I felt that way about the Gilded. CGI stuff looks *way* better on a computer screen than in person, IMO.faunabay said:Yep, good job on de-enabling yourself. I can't remember who but someone quite a while ago was all hot and heavy about that particular lenormand too. But once she had it, she said it wasn't nearly as nice in person. So there you go!![]()
So I don't need to point out that it seems as if the playing card images are holding circular signs with the card's number (useful, admittedly) and the artist's initialssravana said:Successfully de-enabled!![]()
Oh, so *that's what the "IK" is? I(c)K, indeed!Cat* said:So I don't need to point out that it seems as if the playing card images are holding circular signs with the card's number (useful, admittedly) and the artist's initialsbugeyed: distracting, unnecessary, ego-driven, ugly! WTF?!) in their hands?
I don't feel that the art in the IK Lenormand (lol) is bad. Did you ever look at the Empress and Emperor in David's? they are capering monkeys! I just had a good look at my David's last night (I was thinking of selling it), and it is an uneven deck, IMO. Mostly brilliant, mind you - but even it definitely has its moments.Cat* said:And I don't need to mention that this deck has nothing in common with the David's Tarot? That the difference between the two is like the one between minimalist Japanese(?) calligraphy/painting (= David's) and sketches that should have been redone to hopefully get actual good paintings instead of having been printed and sold (= Isabel's). Plus, the latter looks as if has been treated (composed?) with way too many "art" filters in Photoshop - never a good thing.