Another Tarot Deck Pet Peeve

[Tom]

I always think it’s a bad sign when Tarot decks are advertised or their boxes only show Major Arcana Cards.  I like illustrated pips.  When they don’t show any pips I have to research the deck to see if the minors are more RWS or TDM.  Most of the time when the box or ad don’t show minors they are not illustrated minors.  This, I think, is a bit of cheat.  I respect tarot artists, but I guess it’s just easier to have a collection of the four suit items than to make a scene with them.    I’m not good at reading Tarot Of Marseilles style cards—ones that only show a grouping of cups, swords, coins, or rods.  I bought a very expensive deck in December that had beautiful major and court cards but were only groups of the elemental items.  This lowers that chance that I will use this deck for tarot readings and that they will just end up as part of my collection for their beautiful artwork.  A lot of these decks do show suits in either upright or reversed positions—which helps since I like to read with reversals.  It just takes too much mental conversion for me to read them intuitively.  Actually I have one deck like that that has upright and reversed keywords—if I want to use that style of deck I’d still need training wheels so to speak.  I have read decks like those, I don’t know whether any of you have heard of the now out of print Prediction Tarot deck, but I had less difficulty using them because they were reservable. Same with Japanese Yukioe deck.  Some of those decks do have small illustrations on the pips that give insights into the meanings.

[dancing_moon]

I'm an avid Tarot de Marseilles reader myself, so I don't mind pips. Having said that, TdM Minors aren't exactly bare: they usually have a lot of embellishments, and there's shape and dynamics to their arrangement. Modern pip cards - I absolutely agree with you, @Tom: silence and crickets 🙄 I can only read them by combining numerology and suit meanings.

 

(China Tarot vs Grimaud TdM)

[DanielJUK]

One of the more modern deck brands does this to cut costs I think. Plenty of members here have complained about it. They got great artists designing them and then when you open the deck, they have only really illustrated the majors. Some of their decks do all the cards though, so it's a little like pot luck, however it's worth searching the forum as members have said if they have all the cards or not. They are mostly the licensed brand decks for culture we have loved on tv. I am sure it's to make them cheaper and no historical tarot reasons 😆

[Tom]

@DanielJUK I’m sure that has something to do about it.  I have been Googling the decks that show no minors and seeing if they have pictures of illustrated pips or not.  That’s been a big help.  I am collecting Decks from Prisma Vision now.  Their tarot and oracle cards are all illustrated pips.  They are high quality cards and if you’re not familiar with them they have companion oracle decks that go with their tarot decks.  I love the Prima Vision Tarot and Cosma Oracle that is a companion too it.

[Natural Mystic Guide]

On 3/8/2024 at 6:58 AM, Tom said:

I bought a very expensive deck in December that had beautiful major and court cards but were only groups of the elemental items.

Hi Tom can you please share with us what deck this is?  I'm planning on buy one, and aesthetics trumps all, for me.

[Tom]

@Natural Mystic GuideIt says that it's a Christmas Deck but it can be used all winter. It came with some nice extras. A tarot bag, special candle, and some quartz crystals and a card for the year 2024 of your zodiac sign. It's called the Crystal Tarot Deck, but I wouldn't recommend it for beginners. 

 

https://www.etsy.com/listing/1594120410/christmas-unique-tarot-deck-tarot-deck

 

I'm away from home but I found it in my shipping history.  I think it's beautiful.  I just prefer illustrated pips. 

 

 

Edited March 11, 2024 by Tom

[Natural Mystic Guide]

3 hours ago, Tom said:

the Crystal Tarot Deck

Thanks for sharing, Tom.  I agree that this is a very pretty deck.  But you are right...  there is no way that you could have known that it did not have illustrated pips, because it only shows the Aces.  My interest is in finding a Tarot de Marseilles deck that I think is really pretty.  Of course these have non-illustrated pips, but within those 'non-illustrations' there is a lot of depth to be interpreted.  I get the impression that this Crystal Tarot deck is not that.  There is so little written about it in the description.  I like illustrated pips -- especially for working with clients.  I would like to explore the subtleties of the non-illustrated pips, though, too.  I'm sorry that you were disappointed.

[Tom]

@Natural Mystic Guide counseling the whole package, I still am glad I bought it.  I can read with this style of deck, but it doesn't come intuitively to me.  There are lot of my decks in my collection that are just to admired but I will probably never use for readings. 

[Misterei]

20 hours ago, Tom said:

... I still am glad I bought it.  I can read with this style of deck, but it doesn't come intuitively to me.  There are lot of my decks in my collection that are just to admired but I will probably never use for readings. 

I found my deck preferences changed over the years. I mean, yes, I was born and bred on classic RWS and it will always be my standard ... but now a days I like the blankness of a Pip deck for some topics and situations. I don't want to be a prisoner to the illustration. But this developed over many years.

I don't care for the modern Pip decks some of which do just seem to be lazy. I gravitate to the historic Pips or modern decks like Tattoo Tarot where the Pips still have a bit of flavor to them.

[Chariot]

YouTube is definitely your friend, if you want to find out whether a deck has illustrated minor arcana cards or not.

MOST decks end up there as 'flip-throughs'—even those that are not mass market decks.  I'm not fond of watching twiddly fingers wearing lots of rings and nail polish, surrounded by crystals and candles and statuettes, etc ...but even the really irritating ones (the ones that fumble endlessly with the shrink wrap, boxes, flap their hands in a blur, etc) eventually get around to showing the viewer the entire deck.  They are very much worth a look.  (And repeatedly pushing the "L" key on your computer keyboard can move the video along, if the stalling becomes a bit much.)

These videos can really save you money, if you want illustrated pips.  They can also convince you that you either DO really want that deck, or naw, you don't really want it after all.  

[Misterei]

4 hours ago, Chariot said:

...  I'm not fond of watching twiddly fingers wearing lots of rings and nail polish, surrounded by crystals and candles and statuettes, etc ...but even the really irritating ones (the ones that fumble endlessly with the shrink wrap, boxes, flap their hands in a blur, etc) eventually get around to showing the viewer the entire deck. .... These videos can really save you money, if you want illustrated pips. 

OMG! So true. 🤣

I'm grateful for the flip through vids but also wonder about the creators who must have hundreds of decks they bought just to do reviews??? Wow!

Its better than the bad old days where you might see a deck in a catalog and have no idea what it's really like.

Back in the day the bricks & mortar stores often had open box "sample decks" you could see every card ... obvi the selection was limited. It's truly a different world now. The flip through vids have saved me countless times.

 

The OP touched upon a trend that's a pet peeve for me. The modern decks with all the graphic design software ... many are starting to seem soul-less or watered down. Non-illustrated Pips that seem lazy and lack character feel part of this larger trend to me: Modern style decks which lack character or feel shallow. Lightseers I really like. But now it feels like there are a bunch of decks using this illustrative style, but lacking the depth of Lighseers so that they all sort of become generic and antiseptic. No character. The ones with non-scenic Pips even moreso. Let's just photoshop cut & paste a bunch of coins/cups/wands/swords to make the Pips and see if we can sell it on kickstarter.

Edited March 13, 2024 by Misterei

[Chariot]

@Misterei - Yes, I have to agree with you that I also don't find many modern decks all that interesting.  That's not necessarily a bad thing.  When I see one I really like, I won't rest till I've got it—so it's much easier on my pocketbook if I don't see one!   🙂

I like all the illustrated images in a deck—including the minor arcana—to be rich with meaning, but not too visually busy.  I want the meaning to jump out at me, and give me a dimension to think about that I didn't already associate with each card.  Although I have issues with its overly-thick card stock, my 'newish' favourite deck, Poppy Palin's The Everyday Enchantment Tarot, certainly brings new insight into the RWS system for me.  I would use that deck more often in readings if it were easier to shuffle.  However, I do go through the cards frequently, absorbing different ideas from them.  If that deck was to be re-issued in thinner, more flexible card stock, I would die happy.
 

If I was going to start using pip decks—and I suppose I could, as I'm now very familiar with the meaning of each minor arcana card—I would use the ones I've already got ...the Wirth, the Marseilles, etc.  

Edited March 13, 2024 by Chariot

[Misterei]

5 hours ago, Chariot said:

... If I was going to start using pip decks—and I suppose I could, as I'm now very familiar with the meaning of each minor arcana card—I would use the ones I've already got ...the Wirth, the Marseilles, etc.  

Good choices. The old skool Pip decks are the ones I use. The only modern Pip decks I have are Tattoo Tarot, Triunfi della Luna, and Arlequino. In spite of being modern releases, they all evoke a historic feel or pay homage to history.

 

I have 3 modern playing-card hybrids:  Keymaster, Brut, and Fernando Crippa. But somehow the playing card styling of the Pips opens me to their simplicity. Also all 3 of those decks are artsy. Not even a whiff of lazy Photoshop cut & paste.

 

There's some indefinable line between simple vs. lazy. Or simple vs. shallow.

Edited March 13, 2024 by Misterei

[Tom]

@Chariot I am now searching for examples of the pips on Google and YouTube also. It's definitely a money saver.  I do this at bookstore too where they may only show one or two cards. Which also helps knowing what the majors look like.  I want to see what the cards look like before I buy. I want a feeling of whether art resonate with me. 

Edited March 15, 2024 by Tom

[Tom]

Another pet piece I have is card stock.  Some of the card stock is so stiff and plasticized that they are rough to shuffle.  The thinner card stock is easier to shuffle but I have to be gentle with them so they didn't wear out. I have such a large collection that I use multiple decks anyhow, so that cuts now on wear and tear.  I wish they could come up with a happy medium. 

 

I bought the Morgan Greer deck around 2010 or so and it seems to be just right. 

Edited March 19, 2024 by Tom

[DanielJUK]

The older decks before 2010 always seemed to have better card stock! Many of those decks though have awful borders, especially those black border ones *shudder*. I am so glad borderless became more of a thing, they became unfashionable or maybe printing techniques improved. Also they seem to have gotten rid of a lot of the distracting text from the front of the cards. The publishers do sometimes listen to us 🤣

 

The modern plasticated stock lasts longer but has that chemically smell when you open the deck. The thin card stock bends 😕 

Some decks (like Wild Unknown and others) have super thick card stock, I quite like it!

 

I have sometimes looked for older antique versions of the decks, especially 70s and 80s versions, for that cardstock! 🙂 

 

 

[Tom]

@DanielJUK alas I gave up my original 1980s decks, but the new decks don't always get it wrong.  If you want a hard deck to shuffle buy The Animated Tarot.  They are recticulated to give the animated effect and they recommend using sleeves to prevent their surface from scratches.  With all that it has the thickness of two decks of Tarot cards!  Their box is as big as a recipe box. They are beautiful though and have a great guidebook. No regrets here.  Beautifully and inclusively drawn people.

 

[Guest]

Yep, I noticed that some decks don't show any of their non-scenic pips in their promos. It did cross my mind that maybe they don't want to turn off some of their potential buyers, but more often than not I just give them the benefit of the doubt. YouTube has always been my friend anyways. 

 

I can handle semi-scenic pips like in the Minchiate Etruria or in the Williams Renaissance, or even highly-expressive pips like in the Thoth or the Golden Dawn, but I have to exert some effort to read austere pips like in traditional Marseille decks. I do think the time will come when I'll finally feel compelled to read with them though. 

[Tom]

@Akhilleus I agree.  I have learned to look expensive decks up on YouTube before I buy them.  Even some supposedly RWS based decks have illustrations that I can't relate to what the standard meanings. A good example of this is the Tarot of the Great Outdoors.  It has beautiful art, but they should have made it an Oracle Deck instead.  I am focusing on RWS style decks right now.  I want to be a professional card reader. I decided that studying Marseille decks will be too much to handle right now.  I have read with the non illustrative pips, but as your said it takes a lot more brain processing because I don't get much intuitive feedback from them.  Like 9 Swords in a weave pattern doesn't give me a clue as to what that card is supposed to mean. 

[Natural Mystic Guide]

10 minutes ago, Tom said:

Even some supposedly RWS based decks have illustrations that I can't relate to what the standard meanings. A good example of this is the Tarot of the Great Outdoors.  It has beautiful art, but they should have made it an Oracle Deck instead.

I really appreciate this feedback.  Very helpful.  I have been considering this deck...  I like to have RWS clone decks that a client -- who doesn't necessarily know a lot about Tarot meanings, can pull something from the picture.

[Misterei]

2 hours ago, Natural Mystic Guide said:

... I like to have RWS clone decks that a client -- who doesn't necessarily know a lot about Tarot meanings, can pull something from the picture.

LOL 90% this is true for me also [hence my collection of RWS style decks for work] BUT there are circumstances and clients where I want that more simple non-scenic Pip. Especially with clients who know a little about tarot and will try to second-guess every card if they see illustrated pips 🤣

 

Back onto topic, tho. Yes, even for non-scenic pips I want to see ALL the cards before I pull the trigger on purchase.
 

[tag Jorrit]

My pet peeve is admiring the art of a deck online but then, when it's in my hands, the expressions on the characters' faces are so insipid that I put the deck back in its box and park it. The art the original RWS deck with the expressions and body language of the characters is priceless. And the antique TDM decks' characters are wonderful.

Edited May 12, 2024 by tag Jorrit
clarity

[Tom]

@Misterei when I start to read professionally next year (it at least that's my goal) is that clients will try to second guess me with illustrative pips.  I especially wouldn't want to use a deck with keywords on the cards because we all know one it yet keywords can't capture all the meanings possible for a card and have to be judge in relationship to the spread and the other cards. 

[Misterei]

3 minutes ago, Tom said:

... when I start to read professionally next year (it at least that's my goal) is that clients will try to second guess me with illustrative pips. ...

Part of reading professionally is the strange client behaviors you might encounter. 99% I love my clients and they are great. But I read a few months ago for a lady who was experienced with Tarot and for every card she said. "what if it means xyz?" And i had to reply, "in my system card x + card y = this other thing" It was actually a great reading but it took a LONG time to go through every card with her. 😉

[Guest]

On 5/13/2024 at 2:11 AM, Misterei said:

And i had to reply, "in my system card x + card y = this other thing"

 

That really should go without saying. As a reader, she should have known that the cards align themselves according to the reader's schema and not the querent's. Unless of course if the inviting the latter's feedback is part of the former's MO.