About Héron's TdM reproduction

Yves Le Marseillais

JP Payen 1713 Facsimile coming in 2016

Hello LeRomain

No the deck was available for sale some years ago, around 2005 I think. It may be out of print, which is most unfortunate as it's a remarkably well made facsimile.

Hello Philippe,

I prepare a very nice facsimile of Jean Pierre Payen 1713 tarot.
Better in my opinion than 1743 original because I succed to find some very good sources images.
I hope to publish it by October this year 2016.

It's time to do a facsimile of this JP Payen 1713 and now everything go in same direction.

Best,

Yves
 

LeRomain

Hello LeRomain

No the deck was available for sale some years ago, around 2005 I think. It may be out of print, which is most unfortunate as it's a remarkably well made facsimile.

Thanks for the correction, Philippe!
 

LeRomain

Hello Philippe,

I prepare a very nice facsimile of Jean Pierre Payen 1713 tarot.
Better in my opinion than 1743 original because I succed to find some very good sources images.
I hope to publish it by October this year 2016.

It's time to do a facsimile of this JP Payen 1713 and now everything go in same direction.

Best,

Yves
I'm looking forward to it, Yves!
 

eltarot78

Hi everyone!
Thanks to Eltarot78 for joining the discussion.
As I understand it, the Del Prado edition of the Payen tarot deck was issued by the famous museum in Madrid but not meant to be commercialized. Can you confirm that?

LeRomain

Hello LeRomain

as all right says Philippe, no the deck was available for sale some years ago.

I was fortunate to share decks with a friend from France, He had gotten into a sales site http://www.todocoleccion.net/buscador.cfm?from=top&Bu=tarot+marsella
 

eltarot78

Hello Philippe,

I prepare a very nice facsimile of Jean Pierre Payen 1713 tarot.
Better in my opinion than 1743 original because I succed to find some very good sources images.
I hope to publish it by October this year 2016.

It's time to do a facsimile of this JP Payen 1713 and now everything go in same direction.

Best,

Yves

Salute mon Ami


I just simply want say

WOOO HOOOO :)
 

Krystal Mystic

Hello Yves,

Regarding the picture you posted earlier in this thread of the Temperance card, do you know the date attributed to this card? This is the most intact printing of that card I have seen, before the angel's eyes and mouth eroded away. I am curious to know the date. I assume the card is part of a Conver deck.

Krystal
 

Yves Le Marseillais

Read on my lips... and watch my eyes

Hello Yves,

Regarding the picture you posted earlier in this thread of the Temperance card, do you know the date attributed to this card? This is the most intact printing of that card I have seen, before the angel's eyes and mouth eroded away. I am curious to know the date. I assume the card is part of a Conver deck.

Krystal

Bonjour Krystal,

This card is in Japan.
Part of a very uncomplete and damaged Conver deck (one tenth of cards and no Valet).

So, the answer is difficult but one can say that:

Conver decks were all engraved in 1760.

Printed exemplaries are either post 1803 or pre 1803

1870 and 1880 versions were printed with damaged woodblocks (worms "eat" one Temperance eye for exemple).

BnF versions are all post 1803 and were printed from damaged woodblocks.

All in one I can say that this Japan card and uncomplete deck can't be exactly dated.

But this card is very important for me because it allows me to propose in coming months a real restitution based on exact details.

Conver deck is really interesting one and it's a pity to have not yet a good restitution in spite many efforts made by various publishers.

I make a difference between historical decks/facsimilés/restitutions and artistic creations that may be "agreable" to some eyes and taste.

Conver decks are a business it's clear I have no major problems with this but my goal is different let's say...

I was long but it's necessary.

Cordialy,

Yves
 

Krystal Mystic

Bonjour Krystal,

This card is in Japan.
Part of a very uncomplete and damaged Conver deck (one tenth of cards and no Valet).

So, the answer is difficult but one can say that:

Conver decks were all engraved in 1760.

Printed exemplaries are either post 1803 or pre 1803

1870 and 1880 versions were printed with damaged woodblocks (worms "eat" one Temperance eye for exemple).

BnF versions are all post 1803 and were printed from damaged woodblocks.

All in one I can say that this Japan card and uncomplete deck can't be exactly dated.

But this card is very important for me because it allows me to propose in coming months a real restitution based on exact details.

Conver deck is really interesting one and it's a pity to have not yet a good restitution in spite many efforts made by various publishers.

I make a difference between historical decks/facsimilés/restitutions and artistic creations that may be "agreable" to some eyes and taste.

Conver decks are a business it's clear I have no major problems with this but my goal is different let's say...

I was long but it's necessary.

Cordialy,

Yves

Hello Yves!

This is interesting. No valets, but is there a Two of Coins in the Japanese deck? Is the Japanese deck DEFINITELY attributed to Conver based on his name being found somewhere on one of the cards, or is it assumed to be his because it looks to have been printed from woodblocks he was known to have used?

My two Conver deck facsimilies (Heron and Lo Scarabeo), both dated after 1805, show degradations in the images. So by the time Conver was using the woodblocks to print these two decks, he was using worn blocks.

Based on discussion earlier in this thread, it appears reasonable to believe that Conver may have aquired the set of woodblocks from another printer or engraver some time after they were first made and then put his name on them to print his own decks, thereby erasing the name of the person for whom the blocks were originally engraved.

So my questions:
Who owned the woodblocks before Conver, and did the previous owner print any decks with them? (An unanswerable question at this point, I assume.)
How worn were the blocks when Conver first used them? How degraded is the imagery in the earliest surviving deck that is known to be his because it has his name printed on one of the cards?

In other words, I'm trying to figure out if Conver bought/inherited a USED set of woodblocks that somebody else had previously published decks with. Even though you find an incomplete deck that appears to be Conver's, without a printer's name being found on one of the cards, you don't really know who published it. All you know for sure is that it was printed using the same set of woodblocks.

Krystal
 

Yves Le Marseillais

Tracking Conver

Bonsoir Krystal,

My answers:

is there a Two of Coins in the Japanese deck?

No. no Two of Coins in it.

Is the Japanese deck DEFINITELY attributed to Conver based on his name being found somewhere on one of the cards,

No Conver name appears on any of it's cards.

or is it assumed to be his because it looks to have been printed from woodblocks he was known to have used?

Yes. Lines details demonstrate that "Conver" woodblocks were used to print this cards.


Who owned the woodblocks before Conver, and did the previous owner print any decks with them? (An unanswerable question at this point, I assume.)

Nobody knows for the moment.
I suppose that previous owner printed cards with this woodblocks of course: One never engrave woodblocks only for decoration but for printing cards.

How worn were the blocks when Conver first used them?
They were not worn because we have some cards that proov it with eye temperance, eye of Justice, eye of Pendu.

How degraded is the imagery in the earliest surviving deck that is known to be his because it has his name printed on one of the cards?

Cards are degraded but only by time not because of lacking pieces of wood in woodblocks.


In other words, I'm trying to figure out if Conver bought/inherited a USED set of woodblocks that somebody else had previously published decks with.

This woodblocks were used before Conver (Guillaume I suppose, Nicolas father) used them.

This are my own deductions from facts and images and woodblocks.

A XRay examination of woodblocks would certainly help us.

All depends of curators where woodblocks are.

Yves
 

Philippe

Conver deck is really interesting one and it's a pity to have not yet a good restitution in spite many efforts made by various publishers.

I make a difference between historical decks/facsimilés/restitutions and artistic creations that may be "agreable" to some eyes and taste.

Yves

In fact contrary to what is repeated ad nauseam the Héron is rather good. They choosed to enlighten an original dulled by the years but very clean and with colours out of the ordinary. The yellow, the red, the light blue, the emerald green find their intensity again, only the dark blue is a bit faded. The engaving is not very sharp and some lines are hidden by the coulours but it was already the case for the original (see my scans above). The colour added to the faces doesn't bother me. Its weakness resides in the back of the cards and in the cardstock but nearly all the modern decks failed on that last point when compared to the XIXth-early XXth high-quality cards.