Waterproof RWS on eBay and Etsy?

Darytessekhmet

That would be nice if he were receptive. I agree the pebbled back would look much better all the way to the edges.
 

garmonbozia

I'm not an expert in tarot edition identification, and the the colors are different because it's a repro, so I'm not 100% sure. Nevertheless, it looks like Pam A (not the Roses and Lilies, especially since the back is pebbled). There's probably someone on here who would be a better judge.

Thanks Galahad!

I figured it was an A based on the box cover, and since most published RWS decks are based on As.

I was hoping for something different than an A.

I probably won't buy one of the regular decks now, but might get one of the waterproof decks for sturdy outside use.
 

Galahad

No problem. :)

The Sun looks stern in Pam A, lol.

I'm still learning, so out of curiosity, out of all these older Pam editions, what's like the most coveted or considered the best?
 

Celice

Just got the regular poker sized version of this deck and I'm disappointed. The card stock feels a bit thin but it is ok. The seller shipped in a large box without padding or taping the deck box closed so it arrived with the deck box open and cards loose everywhere. But what's really disappointing is that after looking at the cards closer I realized the image proportions look a bit funny so I compared it to my PCS commemorative tarot in a tin and see that they didn't adjust the images or add wider borders to accommodate for poker sized cards being wider than standard tarot cards when sized down so basically all the images are stretched too wide. I would recommend passing on this deck
 

Galahad

Just got the regular poker sized version of this deck and I'm disappointed. The card stock feels a bit thin but it is ok. The seller shipped in a large box without padding or taping the deck box closed so it arrived with the deck box open and cards loose everywhere. But what's really disappointing is that after looking at the cards closer I realized the image proportions look a bit funny so I compared it to my PCS commemorative tarot in a tin and see that they didn't adjust the images or add wider borders to accommodate for poker sized cards being wider than standard tarot cards when sized down so basically all the images are stretched too wide. I would recommend passing on this deck

Sorry to hear about your package delivery. :(

Yeah, I just compared my poker version to my Albano-Waite, and you're right about the image proportions being stretched. From looking at Darytessekhmet's images of the standard sized version, those proportions look normal, but correct me if I'm wrong.

If I were to guess, I think the image proportion might be an issue with the giant sized deck, too. :/

I think the seller/company ought to make some changes...
 

FLizarraga

Just got the regular poker sized version of this deck and I'm disappointed. The card stock feels a bit thin but it is ok. The seller shipped in a large box without padding or taping the deck box closed so it arrived with the deck box open and cards loose everywhere. But what's really disappointing is that after looking at the cards closer I realized the image proportions look a bit funny so I compared it to my PCS commemorative tarot in a tin and see that they didn't adjust the images or add wider borders to accommodate for poker sized cards being wider than standard tarot cards when sized down so basically all the images are stretched too wide. I would recommend passing on this deck

Sorry to hear about your package delivery. :(

Yeah, I just compared my poker version to my Albano-Waite, and you're right about the image proportions being stretched. From looking at Darytessekhmet's images of the standard sized version, those proportions look normal, but correct me if I'm wrong.

If I were to guess, I think the image proportion might be an issue with the giant sized deck, too. :/

I think the seller/company ought to make some changes...



Ugh. I bumped into this thread and bought the cheaper version before seeing these comments. Oh, well. For $17, it's not the end of the world.

I sort of started seeing the stretching in the online scans too, but it might be all in my head.

I agree that it seems to be a Pam A reproduction, at least judging by the pebbled backs. It will be interesting to compare it with the newest AGM version, which is also a Pam A reproduction, if I remember correctly. (Not an expert either.)


ETA After re-reading the comments, I went and double-checked the Etsy store. I did buy the regular size deck, so maybe it won't be distorted.
 

Lisa Myobun

Ugh. I bumped into this thread and bought the cheaper version before seeing these comments. Oh, well. For $17, it's not the end of the world.

I sort of started seeing the stretching in the online scans too, but it might be all in my head.

I agree that it seems to be a Pam A reproduction, at least judging by the pebbled backs. It will be interesting to compare it with the newest AGM version, which is also a Pam A reproduction, if I remember correctly. (Not an expert either.)


ETA After re-reading the comments, I went and double-checked the Etsy store. I did buy the regular size deck, so maybe it won't be distorted.

Hey all - you might find Simon's ("Two Spirit") YouTube video interesting. He offers a quick look at a trimmed version of what appears to be the poker size deck? Some of the images are stretched, but it's pretty subtle.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GnksdNrYRNE

ETA - and here's the original video for both decks - poker and standard - untrimmed (thanks to Anneke "Nobody Here"):
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rvMiuJLmFp8&feature=youtu.be
 

Celice

Thanks for the links to the video reviews. I wish I had seen that before purchasing! Oh well. The stretch was immediately noticeable to me and once you see it you can't unsee it. Here's a picture for anyone on the fence. I think it is noticeable on the Fool because his chin juts out from the stretch and his legs become much wider.
 

Attachments

  • rwsfoolstretch.jpg
    rwsfoolstretch.jpg
    67.7 KB · Views: 594

FLizarraga

Thanks for the links to the video reviews. I wish I had seen that before purchasing! Oh well. The stretch was immediately noticeable to me and once you see it you can't unsee it. Here's a picture for anyone on the fence. I think it is noticeable on the Fool because his chin juts out from the stretch and his legs become much wider.

Is that the regular size? Gosh, even his ARMS look more open!
 

Galahad

Great video reviews! Now that I notice the stretch, too, it's started bothering me. And as pointed out in one of the reviews, it is disappointing, because with a few minor changes (image proportion/card size, fully pebbled backs, card stock?) these decks could be near perfect.