Printing - What Paper do you use?

Tue, 2007-10-30 18:12
USMC2Hard4U

I have created a set of cards and would like to print them out. Currently, I use photo quality paper, with a HP Photosmart Pinter. The Cards look really really nice, vivid, and detailed. They are the right size, and everything is good; however, the photo paper is too thin. Even in sleves you can tell that is is not like a card. For now, I just placed a card behind it, but I would like to print these cards on thicker paper, almost like the sturdyness of a real Magic card, or at least any trading card. Anyone have any luck with this and what paper do you recommend?

Tue, 2007-10-30 19:10
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

Well, you're never gonna get it perfect.

Magic uses a special super-secret card stock that WotC refuses to reveal the contents of. Its even kept under very precise storage conditions, so that it always prints the same, regardless of when its printed. I would imagine that it would be difficult to approximate the card stock of other companies as well.

That said, I rarely print. I would probably be doing what you're doing; photo paper in front of a real card. Others use stickers.

Tue, 2007-10-30 19:11
The Butt
The Butt's picture

I use Bristol Board, and it seems to be the right thickness.

Tue, 2007-10-30 19:46
Rob Cashwalker
Rob Cashwalker's picture

Greeting card paper might be close, I've seen that in Staples....

Check this site out for info on the types of paper available

http://www.paperworks.com/about-paper-weights

I would probably think something in the 100# category wouldn't be like a real card, but it wouldn't be as flimsy as photo paper.

Wed, 2007-10-31 01:15
USMC2Hard4U

Yeah, I can see why they wont release blank cards that are exactly like the ones MTG uses, for counterfit purposes. I just want something as approximate as possible just so I can use them as proxies or whatever. I really hate using a random "Plains" written on with permanent marker as my proxies.

Where can you get stickers that go on the cards? That would work great!

Wed, 2007-10-31 01:33
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

USMC2Hard4U wrote:
...proxies...

Please do not speak about proxies on these forums; save that for your myspace page or something.

MSE2 is specifically not for the creation of proxies, it is for making new custom sets or single custom cards. For that matter, the DCI and WotC aren't very big on proxies, either. No further discussion on the topic of proxying is permitted.

Wed, 2007-10-31 20:34
monkeychewtoy
monkeychewtoy's picture

You have broken taboo.

Since Pich says we can't talk about proxies, I'm spoilering this. But I think it's safe to say this. If it really, really, isn't--first off, yeesh--it can be deleted easily.

Spoiler:
Pichoro enforces a solid rule here, which is that implying that people use MSE to duplicate official MtG cards is bad juju for the program. MSE stands on iffy legal ground as it is, and if we gave the impression that we were some sort of counterfeiting ring, whoah nelly.

That said, Pichoro's "don't speak the name" response is a little harsh; Wizards uses "proxies" extensively. The problem is not the word, "proxy," but rather the suggestion of what is, in effect, counterfeiting. Proxies are fine when you're playtesting your own set. I myself use proxies of cards I own whenever there's an oracle update for them. (For example, my Invasion-era Sky Weaver is in a sleeve with an updated printout of Sky Weaver in front of it.) And this program is great for making tokens. Everybody loves tokens. Especially when those tokens aren't pennies or Cheetos.

It's one thing to scrawl "Liliana Vess" on a Swamp in a casual duel. It's another, from a legal standpoint, to make a card that could actually pass as a real Liliana Vess.

If you, for some strange reason, absolutely cannot avoid making a proxy of a real card, it might be a good idea to write "This card is not meant for sale, trade, or auction." in the copyright line.


September 21, 2007: Monkeychewtoy predicts monocolored hybrid cards, calls them "Ridiculous."

Thu, 2007-11-01 01:40
AlexKOJ
AlexKOJ's picture

I picked up some normal card stock from Wal*Mart for my game, Esotericka. I haven't printed out any game cards, but I did print out a birthday card for my mom. In case you're wondering, the card stock that I have (which prints beautifully, mind you) is Georgia-Pacific 110 lb. white card stock. If you're a token lover, this stuff is awesome. And it was only like $6 US (had to specify) A happy smile

Thu, 2007-11-01 01:02
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

I seem to have said that discussion of proxying is off limits. But since it just can't be allowed to die, here we go.

monkeychewtoy wrote:
Wizards uses "proxies" extensively.

You would have a very hard time persuading anyone who is informed on the matter to believe that what the FFL League does for playtesting is equivalent to proxying. Likewise, making cards for testing your own set is very different.

Proxying isn't making a fake card, it is making a fake of a real card. That's the difference; and proxying isn't okay by any standard. If you want to use a real card in a game, go buy it.

Edit: Oh, and think what you will of the harshness of my reaction. In reality, you would get the same reaction over in, say, mtgsalvation, except with a whole lot less explanation.

Thu, 2007-11-01 05:55
monkeychewtoy
monkeychewtoy's picture

Pichoro,

Spoiler:
Where we agree:
Pichoro wrote:
Proxying isn't making a fake card, it is making a fake of a real card.
monkeychewtoy wrote:
The problem is not the word, "proxy," but rather the suggestion of what is, in effect, counterfeiting.

Pichoro wrote:
If you want to use a real card in a game, go buy it.

This is, in all honesty, exactly my stance on the practice.

Where we disagree:

Pichoro wrote:
You would have a very hard time persuading anyone who is informed on the matter to believe that what the FFL League does for playtesting is equivalent to proxying.

I made deliberate attempts to differentiate between the practice known as "proxying" and proxying in the sense of "to substitute one thing for another." It's the fourth sentence in my spoiler. You clearly make no such distinction within the term, ("Proxying isn't making a fake card,") so there's a misunderstanding here.

I'm not claiming that the FFL "proxies" in the usual sense. But they do use the word "proxy" to refer to it. I pointed this out simply because I thought it possible that USMC2Hard4U was using it in the same sense the FFL does. You can see in this case that your response, and consequently mine, take on entirely different lights. Do not construe my words as being in favor of the practice; I am not. However, there are still two things I disagree with:

Pichoro wrote:
[P]roxying isn't okay by any standard.

I mentioned three standards by which I believe "the act of substituting one thing for another" to be justified: playtesting, oracle updates, and tokens. It's clear that we have different standards here, but that only furthers my point.

Lastly,

Pichoro wrote:
In reality, you would get the same reaction over in, say, mtgsalvation, except with a whole lot less explanation.

I just don't see it as possible for them to give an amount of explanation less than zero. Winking smiley

Anyway, sorry. It's clear that we're talking about different things here. If it's all right with you, I'm prepared to let this die, since I think we've both presented our points in full. There's nothing I've said now that really begs a response; I've just more succinctly defined what I was already saying. We should probably put this misunderstanding behind us.

AlexKOJ,
I've printed on 70-lb paper, and it's a bit thinner than it needs to be. I've used 110 for other projects, however, and it seems about right. Let me know how it works out.

And man, what I'd do for some of their patented varnish, mmm. New card smell. Anyone else here ever crack a pack and spend about 30 seconds just smelling it? Man I love that smell.


September 21, 2007: Monkeychewtoy predicts monocolored hybrid cards, calls them "Ridiculous."

Thu, 2007-11-01 06:19
carbonfyre
carbonfyre's picture

Proxy. Heh-heh. He said proxy.

Sorry couldn't resist.

Here's my stance:

If you are intending to 'proxy' your own cards, that you created, there shouldn't be any problem. Somewhat the same for tokens and such.

However, using 'proxies' for actually printing copies of Wizards' copyrighted intellectual properties...big no-no, even if it is for playtesting. If you just have to print a 'real' card to play with, leave out the art or something. Make it clear you are not trying to counterfeit a card.

As was stated earlier, MSE is on a thin rope when it comes to legality. Several less advanced programs fell victim to cease-and-desist orders, and thus are no longer available to use. I would like to see continued development for this software and Wizards getting wind of realistic 'proxies' in circulation is going to shut us down quickly.

This program is intended to be used for us to express creativity in designing our own sets and cards that have nothing to do with actual printed cards, and it should stay that way. Like Pichoro stated, if you want to play with real cards, go buy some boosters instead of risking the continued availability and possible lawsuits that 'proxies' could bring about.

Oh, and just to let everyone know, I used to be just as defensive when Pichoro would seem to be gunning for me. I finally learned that he is not actually gunning for me. He genuinely cares about this community and his responsibilities as a developer and moderator. If he says that a topic should die, he is most likely correct. I believe a little respect can go a long way with him, but no respect will get you nowhere even faster.

Thu, 2007-11-01 17:10
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

monkeychewtoy wrote:
I made deliberate attempts to differentiate between the practice known as "proxying" and proxying in the sense of "to substitute one thing for another." It's the fourth sentence in my spoiler. You clearly make no such distinction within the term, ("Proxying isn't making a fake card,") so there's a misunderstanding here.

I disagree; I made plenty of distinction. If you quote the rest of me, you see that I said "Proxying isn't making a fake card, it's making a fake of a real card." Although WotC may have referred to it as "proxying" in their article (and yes, they used quotation marks), what they're doing there is more accurately described as playtesting (and yes, they called them playtest cards without quotation marks), because those cards don't exist yet; they're not real. Once a card sees print from a WotC printing press, it is real, and should not be proxied any longer.

monkeychewtoy wrote:
I just don't see it as possible for them to give an amount of explanation less than zero.

I guess at this point, I'll quote a few lines from mtgsalvation's "PSD Thread", including a quote from Annorax, one of their mods.

Jubal wrote:
I dont know if anyone sai danything because theres like 10 pages, and I dont want to read it all, but 219-221 pixels is the ideal aspect ratio for cards sans border if your proxy-printing

Nex3 wrote:
We don't talk about printing proxies here . Wizards doesn't like it, it'd borderline illegal, and it's just not good to talk about.

Annorax wrote:
Not only are you wrong as all hell, you're not getting any help here.

Think what you want about my "no further discussion" attitude with the matter, but remember, I responded much more openly than that. And I would point out that he received no challenge on the matter. And now that I'm done defending myself, for the good of MSE and this community, any further discussion on proxies will be deleted.

smr1313 wrote:
Oh, and just to let everyone know, I used to be just as defensive when Pichoro would seem to be gunning for me. I finally learned that he is not actually gunning for me. He genuinely cares about this community and his responsibilities as a developer and moderator. If he says that a topic should die, he is most likely correct. I believe a little respect can go a long way with him, let's please stop talking about proxies. Thank you.

Thank you, smr1313. Indeed, I take no issue with monkeychewtoy.

Thu, 2007-11-01 17:29
carbonfyre
carbonfyre's picture

But, I was wondering if...

Just kidding again.

This is a topic that I have looked into alot (and I'm not talking about the 'P' word). That, a community, just like in real life, needs moderation. Pichoro was chosen to moderate these forums because he is dang good at it. He's probably one of, if not THE most active member of the forums, and when he gets hot on a topic, he also fully explains why he is for or against an issue while letting it be known that the is just saying what he feels is best for our community.

If this forum had a 'rep' function, we should all give him kudos for sticking with it for so long.

So, kudos to Pichoro!

And, if we do end up creating a new home for the MSE community, I will ask Pichoro to be a top dog in the process and implementation of that new home.

Thu, 2007-11-01 20:44
AlexKOJ
AlexKOJ's picture

Actually, since Twanvl created MSE, he and only he can choose to move MSE elsewhere, unless he says otherwise.

Thu, 2007-11-01 21:24
carbonfyre
carbonfyre's picture

Quote:
Actually, since Twanvl created MSE, he and only he can choose to move MSE elsewhere, unless he says otherwise.

Actually, nobody asked you specifically. Secondly, nobody is moving MSE, just the community aspect of it.

This website is and always will be the home of the Magic Set Editor software. That is what Sourceforge is all about, open source software development.

However, the community that has sprung forth from the software has grown larger than this site. Myself and many of this community's more prominent members have been discussing that maybe it is time to forge a new home for our members to discuss interests outside of the software itself.

This site should be dedicated to the actual development of the software. However, many other issues currently run alongside of the development. For instance, custom sets, card ideas, mechanics discussions, and many other topics have absolutely nothing to do with the software. These issues revolve around how people use the software. This, in my opinion, crowds the development forums and should be discussed elsewhere.

In addition, if you haven't noticed, MSE servers have been experiencing a lot of lag lately. This is due, in part, to the fact that we are spending most of our time here frequently bogging down the forums with off topic discussions.

The forums here should actually be used to discuss things like feature requests, bug reports, how to use the software, etc.

I have mentioned before that many of our members are afraid of abrupt change and fear that moving the community or changing this site would cause the community to fall apart. I disagree, but empathize with those fears and take every effort to make sure ensure that accepting change is the only way to evolve and make things better in the end.

I am going to start a thread for discussing these issues in more detail so that the community may become involved and voice their concerns and opinions.

Quote:
Here is the thread for continuing this discussion: http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/node/1282

Fri, 2007-11-02 19:19
Komaru

I picked up some card stock the other day to try printing my stuff out on. Unfortunately, the photopaper I got is too thin, and smears even if it's dried for over a day. That said, I'm also a crazed perfectionist, and, as such, I haven't figured out a good way to print card backs. I suppose if I just started using sleeves, then only the front would matter...

Fri, 2007-11-02 22:00
AlexKOJ
AlexKOJ's picture

@smr: It doesn't matter if anyone asked me specifically about the topic or not. This is an open forum, and as long as I am a member, I may post where I am permitted whenever I want, granted it pertains to the discussion and is appropriate.

Also, when I said MSE, I was referring to the community, which was the discussion at hand. I know that the program will stay here. That's what SourceForge is for, as you said. Hope this clears it up.

smr1313 wrote:
In addition, if you haven't noticed, MSE servers have been experiencing a lot of lag lately. This is due, in part, to the fact that we are spending most of our time here frequently bogging down the forums with off topic discussions.
This is funny, because the talk of moving the community in this thread, which you started, has absolutely no relevance to the paper upon which we print.

@Komaru: Check the General Question forum for a thread called "Printing on both sides" or something like that. You'll be happy.

Fri, 2007-11-02 22:32
Komaru

Yeah, I've seen that thread. Thanks though.

I forgot to add my main point about printing on card stock:

Be sure your printer can handle it. The stock I have, though slightly thinner than the WOTC stuff, is still to stiff to run through my printer. If you have the option of feeding paper through the back, that would probably be best.

Fri, 2007-11-02 22:34
carbonfyre
carbonfyre's picture

I apologize for my 'apparent' rudeness.

I was simply stating it is an open topic, as you just pointed out to me, not a question as to whether or not Twan would agree. I'll leave that for Twan to decide, not you. That is all I said.

As for me starting a non-topic reply, I believe that our Moderator stated that the topic of 'proxies', as referenced by printing cards on paper or stock that nearly resembles that of the same product Wizards uses, is not to be discussed anymore So, the topic should have been closed anyway. Though I do realize that I should have posted elsewhere, which is my bad. Thank you for pointing that out to me, as my statements are rather hypocritic in that stance.

Yet, my reply was not actually posted as a new topic. If you read the post, you would see that I was merely commending Pichoro for keeping on top of a touchy subject, while mentioning that if it were to happen I would want Pichoro as a top dog in the process. Then you chimed in and let it be known that only Twan may control an, as you said, open forum and what it's members decide to do with their time and interests.

AlexKOJ wrote:
Actually, since Twanvl created MSE, he and only he can choose to move MSE elsewhere, unless he says otherwise.

AlexKOJ wrote:
Also, when I said MSE, I was referring to the community, which was the discussion at hand.

Actually, you are wrong twice. You did not specifically refer to the community. MSE and the MSE community are seperate entities. One is software, the other is people. No one could prevent every member of this forum from moving to a better option if they choose, not even Twan. However, this isn't about trying to undermine Twan's creation, it is about offering a solution to the current state of MSE's community and its members. In fact, I nor anyone else would dream of moving anything without his blessings, so you merely reinforced what we all already felt on the subject: If Twan thinks it is a good idea, we'll run with it; if not we'll likely think of something else.

So, whether you agree with anything I say or not is not relevant, since, as you said, this is an open forum and as long as I am a member, I may post whatever I want, within the guidelines set forth by the moderators. If you don't want me being defensive on a subject, then don't become defensive about something that was not forced on you specifically. I never said you didn't have a voice in the matter, I merely pointed out that your voice wasn't the only one to be heard.

Now, I've said my bit on this matter and hope not to have to do it again in such a combative way. And I prefer to leave the moderating of topics to the moderators. If you have a problem with something I say, report it. Pichoro will handle it fairly.

Once again, sorry for my harsh words, but I wasn't trying to attack you with my statements, only keep my stance that the subject is open to debate with all members of the site, not one person.

Fri, 2007-11-02 22:55
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

First, let's be friendly please, folks.

Second, while proxying (there's that word again) is off limits for discussing, I see no problem discussing what type of paper works best for you for printing cards on. In fact, I seem to have noticed some discussion about some types not working well for smearing; this seems to be a fruitful direction of discussion to me, so I've no plans to close this thread.

I just want it to get back on topic and away from potentially illegal activities.

Sat, 2007-11-03 01:54
monkeychewtoy
monkeychewtoy's picture

I just feel like pointing out that discussion of legally-ambiguous activities is not illegal in and of itself. (In most places.) That's the only reason I had the reaction I did to Pichoro's initial response--barring discussion of something just seems wrong to me, even if I don't like that something.

That all said, it's not the topic at hand. I really don't care about the horrible abominations people breed between their Sharpies and spare cards. I'm wanting to know what paper works, and how, so I can print off my set when I finish it.

I've long suspected that photo paper would produce the most attractive prints, but the only stuff I've seen has been way too thin. I've yet to see 110-lb glossy paper.

I open my booster packs very carefully. I've been saving the wrappers to refill with my own cards so I can have a booster draft with my set. But for the real, authentic experience, I'll need proper-weighted cards.

So if anyone knows where I can get thick, attractive paper, let me know.


September 21, 2007: Monkeychewtoy predicts monocolored hybrid cards, calls them "Ridiculous."

Sat, 2007-11-03 02:01
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

monkeychewtoy wrote:
I just feel like pointing out that discussion of legally-ambiguous activities is not illegal in and of itself. (In most places.) That's the only reason I had the reaction I did to Pichoro's initial response--barring discussion of something just seems wrong to me, even if I don't like that something.

Feel how you want; but with all due respect, I didn't accept the "moderatorship" to protect feelings or make friends. I'd rather not have to do anything, and have everything go on in harmony, but without a thought, I'll take whatever action is necessary to protect the integrity and reputation of the program.

We have a good reputation now; WotC has even used MSE generated images on their site. To me, this speaks volumes about how they see this place, and MSE. I do not desire to have their view soured by people discussing proxying.


As said above, discussing what paper works best for you, though, is a great line of conversation. I'd love to see more discussion about this. It is good information about how to get the most out of the program, and how to get more bang for your buck when you're making your own custom cards. Sounds like a very useful discussion to me.

Personally, I know almost nothing about paper qualities.

Sat, 2007-11-03 02:38
monkeychewtoy
monkeychewtoy's picture

I admire your passion and resolve, Pichoro. And agree with you. That's the thing that strikes me as strangest about this ordeal--I feel like I'm arguing with you, but I absolutely agree. So are you sure you don't want to make a friend? Winking smiley

The Pichoro in my Imagination wrote:
I once shot a man in Reno, to keep MSE alive.

Okay, sorry for that.

Anyway, this seems to be the stuff I'm looking for. So if anyone's seen it in stores...


September 21, 2007: Monkeychewtoy predicts monocolored hybrid cards, calls them "Ridiculous."

Sat, 2007-11-03 04:07
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

Lol...

While I may not be moderator to make friends, I'm certainly not opposed to doing so.

Good luck finding that paper; looks scarce. Probably have to order it online.

Sat, 2007-11-03 09:40
riodelapanlima
riodelapanlima's picture

I am sorry because this is off topic, but I can't resist in putting this.

Spoiler:

dedicated to Pichoro, our hardworking moderator

Sat, 2007-11-03 16:14
carbonfyre
carbonfyre's picture

Hah, that's figgin' funny, I don't care who ya are!

Sat, 2007-11-03 18:51
riodelapanlima
riodelapanlima's picture

smr1313...are you offended by the card I made?

smr1313 wrote:
I don't care who ya are!

Sun, 2007-11-04 00:05
AlexKOJ
AlexKOJ's picture

No. It's something that Larry the Cable Guy says. Whenever a joke he tells is funny, he says, "I don't care who you are; that's funny right here!"

Sun, 2007-11-04 06:54
riodelapanlima
riodelapanlima's picture

different country, different culture..
Sorry, never heard or met larry the cable guy.
So I don't familiar with him

Wed, 2007-11-07 12:46
eikons

Well USMC2Hard4U,

You might wanna read through my printing guide: http://magicseteditor.sourceforge.net/node/1277
It describes accurately how you can print double-sided in the right sizes.

The paper I used was 300Gramms.(i'm in EU so we use Grams Stick out your tongue but im guessing its 110 lbs.)

I printed 800 cards this way and they are hardly distinguishable from real ones... except that the card's effects/mana cost/names/artists/etc. are total bullocks Stick out your tongue

Wed, 2007-11-07 21:32
kobalobasileus

First, on the topic of printing: I use glossy presentation paper and glue it onto a crappy common (since I primarily play Yu-Gi-Oh, crappy commons are very easy to come by) with a glue stick. However, I find that, for some reason, my print outs are STICKY! It is really annoying, and the only solution I've found is to sprinkle flour on the faces of my cards. Any suggestions for avoiding sticky prints but staying glossy? I thought about photo paper, but the samples I have seem even stickier than presentation paper.

Second, have the Powers That Be of this project considered changing the name of the program to something generic like "TCG Designer" to keep WOTC off our backs? I and several others on this board have mentioned that we are designing our own entire games, not just custom cards for existing games. It seems to me that calling the program "Magic Set Editor" unfairly pigeonholes it into a gray area of intellectual property rights, when it can be and is used for so much more that is completely legit. If the name was changed and the primary purpose of the software was re-marketed, WOTC could, at most, stop distribution of the Magic Templates. As it is now, it would be like if Adobe called Acrobat "Manga Pirate" or something along those lines (yes, that example is probably a bit silly).

Thu, 2007-11-08 03:24
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

kobalobasileus wrote:
Second, have the Powers That Be of this project considered changing the name of the program to something generic like "TCG Designer" to keep WOTC off our backs? I and several others on this board have mentioned that we are designing our own entire games, not just custom cards for existing games. It seems to me that calling the program "Magic Set Editor" unfairly pigeonholes it into a gray area of intellectual property rights, when it can be and is used for so much more that is completely legit. If the name was changed and the primary purpose of the software was re-marketed, WOTC could, at most, stop distribution of the Magic Templates. As it is now, it would be like if Adobe called Acrobat "Manga Pirate" or something along those lines (yes, that example is probably a bit silly).

Well, the primary purpose is Magic cards. The last time I counted, there were about 60 templates; 40ish were Magic.

And really, as is, WotC doesn't seem to mind us. They use us on their site. I just don't see it as beneficial to give them a bone to pick with us.

As for the name, although the name mentions Magic, it isn't a trademarked word, as far as I know. "Magic: the Gathering" almost certainly is. But the word "magic" has many meanings, and it's only natural to caplitalize it since it's the first word in the name of the program. As is, I think cutting the WotC owned templates out would leave them with nothing to complain about, regardless of name. Notice, though, that there are more WotC owned templates than just Magic. But really, that comes back to my original thought; why give them a reason to complain about to begin with?

Thu, 2007-11-08 04:28
coppro
Administrator
coppro's picture

In fact, Wizards had to choose the name "Magic: the Gathering" simply because "Magic" was untrademarkable.

Thu, 2007-11-08 07:29
monkeychewtoy
monkeychewtoy's picture

Yeah. And it's still not terribly clear what's being gathered. Planeswalkers and/or spells from across the multiverse, I guess.


September 21, 2007: Monkeychewtoy predicts monocolored hybrid cards, calls them "Ridiculous."

Sat, 2007-11-10 03:39
kobalobasileus

Methinks Mana. Or perhaps players. Or perhaps cards. Or perhaps giant piles of money in Garfield's pocketses. A happy smile

Mon, 2007-11-12 21:47
zotoshibobo
zotoshibobo's picture

I got some 110# card stock at Sams Club, it the closest I have seen to any CCG, and it was like $5.50 for 250 sheets. w00t!

Wed, 2007-11-14 02:34
kobalobasileus

Was the 110# stock glossy? I got some 65# stock that is a little too thin, but workable. The main problem I have with it is that it's not glossy. I find that my printer works better with glossy paper, and I just like the look of glossy cards better than matte. If only it wasn't sticky!

Thu, 2007-12-13 11:02
zotoshibobo
zotoshibobo's picture

No, It's matte paper, but I use sleeves so...

On another note, how do you guys think a laminater would work?

Thu, 2007-12-13 19:52
kobalobasileus

I think laminated cards might end up a bit like Yu-Gi-Oh Parallel Rares.

Thu, 2007-12-27 17:31
Pichoro
Pichoro's picture

Recently, they've been discussing something at mtgsalvation that I find to be an interesting prospect; erasing a card. They only erase part of it, then proceed to draw/paint/mark on it. I wonder if it plausible to erase a card completely, then print on it? Their discussion on the matter can be found scattered in the last several days of discussion in this thread.

And yes, I'm fairly certain this is the same thread that lead Lordpenguin to create the artbackground template.

Thu, 2007-12-27 22:46
Art_Freak
Art_Freak's picture

It's totally plausible, but you need a printer that can do photo-quality prints, and that can either load envelopes through a slot in the back, or is a photo printer (like the little Kodak ones) so that the card goes in without requiring it to bend through pullies. I would recommend a laserjet, but I managed to do it in the past when I was still into YGO with an inkjet (just don't touch it till it's dry if you use an inkjet.)
If you do it, I recommend using an ink eraser to erase the card. A white rubber eraser will work as well, but the ink eraser requires very little effort and doesn't burn through half an eraser to do the job.

Fri, 2007-12-28 00:17
The Butt
The Butt's picture

I don't think it will work, myself. The gloss on the card has to be taken into account as well.

I mean, I tried printing on the glossy side of a piece of Bristol Board once, for kicks. The ink ended up wet, and didn't merge with the cardboard. Sliding my finger across the card took a bunch of ink with it.

Fri, 2007-12-28 13:14
Dr. Slump
Dr. Slump's picture

Same happened with me. I was trying to print some cards I did with MSE, but the ink just doesn't dry...