Maybe excessive white borders. Yes, I´d go for that if there was a poll. Big white borders. Really don´t need them but it´s probably the kind of thing than non-AT members would think a bit odd and probably don´t even notice.
It would be hard to pick just one thing, but we could do a few polls. That seems easiest. As long as there are enough ATers interested in a certain issue, why not poll it and direct publishers to it? If I had to pick one to just start, one that would be or should be an easy fix for publishers, it would be BIG borders (have nothing against borders, it's the big ones) that may a deck feel too large and the images are still small. If a deck is going to be a bit big for me, I want that because the images are bigger not that the borders take up a third or more of the card.
Well, I was waiting for someone to bring this one up and see if others agreed with me that LARGE borders are probably the most likely common ground issue. It appears some of you thought of it yourselves, which is promising for its common ground potential.
Leaving some border at all should satisfy those who like borders and consider them protective to the image or portal-like, while reducing their size will placate those of us who lament how small the images are in relation to wider-than-necessary borders. Just enough for a small title and for the fingertips to grab on...anyone disagree?
Unfortunately, the decks that need this most (such as Lo Scarabeo's) have little chance of being changed (see below).
I also wish that LoS would change their format sometimes. Bigger cards, not always the standard ones. I just wish there were editions of the Liber T in the same size as the Waite/de Angelis Professional edition, but I think they´re putting out the Medieval in a bigger size plus the Illuminati so it looks like that might be changing.
Small image size (whether due to border size or card size) is my number one pet peeve.
Lo Scarabeo decks would benefit the most from increased image size owing to a relatively higher degree of visual intricacy, at least as compared to the benchmark RWS. I have a trimmed Sweet Twilight and the removal of the multi-lingual border really highlights just how small these images really are. It's a crying shame.
But of course...we know that the multi-lingual borders are hard to budge. The company needs them to sell decks across Europe, it seems; so be it. I'd rather have tainted LS decks than none at all.
On the other hand, of late they have put out more decks without the multi-lingual borders, so even if our old favorites can't benefit from a facelift, fewer new decks will suffer in the future.
(For the record: I own and enjoy decks printed in a variety of languages and in fact prefer them to my English ones. I can't even read the Cyrillic alphabet and yet Russian decks are among my favorites. So this is not an issue of Anglophones pouting over exposure to multiple languages; it is an issue of image size and how it is necessarily reduced with a lot of border---and an issue of visual incongruence with utilitarian modern-looking type surrounding a piece of art in which we're supposed to lose ourselves).
And Heroes - the art quality itself was the killer for that one. I think Schiffer were remiss in publishing it at all. He'd put out the Shadowfox already... why put out another, why oh why....
I'm afraid I have to agree with you, all respect due to Annabelle's opinion and to Mr Shadowfox. I have no explanations, not even speculations, about how a team of people said "Yes" to this one. The best quality production in the world couldn't save it.