The Pamela Colman Smith Centennial Deck review thread

[starlightexp]

So I don’t know if there has been a deck so anticipated as this one for quite some time, and I know the last thing that we need is ANOTHER thread on this deck but I thought this one would be good for reviews of this deck.

The Pamela Colman Smith Centennial deck arrived today and I have to tell you it was the best $20 I ever spent on Amazon...well almost. The production values of the set are outstanding.
So I don’t know if there has been a deck so anticipated as this one for quite some time, and I know the last thing that we need is ANOTHER thread on this deck but I thought this one would be good for reviews of this deck.

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...p/100_1164.jpg

The boxed set is very hefty and is stunningly packaged. The box opens with a gatefold and each side has its own cover hiding the treasures beneath.

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...p/100_1165.jpg


Before we get to deck lets go over the Books-postcards-prints side. Here we get 6 postcards of PCS, a glossy leaflet featuring three spreads ( 5 card love, Woven, and 3 card relationship) , 3 larger prints of her work as well as to books A.E. Waite’s Pictorial Key that clocks in at 239 pages and the 101page Artwork and Times of PCS by Stewart Kaplan.

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...p/100_1166.jpg

Both are printed on exquisite heavy weight paper and the PCS book has copious images of her works outside of the deck. The downside to these books is the bindings, if not handled carefully, could be prone to breakage. The covers are very heavy card stock that too needs to be handled with care or it will crease with relative ease. The good part is it looks like they are sewn bindings so the pages should be safe, but for those that want to keep their set in mint shape just handle them with care. All in all a minor gripe about this half of the set. Onto the deck . . . .

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...p/100_1167.jpg


Side two pops open with the deck and a pale blue organza bag to keep it in. (Does anyone REALLY use those?) The deck is of very nice stock and has a nice semi-gloss finish to it so those that were worrying about the stock can rest easy, The deck measures up to about 1 1/4 inches so it’s thicker then then normal 3/4-1 in decks we are used to but not as thick as the original that comes in at just over 1 1/2 inches.

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...p/100_1169.jpg

As for the images, yes Virginia they are from the Pam A. The only sort-a issue I have is that many of them look like they are reproductions of pictures of the deck if that makes any sense. Like if you take a picture of a card then print out the picture as opposed to having placed the card on a scanner and taken it like that. It’s not on all cards but on a bunch of them enough to make it distracting. This also makes some of the fine lines blur a little. Here is a scan of what I’m talking about. (PCS 100 on the Left/ A Pam A Crackle back on the right.)

http://i435.photobucket.com/albums/q...exp/Review.jpg

The other thing is the artificial ‘aging’ of the deck. This again takes away some of the crispness of the images and mutes the colors. Is this better then the ORWS? BY MILES!!!! You’ll want to toss that one in the trash once you see this one, but is it the holy grail of decks? Sadly it falls short for me. It will become my go to for RWS reading wise but after going through it with the Pam A crackle back that I have tucked away in a box there is still a part of me that wishes that the original was cleaned and presented as a bright vivid reproduction as best as it could have been.

All in all a great effort that I’d give a B- too because the packaging, books, extras and card stock are outstanding (I hope they use that stock on other decks.) but the images are still sadly lacking. . . .sigh. . . . .

[Jaws_Victim]

Glad to see the review for the new deck. I simply don't understand the need for "artificial aging". I really like the nice clean images with bright colors of the original deck.

Looks like I'll be sticking with my original deck.

[Sinduction]

What about the backs?

Great review by the way!

[starlightexp]

The backs are very nice, soft and easy on the eyes. They fit in well with the rest of the deck

[nicky]

If you end up with too many versions you can give me your Pam A.


Great review thanks

[Essjay]

Brilliant pictures and review - thank you.

I'm with everyone else, I'd love a clean and crisp version without the muddy ageing. I'll probably get one but like Le Fanu mentioned in the other thread I'd love to be able to buy the deck only.

[Kissa]

BRILLIANT review!!!! Thx for this

K

[starlightexp]

Well I can’t see them keeping the boxed set around long. Of course it’s all based on sales but the costs on it must be huge because really the materials are top top quality. I don’t know how much they are making off each set but I’m sure just the regular deck would be much more profitable for them. The thing is like $23 on Amazon and really you can’t go wrong with it. I think it might become the got to RWS for most people. I was doing readings for a co-worker this morning and while they are stiffer then other cards they have a nice feel to them when they are shuffled, and the backs are so so so nice

[Shade]

Originally Posted by starlightexp

I don’t know how much they are making off each set but I’m sure just the regular deck would be much more profitable for them.

You would think so wouldn't you? The weird thing is I know Llewellyn at least said that for them the deck/book sets are the bigger sellers. I wonder if Barnes & Noble only really carrying the sets in their stores contributes to this

[starlightexp]

Originally Posted by Shade

You would think so wouldn't you? The weird thing is I know Llewellyn at least said that for them the deck/book sets are the bigger sellers. I wonder if Barnes & Noble only really carrying the sets in their stores contributes to this

Ohhh good point, I never thought of that