"Vintage" Bicycle Cards from Penguin

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by VagueTheory, Jan 13, 2008.

  1. I would probably just stick to E's 1800 deck.

    They don't fan well but, they flourish very well. These are probably just regular Bicycle stock and Finish. And I don't know about you but, the baby blue looks out of place.

    My 2 cents,
    -RA69
     
  2. It doesn't look too blue. I might buy some if they were cheaper.
     
  3. Woah, the blue really shows. I'm not into the vintage style at all, but if I had to choose, I would go for Ellusionist's. I think Ellusionist's cards have better quality, too.

    But I would choose the Ghosts over them any day! (I ordered 4 of them)
     
  4. Just out of personal taste it looks too blue.

    They are cheaper than E's decks but, usually when things are cheaper, the quality isn't the greatest. Don't take my word for it though, since I've never handled them. Just my observation.

    -RA69
     
  5. they just look... dirty. and not really a good dirty. I choose you 1800's!
     
  6. Why anyone would want to perform card magic with cards like these is beyond me.
     
  7. They look horrible.
     
  8. Ocver the compuer, they look quite nice.

    But when you get the chance to hold them, they are yucky..

    Thats all I have to say.
     
  9. Allan have you actually bought some of these?

    1800s handle TERRIBLE. they are some of the most awful cards I've ever used.

    these cards look similar but a little different - I like the idea of using these for magical effects b/c you can say "I found this deck of cards in an old attic... " or something.

    I would buy them if they handle better than the 1800s. unfortuantely, any time that a VERY elaborate multi-color graphical printing is done on a deck of cards (like the tragic royalty), it usually results in a much worse finish due to their printing process.

    the only exception I've ever found to this would be the "fragment X" bicycle deck where the cards are multi-color, and it handles great :D but they are $15/pack :(
     
  10. I'm on the fence about 1800s; they're VERY different from normal Bicycles, and while they feel thicker, they actually are thinner. They're much slicker and stiffer than any other modern deck I've used, and they seem to be almost trying to jump out of your hands. I really like the look, though, and there's a distinctive texture to the cards that I like. It definitely takes some practice to get used to them, though.

    Objectively, I don't think most people would like the 1800s. If these vintage Bicycles feel and work like regular 808s, I'd say most people will prefer them.
     
  11. I have handled botht he one produced by bicycle and the oens produced by e.

    I didn't like either of them. My local magic shop got them in and I really didn't like them.
     
  12. Dammit, I went to buy some and they're out of stock. I hate it when that happens. I'm in an orgy of card-buying right now.
     
  13. Wow. I'm not a very stylish person, but those... just... look....

    unattractive.
     
  14. Amazing,

    I would think it would be bad enough that they simply stole the idea from the Ellusionist 1800s decks, but then they heaped travesty on top of it by doing such a horribly lazy job in making this version of them. The real 1800s were months in the making and were created by true artists. These look like someone just sat down with photoshop and created random smudges in a matter of minutes.

    The colors? I can't even go there.

    RJ
     
  15. Allan,

    The ones created by E were printed by the USPCC. The funny thing is, they feel dirty when you handle them, but not when you close your eyes...you would not know you had that deck in your hands. It is a case of the beautiful job that JBone and the others did in designing these decks.

    RJ
     
  16. These dont look as nice as Ellusionists in my opinion it kind of looks like a knock off of it.
     
  17. That "Penguin" deck is actually manufactured and designed by USPCC. It's NOT Penguin's deck, it's NOT E's deck...it's NOT trying to be the 1800 deck.

    USPCC obviously is catching on with how great custom looking decks sell, so they're trying their own twist on making a custom deck. Nothing wrong with that.

    I personally own both the red and blue 1800's and one of these new "dirty" or "faded" decks. I don't handle those decks much (they are part of my 'not-for-use collection') but I did quickly fan them, and I found them to be smoother than the 1800's decks.

    Just my opinion, but I like the baby blue .... I think it's so different, it's actually quite cool. The baby blue mimics what would happen if you leave something with red ink in a window for a few weeks/months. Go to your local small video store, and or any other store that has posters in their windows...and you'll see the red fading in the sun to a baby blue.
     
  18. Phil,

    Where did you get your information, and can you guide me to it? I am having a hard time believing that the USPCC decided to rip off a customers design, especially when Ellusionist would have been more than happy to let them sell them.

    RJ
     
  19. They didn't rip off anyone. The vintage Bicycles are NOT the same design as the 1800s, nor are they even similar. The only comparison you can make is that both decks are supposed to look "old", which is hardly ripping anything off. Indeed, the light blue highlights are the selling point for me, and there's nothing even remotely like that in the 1800s.

    I don't find the 1800s to look convincingly old, anyway, because the way they're aged - while it looks great - is completely inaccurate. Playing cards in the early 19th century were made of paper, not card stock, and the glycerin-based inks tended to bleed and mottle rather than crack. The vintage Bicycles look considerably more accurate in their representation.
     

Share This Page

Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results