug 2004
Sometimes littler, sometimes bigger By that I mean that the small Motherpeace is hard for me to shuffle. I prefer the larger deck. On the other hand both the Goddess deck and the Sacred Circle are too big for me. I can shuffle them, it's just hard and takes a lot of patience and concentration. Both of which the Goddess shorted me on at birth.

VGimlet	17 Aug 2004
I have small hands, but I like the larger decks - perhaps because I learned to shuffle with my Aquarian deck. For those of you without it, it's between the Thoth and a regular sized deck. I like the larger decks because of the detail but smaller decks are certainly easier for other people and querants to shuffle.

cundi	17 Aug 2004
I vote for BIG deck, but what's perfect is one BIG and one Standard/Small since I usually keep 2 sets of a favourite deck.

janstar17	18 Aug 2004
I am another 'blessed' with small hands but I like a large deck because of the ease of falling into an image...especially for a querent who may not be familiar with tarot images. I like to ask querents what they see in a card depending on the reading. With a deck that has such beautiful artwork like The Gilded -- bigger is definitely better IMHO!!

Shalott	18 Aug 2004
I've found the perfect sized deck for me is the Fournier Marseille. It's smaller than standard, but not toosmall. Like most "pocket" sized decks are too small, I think. Too the point of being difficult to shuffle, and I have small hands. I've tried the mixing on the table method but just doesn't seem right to me, so when the tendonitis is acting up in my typin' hand, I go for the Fournier.

Jewel-ry	18 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Shalott I've found the perfect sized deck for me is the Fournier Marseille. It's smaller than standard, but not too small. Like most "pocket" sized decks are too small, I think. I was coming on here deliberately to say this and then found Shalott's post. The Fournier, is absolutely perfect size for holding and shuffling. It sits easily in the hand. In fact, it is quite easy to sit and shuffle and do nothing else with it because it feels so good! That said, I also agree with Marion about the ToPrague 2nd edition. This deck is not small but its size is quite good for shuffling. You might want to look at the card stock and finish too, it is very, very good. I suppose it all depends on the amount of fine detail to go into the card. The Gendron deck for instance is frustrating because I just can't see the busy-ness in the cards. There is too much detail for the size of the card imo. :)

sunflowr	18 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by cirom As usual, the tarot communty seems to be split it in its opinions regarding their preferences for the size of their decks. Various people have commented that the Gilded would have been better at a larger size. In other cases I've noted several posts indicating that larger cards are difficult to handle and shuffle (obviously for those with smaller hands). I'm interested in feedback, as I'd like to take it into consideration for my next project. What takes priority, would the appeal of a larger deck overide any difficulty with shuffling etc, or the opposite, does the physical ease of use take priority. The eternal question....Does size matter :-) I like smaller cards. Ease of shuffling is 1st priority for me. The size of the Gilded is perfect, IMO.

Tarot Galadriel	18 Aug 2004
I was sitting last night shuffling my Llewellyn version of the Gilded and I realised it was so lovely to shuffle. It is not the length of the card so much but the width, they are just slightly narrower, making them a dream to shuffle and so comfortable in the hand. I do like larger cards, but I prefer the tall, narrower ones, I really do not like the more square shaped cards, they are always difficult to shuffle. So tall, narrow cards are perfect to me !

baba-prague	18 Aug 2004
Just to say that when we initiated a thread like this some time back we also found a lot of different opinions. The size that we came up with (which I'm very glad to hear Marion likes so much) seemed a good solution. However, we are very aware that the BBCats cards can't show all the detail at this size which is one strong reason for doing a very large version. The horrible truth is probably that a two-size solution is ideal for users, but of course it can be complex and pricey for the designers/publishers. Astra may also have some comments as she is one of the few people I know of how recently produced a deck in two sizes.

ferrous	18 Aug 2004
I am another one of these small-handed people. The perfect shuffling size for my hands is the African tarot, the cards which are about as big as a smallish pack of playing cards. Having said that though, for general handling, I've found the longer, skinnier ones to be very nice. My Sakki-Sakki (which I'm beginning to suspect is perfect in every way ;)) is about 2½ by 4½ inches & it's lovely. Nice & slim for relative ease of shuffling, but still large enough to feel like a 'real' deck.

MeeWah	18 Aug 2004
Although I have small hands, I am not particular about deck size as long as the artwork does not suffer from too small a deck size. There is nothing worse than feeling a need for a magnifying glass (other than hitting a reading block, that is). Granted the smaller or less wide decks are easier to handle, but some decks seem to require a larger size in order to showcase their artwork & details. Such as the Thoth, The Ancient Egyptian, Templar, Baroque Bohemian Cats. Besides, I tend to shuffle all decks regardless of size in the same manner to avoid damage--the riffle style, I think.

ambermoon	18 Aug 2004
At first I thought that size DID matter, but I realized that flexibility is more important. I can't shuffle stiff cards or clingy cards, no matter how small they are. Something must be flexible, and since my hands aren't, the cards must be. So, anything the size of the standard RWS or even a bit larger is OK, as long as the cards are springy, and do not cling together. ambermoon

The 78th Fool	18 Aug 2004
The ideal size of cards for me are Llewellyn's standard size, like the commercial printing of the Gilded. For a man, I've got smaller than average size hands so these cards are very comfortable to shuffle. Saying that however, there's nothing more lavish than a specialised 'large' edition of a deck. One of my favourite acquisitions has been the Giant Rider Waite. I tend to reserve this for special readings, for example if someone comes to me with a particularly important situation and the reading requires that bit extra gravity. Using such large cards has an almost ceremonial feel to it for me and helps to reflect the importance of such situations. Can I have a Giant Gilded please ??? !! Chris. xx Edited 21/08/04 - Have just obtained the Rohrig this week and the Light and Shadow Tarot several weeks ago. Neither are quite as large as the Giant Rider Waite but they are similarly imposing and I will probably use them for the same purpose. Both decks have blown me away incidentally.

Nydia	18 Aug 2004
I prefer the Hanson-Roberts size. I choose decks for their beauty first. If a deck is smaller than normal, that is a bonus for me. I think borders are often pretty, but I would sacrifice the borders to make the cards smaller. The artwork would still be the same size. Although it's an option, I don't plan on cutting my own cards to make them smaller.

BlueLotus	19 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by Red Emma Sometimes littler, sometimes bigger By that I mean that the small Motherpeace is hard for me to shuffle. I prefer the larger deck I received my small motherpeace a couple of days ago, and find it a bit strange to hold in my hand though, due to its shape. Although I was aware that it was smallish, I was not sure how small ( should have done my homework better ). But I like it nevertheless. I am not sure I want the big one though because I may have issues with it as well. For me the small one although has miniature artwork, shuffles good, though I have a bit of a problem with cards turning anywhich way they do, since I find myself automatically turning the cards the right way, before I realize what I have done. But overall I like this deck and I believe it speaks to me in an honest way.

Astra	19 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by baba-prague Astra may also have some comments as she is one of the few people I know of how recently produced a deck in two sizes. Astra thinks that the smaller decks may eventually sell, but so far the only ones that have taken them are two of my friends (can't count them for statistical purposes) and the Tarot Garden. Otherwise, on my admittedly small sample of sales so far, standard sized decks are winning hands down. I suspect that I may get more sales of the mini-decks once (hopefully!) the WorldTree Tarot has established itself, but I also suspect that, with a few exceptions, they will be second decks for people who have bought the standard size. Even though my graphics have come through surprisingly well in the mini-deck, it seems reasonable that people will tend to want the larger cards to look at first.

M-Press	21 Aug 2004
I have as large hands, but shuffling big cards is a problem for me too. The other problem with big cards, is that you need a large table too, and that is very often not the case. When i use big cards (I hardly do), I only do a 3-card spread, otherwise we have to move to the floor. I also like carrying my cards with me if I go to a cafe with friends or something, and if the deck is too large, it just doesn't fit my bag (or everyone knows I have them with me, and it's "working" time...! I like to carry them and take them out only if I wish... I really like the size of my Marseilles-small but not tiny... I think though, that it also depends on the art: a graphic, bold style, can look great in smaller, but something with much detail, makes you feel as if there was a compromise there. My suggestion then would be to "follow the art", and do what will flatter it most, without being extreme in your choice (not too big , not too small). I would do a Majors deck only-bigger.... It's great to hear that "you are staying" ciro! :)

smokey	21 Aug 2004
Quote: Originally posted by babyd Having seen some samples of this new project I would safely say that a slightly larger than standard card size would help greatly in this case. Can't wait to see more Ciro, what I have seen is breath-taking. I like the larger size to see small details and personally, I prefer no borders, as I feel this adds more to each card. New project ?

astril	21 Aug 2004
Large decks are cumbersome, hard to carry with you for those spontaneous readings, and personally, I think they lose some of the crispness in the artwork when they are too big. But the top reason for a smaller deck preference? I have small hands!

tmgrl2	21 Aug 2004
I like them any size. Your GT LE, as Luna said, is tricky to shuffle, but I have my sitter shuffle the old fashioned way...then cut several times, then deal from one pile to another....so where there's a desire, there's a way. I love reading with the LE. I also like the size of your mass-produced deck. I find it easy to shuffle of course...I can use my old poker players ripple with them since they are so smooth and slide together easily. People think I got that from reading Tarot, but really, my three teenage brothers taught me that shuffle when I was a little girl. We used to play a lot of poker. So....to some it may matter. I take the deck as having the energy of the creator/designer and use it as designed without questioning it's size. There are reasons other than size that I don't like decks. Size is not one of them. terri

lionette	21 Aug 2004
Large is better! The size of the Light & Shadow is great (sorry no ruler handy to measure) to view the art and still be managable. No keywords, please. Just enough border to enhance the design. Please just one language for the type -- any language but only one.

cirom	21 Aug 2004
Wow, a tremendous response, thank you all for taking the time. Surprise surprise a whole range of opinions, so what does one do ? Produce a smaller or standard, for ease of shuffling and transportation, or larger to better show the style of the artwork ?? How about both, well sort of anyway. I'll be updating my web site in a few days with more info.

lionette	21 Aug 2004
A more practical side ... Production costs might be something to consider. I've not dealt with this personally, but there may well be certain "standards" in the printing/production part that could sway your decisions by making the deck easier to produce or more cost effective.

Majecot	22 Aug 2004
Well on the impractical side :D..... I for one would be interested in a borderless oversized version... Poor Ciro... It cannot be an easy decision. On the practical side of things, you cannot please everyone, and it is good business sense to go with the standard sized deck. I do feel the borders do take away from the artwork.

dolphingirl	22 Aug 2004
My favorite sized deck is my miniature Albano Waite, it is just the perfect size for shuffling and toting around. I really love pocket sized decks myself, there so much fun and easy to store.

The Card Sizes thread was originally posted on 17 Aug 2004 in the Talking Tarot board, and is now archived in the Forum Library. Read the active threads in Talking Tarot, or read more archived threads.