Truth is multiple
Worse than the Thunder Bay repro? I'll have to dig it out and look at it again, I didn't remember it being THAT bad!
Hello all,
For helping you in your decision I will give you my opinion about this two decks:
Nicolas Conver By Héron:
It is the earliest version known and on the market.
But may be not the earliest at all.
His back is not the original one. If you search for a real facsimile, it don't "works".
His size is not at all corresponding to original. Around 8 % less. If you have small hands it's OK for you.
His colors are not all corresponding to reality of original. i.e some greens are black/brown.
Some authors have been mis treaded by this and analyzed black color and his symbolic signification on this deck.
When I study a deck I go to THE source i.e I go to Museum and watch originals and/or buy High Resolution copy of it.
Regarding Conver I bought the entire deck in High Resolution numeric pictures.
Nicolas Conver by Los Scarabéo:
This reproduction is based on a newest version of Nicolas Conver deck: around 1890.
Six of wands was missing in their original so Lo Scarabeo remade this card by using other minor cards: Result is correct on this point.
Regarding colors, having myself an original of this Conver dated around 1870, I would say that nothing is better of course than an original rather than ANY facsimile.
But this deck keep a big part of original charm.
As a purist I don't like at all colors of faces comparing to original and greens are much more vivid on original.
I don't remember of his back but if I remember well it is not the original back too as Heron Conver.
Size is more or less correct regarding original.
Please note that on original (and Lo Scarabeo by consequence) 1890 Conver, lines are much less precise comparing to 1760 version.
To resume my opinion:
Nicolas Conver deserve a real facsimile version of his 1760 original edition.
Nobody made this work up to now.
Yoav Ben Dov for example made his own version (I bought it) who is an interpretation and not a facsimile.
It has his quality: preciseness, colors, size.
Last but not least, I can't resist to suggest you to take a walk on my website as to:
Exercise your eyes by viewing a large scope of different Tarots of Marseilles or said Marseilles.
http://tarot-de-marseille-heritage.com/english/
I have just published what I estimate being the real thing regarding Tarot of Marseilles reproduction:
A tarot of.... Dijon made by a serious cardmaker AND engraver Pierre Madenié acting from 1709 up to 1740.
His deck is dated 1709 so 50 years before Nicolas Conver.
Just see his drawing qualities and colors and compare with others and Conver.
For most of Tarot of Marseilles interested fellows N. Conver is THE deck.
This reputation is rather usurped in my personal opinion because many very nice Tarot of Marseilles decks are know from public and kept in Museums or private collections.
I aims to reveals as much as possible of this treasures.
Not for the money but by passion of truth.
I have my own job and it help me to take good decisions.
Sorry to have been long but I like to share my "hobby" and consider that this Forum is made for this: Communication AND Education.
Salutations from Marseille City Capitale of Tarot
Old €urope
