Starchild vs Wild Unknown

[brandolina]

I was talking to my professional psychic friend. I was asking which decks she likes to use for her clients. She was talking about the size factor being too big for The Starchild Deck, especially too wide, as opposed to the size of the Wild Unknown deck which was more comfortable when shuffling. Can anyone offer more feedback about what size and thickness you prefer your decks to be, or whether or not that matters???

 

[Nemia]

I don't mind. I like matte a bit more but linen or a more shiney finish doesn't irritate me. I have some mini decks and some large decks. I use different shuffling methods for each. There are different options and deck creators and publishing houses make different choices. Each has its advantages and disadvantages. The same is true with borders. There are decks I like to trim, others where I feel the white border adds something to the feel of the deck.

 

[Citrin]

I think that comes down to personal preference... I really like the standard LoScarabeo size. I wish the cards were a little bit thicker, but I personally don't like my decks too thick! I find the Wild Unknown too thick, it feels like it has 50 more cards than a normal tarot deck lol and it makes it hard to shuffle for me...

When they're too big they're hard to shuffle, but I also really don't like the "pocket sized" decks, because too me they don't feel like tarot lol. I still want them to be bigger than regular playing cards. Besides, I like being able to see details and a too small size gets in the way of that.

 

[Nemia]

Sorry, forgot to add (was disturbed while writing): the Wild Unknown is pretty much perfect from the cardstock and size point of view. I don't have the Starchild but the Wild Unknown couldn't be improved in any way I see. It's a great haptic experience to handle this deck.

 

[Alta]

It probably does come down to personal preference, could be based on hand size, manual dexterity, or even vision (are larger cards easier to see?).

In my case I have long hands and find the mini decks annoying to handle. I also find stiff cards and oversize cards hard to handle so I resist all of those. The Lo Scarabeo size and cardstock are generally about perfect for me though I do prefer a linen finish. Linen finish is rare though. Matte versus shiny though, I have no horse in that race, either is fine.

 

[brandolina]

Thank you

Thanks for all the replies so far. It's been really helpful. I'm trying to decide for making my own deck, which size would be most user friendly without compromising the integrity of the imagery used. I def want to use matte lamination. It's a full 78 card deck so if I print on 400 GSM, that will increase the thickness of the deck, as opposed to sticking with what seems to be standard at 350 GSM. I would rather go with the wider version as to not crop too much of my images. Your input is super valuable to me. Thank you!

To continue the conversation... Which of these would you prefer?

A) 350 GSM or 400 GSM?

B) Narrow or Wide?

C) Is 3.5 X 5 inches okay?

 

[wooden-eye]

Hi brandolina,
Congrats on the decision to make a deck.
Just with regards to the weight of the stock. I would honestly say do not go for 400gms. That is too thick. The word 'beermat' will be levelled at your deck. I made mine with 350gms, with a matte laminate in both sides the deck stands 1 and 3/8 ' high. This is about the same as 'wild unknown' and has been largely popular.
Standard cards are 300gms-320gms.
There I just saved you some money.

 

[brandolina]

@wooden-eye - Thanks! You're funny! That was super helpful, boom, just made a decision.