Best RWS reproduction: MPC Study Deck or 1909 Art Restoration?

[Merrick]

Hi all,

For a good while I’ve been using an RWS Centennial which frankly I think is a stellar deck. I’ve gifted my deck to my partner as she really fell in love with it and instead of just buying another copy for myself, I thought I’d go one step further and find a deck that corrects the few things I didn’t like about the Centennial, mainly the copyright on the individual cards, the ahistorical backs, and the aged veneer US Games added to that particular release. Doing a lot of research, it seems there are really only two decks that would meet my criteria: the MPC study deck, a scan of a vintage PAM A (https://www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/m ... ourse.html) and the 1909 Art Restoration deck, based on hi-res scans of a vintage Roses and Lilies deck (https://www.drivethrucards.com/m/product/316815). I’m aware of the AGM deck that has no copyrights and crackle backs and is a PAM A reproduction, but I believe it doesn’t use Pam’s calligraphy for the card titles and the colors are not accurate to the originals, so that’s out.

I did find a comparison video of these two decks here: It appears to my eye that the study deck has darker/thicker lines and potentially slightly less detail, but also appears less aged and with some minor corrections made to restore damage done to the individual deck that was scanned. The restoration deck seems to have more detail but there’s more aging on the cards and no damage has been restored. Also it sounds like the stock on the MPC deck is better.

Does anyone own one or both of these and can give an opinion on them? Thanks in advance!

[reall]

Thank you for posting this vid! I know about both of these decks & think mpc is Kenji Original scan version?
as is scan condition & without any alteration to deck aged as is condition? also think mpc cardstock is good quality so you may go with it if you are fan of legit vintage condition of art & colors? aka not perfect but raw?

& dtc edt is added recently I think author did great job with *sharpening & perfecting images, colors may also be bit lighter so you may wish to check it out in case you prefer improved/sharper look? but I noticed it use Premium playing card stock that may not be everyone cup of tea as it's meant for playing cards aka may feel bit thin if you are used to something else, but specification for both mpc & dtccardstock should be similar aka 300gsm Smooth so it should be same? hope this helps! do let us know deck you end up with & how you like?

[Merrick]

Well, I really went back and forth on these two. Ultimately I decided to go for the study deck, based on the Pam A scans. What pushed me over the edge are the scans I found here: https://blog.goo.ne.jp/valet_de_coupe/e ... 7b7209c772

And that same site has Pam A scans as well. Comparing the two hi-res scans, which I believe are the sources for both the study deck and the art restoration deck, the Pam A looked far more pleasing to my eye in terms of color saturation and tone. The darker images also evoked more of a sense of mystery, which to me aids in the reading of the cards as it drives me to find further meaning. I’ve also consistently heard people say they prefer the card stock of the study deck over the art restoration.

However there are two areas where I felt the R&L excelled. I picked some of the most detailed cards, like the King of Pentacles, and compared the two, and there is indeed some amount of detail lost in the Pam A due to the thicker lines and blacker blacks. If picking out details is your thing, then get the art restoration deck, as it’s easy to make out any detail you wish. I felt that not so much of the detail was lost in the Pam A that it was a problem, but for some that may be the deciding factor. The other area where the R&L really excelled was in skin tones, which looked far more realistic to my eye. The skin tones in the Pam A run too much to red but if I’m not directly comparing the two decks it doesn’t bother me. I almost went for the art restoration deck for the backs alone, as I’ve always preferred the R&L over the crackle backs.

One other reason I passed on the art restoration deck is it looks like Llewelyn is going to release their own R&L facsimile in 2021 so I want to wait and see how that compares:
https://www.llewellyn.com/product.php?ean=9780738769578

The big takeaway I got from all of this is that both are high quality reproductions and if it’s an RWS historical replica you’re after, either would satisfy based on your personal preferences.

[Amoroso]

I adore the RWS, so this info is a godsend. Thanks a ton, Merrick.

[Merrick]

I adore the RWS, so this info is a godsend. Thanks a ton, Merrick.

Glad I could provide some useful info! There’s sadly very little info about either deck out there, which is kind of wild because both are pretty much exact reproductions of the most desired RWS decks in existence (unless one prefers the ‘70s editions). Neither have copyrights slapped onto the face of the cards and neither have ahistorical backs. Also neither have significant adjustments/corrections/filters applied. It’s a shame more people don’t know about them.

[Merrick]

I received the study deck. It’s very nice! It is dark, more so than the Centennial, but the colors look far more accurate. For example, the Emperor’s throne is a very light gray in the Centennial, while in the study deck it’s deeper. Additionally on the same card, in the centennial the mountains behind the emperor are the same color, while in the study deck they show a gradient of colors. This deck also has the original Pam A crackle backs and no copyright anywhere on any of the cards. The cards themselves are a nice thickness and riffle shuffle cleanly. I highly recommend it!

[Scanner]

I'm still waiting on my study version deck

[Scanner]

Today my deck has arrived.

I adore it, the card stock is quite perfect and the dark colour and shades are so intense.

I find the crackle backs are far more beautiful than the backs from the Centennial deck.

But mostly I love the missing copyright symbol, it gives the deck a more "ancient" look.

This deck becomes a genuine competitor for the Blue Box Edition, which is offered extremely overexpensive.

I just ordered one more (I'm addicted to buy Tarot decks)

[Melissa Zupan]

Oh cool! I'm glad my video helped you, and I'm really glad to see the Study Deck is back on the market!

I often vacillate between the Art Restoration deck and the Study Deck. I think my preference is slightly towards the Study Deck. Saskia has mentioned a few times that the yellows on the Art Restoration deck are still too bright, and looking at her scans, I'd have to agree.

My dream deck of the moment would be to have the Study Deck available on Make Playing Card's thick cardstock. It might approach the feel of the original a little closer that way...the OG Pam decks are hefty!