Stockholm17 wrote:Question: Why Printer Downgrade?
USPCC is not the best, it is just different. I do not think Cartamundi is a downgrade at all, especially if they invested 2 years in developing a new paper stock and a new varnish (48 prototypes) for better handling and durability. Also, printing at Cartamundi costs more or less as USPCC, with a couple of pros and cons.
This is how I see it
I wish people would stop hyping up stock so much. Pretty much everyone uses acceptable stock. That's MPC straight up to USPCC. They're all of comparable construction and thickness. True, there are some minor variances in stiffness, snap, and elastic deformation, but all fall within acceptable tolerances for the purposes of general card play or cardistry. I do see that a significant number of EPCC/LPCC have warping issues, and I've come to the conclusion that it's because the factories in Asia don't have sufficient humidity control. So what happens is that the humidity level there is usually significantly higher than in the environment of the end user, typically here in the United States. People always associate the cause of warping to be more humidity/moisture, but the reverse is true where if something is made in a more humid environment and goes to a drier place, there will be warping as well, and I think that's what I'm experiencing here in California with many of the Asian decks. Any woodworker can tell you this fact, and paper is made from wood as well. But aside from this, the card stock is good across the board from all major printers.
The great variable is the finish. Whether you feel the USPCC is the best or just different, there is no denying they have the most superior coefficient of friction in their finish which enables the most consistent slip between cards. Perhaps the only argument against USPCC's finish is that it's
too slippery for certain cardistry moves, but that is easily remedied by a little fanning powder. Everyone else is trying to catch up. I've handled many Carta Mundi decks over the years. I have always been impressed with their stiff and durable stock, but the finish is where they lack. I've not handled this new varnish they've been working on the past 2 years, but it just sounds like more of the same from what we've been hearing from EPCC/LPCC. And they're
still tweaking their formula after all these years.
I think its great Lorenzo is willing to experiment with different options, but in this case if the cost of printing is more or less the same as USPCC, then why risk getting a potentially inferior product? And even if this new Carta Mundi finish is as good as advertised, producing these decks with a different printer breaks up the continuity of the series. Maybe Lorenzo should've experimented with a different deck instead of one made to be part of a series. This is probably going to be the first Lorenzo project that I do not support. Since this is more expensive than what I consider the market rate for a well designed custom deck, there's not enough here for me to pledge since this is, after all, just a recolor and I have his first Ravn decks. Plus, if Carta Mundi comes through on its promise of a better finish, then I can always pick some up in the aftermarket.