Thick or Thin?

[Callistabell]

I've been experimenting all day with printing my deck and it seems it's come down to two options: A vividly colored, slightly water resistant deck with somewhat flimsy cards OR A softly muted color deck with non-water resistant but sturdy cards. What would most people prefer? The vivid floppy deck, or the muted sturdy deck? Does water resistance play a part? Would it be wise to offer a cheap floppy deck or a more expensive art edition sturdy deck? We don't have lots of money to invest and we just want to put our deck out there in the world. We think it's a great reading deck, a fun deck. So we're going to produce it ourselves (my husband and I) and we need a little help in the "what would people prefer?" department. So what do you think?

[GryffinSong]

For me it would depend on the artwork. I'm such a visual person. Some images really look great muted. Other scream to be vivid. I printed out a free online deck here at aeclectic tarot on a matte card stock. Nothing expensive. Then I laminated them, which gave them waterproof-ness, sturdiness, and a little shine. Would you mind sharing an image on both papers so we can see the difference?

For what it's worth, the ability to shuffle is important to many. I don't mind if I have to shuffle a slow way. But I've got to be able to mix them up without fearing too much damage to my cards.

[Callistabell]

I will share, but tonight my camera is M.I.A. So tomorrow--
The thinner deck actually shuffles much better. It's on 110 lb. cardstock, laser printed so there is a shine and a slide to them. We had some of the same ones laminated to see how that would be, but we didn't like it at all, there were tiny bubbles and the card actually felt and shuffled better without the laminate (cheaper too). The thicker ones of course feel sturdy but don't shuffle as nicely. With a clear coating I sprayed on them they have a bit of a gritty feel and you need to shuffle slowly. Still they are nice, but DON'T get caught in the rain. Even with the clear coat for protection, they aren't water resistant. You can look at the cards on my website to see the art. It's funny, when they are vivid it's like "pow, bang" all about the color and the "hip"ness. Then when they are muted, its all about the lines and the images.

[Alta]

That is quite hard to answer. I have decks that roughly fit both of your descriptions. I think that I would prefer

A vividly colored, slightly water resistant deck with somewhat flimsy cards

. I find thick cards more difficult and also would prefer that your art be displayed to its best advantage.

[Disa]

Hey, those images on your website look GREAT! I really like those cards! They really do look like fun. My vote is to go for the more vibrant colors. Pizzaz is vibrant, I would think.

[Callistabell]

Thanks Disa! I'm glad you like them. The encouraging comments help push me onward. It looks like there may be a third option. Unfloppy, bright and colorful. ON 80 lb. Cover Stock. Weeee. (I hope it works out-- the best of both worlds.) HudsonGray sent me a link to her printer and we've been working toward a quote. I'm hoping its the answer, it would be great!