The problem with many decks...

EthanWaite said:

...is that it seems like the artist has devoted all their energies to the Trumps first, but when it comes to the suit cards, I often get the feeling that they were tired of the endeavor by the time they finished the trumps. I try to check out new decks at conventions, especially if the illustrator is present at the booth, but most of the time I get the feeling that they used up their brilliance on the trumps and decided to phone it in on the rest.

Anybody else get that impression?

Click to expand...

This is exactly how I feel about the Joie de Vivre. The trumps are gorgeous, and many of the minors, but the detail is so variable. For example:

http://www.paulina.ws/joiedevivre/cups3.html
http://www.paulina.ws/joiedevivre/coinspage.html

http://www.paulina.ws/joiedevivre/5hierophant.html
http://www.paulina.ws/joiedevivre/coinsknight.html

The suit of Coins in particular I feel like Paulina Cassidy gave up halfway through. Don't even get me started on some of the cross-eyed faces...

It's a lovely deck; I just wish it was more aesthetically coherent.

Emily said:

The Spiral was one of the first decks I purchased when I joined this forum. I thought the Majors were stunning but the Minors less so but then I read the book about why she did it and it didn't seem to bother me at all. I used it and loved the way it looked. The 4 Swords still remains my favourite Sword 4 despite all the other decks I use now.

Search out some of the Minors, there is a review of the deck on youtube. It is a small deck too, smaller than say the Rider Waite, and purple - the companion book is also well worth getting.

Click to expand...

Thanks for the tips, Emily. I'll be sure to take a peek of the deck on YouTube. Sometimes seeing more of the cards (especially when in someone's hand) helps me get a better idea of what the deck is like. I didn't know the deck was smaller that the Rider Waite - that would be a plus, at least for me. I think the companion book may be OOP but if I spring for the deck I suppose I would want the book as well.

EthanWaite said:

...is that it seems like the artist has devoted all their energies to the Trumps first, but when it comes to the suit cards, I often get the feeling that they were tired of the endeavor by the time they finished the trumps. I try to check out new decks at conventions, especially if the illustrator is present at the booth, but most of the time I get the feeling that they used up their brilliance on the trumps and decided to phone it in on the rest.

Anybody else get that impression?

Click to expand...

Yes!

For some

One deck that did disappoint me was the Llewellyn Tarot - I'd seen scans of the deck and fell for it online, the watercolour artwork looked vibrant and full of life. Then the deck came, I opened it and felt like sending it back. The Majors were stunning, very detailed and, as they had looked online, crisp and vibrant.

Then I looked through the Minors - not as detailed or as colourful. Some of the cards looked blurry in comparison to the Majors. It only took me a few minutes to realise that the Minors had been drawn with less detail - and it was too obvious when you compared them with the Majors. I really tried to like this deck, to ignore the fact that the majority of the deck seemed to have been drawn inferior to the Majors but it did matter.

Also it was a few years later when I read an article about the Llewellyn deck stating that the Majors were the main part of the deck and the Minors were like bit players, I don't feel like that. They should have drawn the deck as one deck, either colourful and vibrant or less detailed.