Very interesting comparisons! Thank you for this as I had no idea about all the different options for the RWS Tarot decks. I’ve only been into Tarot for about 4 years now and I’ve fallen in love with reading the cards. My deck is the RWS Radiant Tarot. I love the borderless pictures, the shine of the paper and the heavy card stock.
Thank you sooooo much for this video… I just reviewed this deck on my channel and I have to say that I am very pleased with it… thank you for all the very good information you have given us in this video….but the way I will be subscribing to your channel…😊
I find myself overwhelmed, utterly confused, and running screaming from the room. You should be commended for your scholarly approach and the research you've undertaken. For me, it comes down to personal taste and preference as well as the subtleties between them. I have 8 different RWS decks (only one of them is one of these) and I'm happy with the distinctions between all of them and all are different enough in their looks and packaging to easily tell them apart. I totally think publishers should drastically change the packaging or put a large bold identifiable stamp on each box with a distinguishing number to set them apart.
Yikes! I'm sorry, I didn't mean to confuse you. I have to admit, I re-shot this video a few times because I was confusing myself...and I can't say that I'm 100% satisfied with this version.
My favorite part was the "ooooooooOOoooOOoo" when you opened the box! This was a great video. I had no idea about the editions prior to the OG Dirty Pam. Thanks for sharing!
Hah! I'm glad my goofy vocalizations continue to entertain. :) I always feel like I should be more professional for some reason...but it wouldn't be half as much fun to make or watch.
I want a dirty Pam deck so bad! I bought the radiant wise and love it, but it’s kind of zoomed in and the cards are pretty stiff and shiny (for my taste). Stunning cards. Loved your video!
you prolly dont care but does any of you know a trick to log back into an instagram account?? I somehow forgot my account password. I love any tips you can offer me!
@Jimmy Layne thanks for your reply. I got to the site on google and I'm trying it out atm. Takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
What an interesting video! The "dirty Pam" as it has become known was difficult to get in Canada once all the craze caught on and people decided they liked it. Whatever I didn't like about the line work was made up for by the beautiful shading and colours . I just got the Radiant Wise Spirit last month and I find I quite like it. Its as close as Ill ever get to the "dirty Pam" Thanks for posting this informative video for us! : )
Yup! They’re the same deck. Tarot Original 1909 had not yet come out in the US when I made this video, so I couldn’t include it…but they’re the same deck.
Have you seen the Tarot Original 1909 from Lo Scarabeo yet? It is forthcoming in June 2021 from their US imprint, Llewellyn. It also has the greenish tint in the “blues.” I wonder if this is a scan of an older deck that had faded colors? I have the Centennial from US games, which looks similar but the “blues” seem to be on point.
Hi Jonny, The Tarot Original 1909 is a reprint of the deck in the last of the three "wheatsheaf" boxes. It's not a horrible reproduction of a historic Pam B. (Centennial from US Games is based on the earlier Pam A.) Lo Scarabeo did make some photoshop choices with this B so that the images would best fit their skinnier aspect ratio. I haven't got a copy of Tarot Original 1909 yet as it isn't currently available in the US...but we shall see!
@@melissazupan6026 thank you for your response! I see that is appears that the 1909 is the last wheatsheaf deck in a different box. So “Original 1909” is a misnomer??? And they photoshopped the image? Why would they do this, is it because the original images are inconsistent in size?
@@jonnypolk2502 The original images are actually inconsistent in size, but I think the primary reason Lo Scarabeo photoshopped is because the dimensions of the card they used is narrower than the cards that Rider used. So Lo Scarabeo creatively crops, squeezes, or elongates areas of cards to make it fit. If you look at the bottom of the Fool card, for example, you'll see that the bottom of that card was elongated. The name "Original 1909" is a misnomer. The deck used for this was the Pam B, which was done in the late 30s and 40s. However, the founder of Lo Scarabeo is convinced it was the first deck, or the one published in 1909. So that's what they called their reproduction.
@@melissazupan6026 hi.. I am no expert at all here but isn't the ''dirty Pam'' the exact same photoshoped Pam B line work than the ''boring Pam'' or the Original 1909? I am a newbie and my first and only RWS has been the Original 1909 and I feel cheated but also tryimg to find a genuine artistic value in it as a good Pam B reproduction.. but having only noticed the huge stretching of the bottom of the Fool bugs me quite a bit and need reasons to make peace with it 😅 Thank you for your very informative work!
Hello,why is it called boring pam? Thanks for doing this video! What's about the other decks in this series? The centennial, which also was released in a set as commemorative-set (very beauftiful!!) and as little version in a tin, then the 1910 and 1909 version and others in between of this publishers. I wish you nice easterholydays!
I think the deck with the titles on top and bottom of the card was printed by AGM. The line work seems to be same as the recent AGM printing of PAM A with crackle backs. I could be wrong but its just my observation. Maybe you could do a comparison of those two decks. :)
Do you have any insight on why Pam “B” and “C” had different line art? I have been trying to research this but haven’t found this question addressed directly.
Hi I have enjoyed seeing the different lo scarabeo versions and having the differences explained as well, but can I ask you: right at the beginning of the video you mention a "study" deck which has the pebble backs and lovely colours. It looks a bit like the AE Waite by Muller except for the lovely calligraphy. Would you mind telling me what deck that is please! It's lovely. Best wishes Adam
Hi Adam, That deck was the "Study Deck for Tarot Course" that a Parkson Kwok uploaded to Make Playing Cards. He basically took scans of Kenji Ishimatsu's Pam A, did some minor photoshop to camouflage the worst damage (like on the 3 of pentacles), and uploaded it to MPC. I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be for his own private use...but he never took it down and the tarot community discovered it. I'd LOVE to know what he's got in his MPC creator balance at this point. :) Here's the link to the deck: www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/marketplace/study-deck-for-tarot-course.html
Hi Melissa, wow! That's fascinating to read. Thanks so much for the helpful reply and the link to Making Playing Cards. I've never come across this deck in all my years of internet tarot travelling. A facsimile of a surviving Pam A with the crackled backs. That's awesome. Adam
Very interesting comparisons! Thank you for this as I had no idea about all the different options for the RWS Tarot decks. I’ve only been into Tarot for about 4 years now and I’ve fallen in love with reading the cards. My deck is the RWS Radiant Tarot. I love the borderless pictures, the shine of the paper and the heavy card stock.
I am fairly new to tarot still and getting into the history. I loved this video and learning the publication history of lo scarabeo’ dirty Pam deck
Thank you sooooo much for this video… I just reviewed this deck on my channel and I have to say that I am very pleased with it… thank you for all the very good information you have given us in this video….but the way I will be subscribing to your channel…😊
I find myself overwhelmed, utterly confused, and running screaming from the room. You should be commended for your scholarly approach and the research you've undertaken. For me, it comes down to personal taste and preference as well as the subtleties between them. I have 8 different RWS decks (only one of them is one of these) and I'm happy with the distinctions between all of them and all are different enough in their looks and packaging to easily tell them apart. I totally think publishers should drastically change the packaging or put a large bold identifiable stamp on each box with a distinguishing number to set them apart.
Yikes! I'm sorry, I didn't mean to confuse you. I have to admit, I re-shot this video a few times because I was confusing myself...and I can't say that I'm 100% satisfied with this version.
My favorite part was the "ooooooooOOoooOOoo" when you opened the box! This was a great video. I had no idea about the editions prior to the OG Dirty Pam. Thanks for sharing!
Hah! I'm glad my goofy vocalizations continue to entertain. :) I always feel like I should be more professional for some reason...but it wouldn't be half as much fun to make or watch.
I want a dirty Pam deck so bad! I bought the radiant wise and love it, but it’s kind of zoomed in and the cards are pretty stiff and shiny (for my taste). Stunning cards. Loved your video!
Maybe someday Lo Scarabeo will bring Dirty Pam back? There are plenty of people who would jump at the chance to have one.
you prolly dont care but does any of you know a trick to log back into an instagram account??
I somehow forgot my account password. I love any tips you can offer me!
@Jaxton Dax Instablaster ;)
@Jimmy Layne thanks for your reply. I got to the site on google and I'm trying it out atm.
Takes a while so I will get back to you later when my account password hopefully is recovered.
@Jimmy Layne It did the trick and I now got access to my account again. I am so happy!
Thanks so much you saved my ass!
This was really interesting! Thanks for the tour through the Pamela Colman Smith tarot versions. 😉
Thanks, Jen! This was all 100% because I kept trying and failing to get a Dirty Pam. I ended up with a lot of decks...
So fascinating!!!! I so appreciate the depth of your knowledge!
What an interesting video! The "dirty Pam" as it has become known was difficult to get in Canada once all the craze caught on and people decided they liked it. Whatever I didn't like about the line work was made up for by the beautiful shading and colours . I just got the Radiant Wise Spirit last month and I find I quite like it. Its as close as Ill ever get to the "dirty Pam" Thanks for posting this informative video for us! : )
I love this. Got my Mini today. Thanks for sharing.
Awesome! I'm really enjoying the mini...and I'm not a huge fan of mini decks!
Thank you. This was very interesting.
this video as super helpful, im trying to online shop for this one and i needed to make sure i was getting the pam B!!
Great! I'm so glad you found it useful!
Great video thank you so much!
You're very welcome!
This is great. Thank you. :)
hi, thanks for this very comprehensive video. is it my mistake, or is the deck you call "Boring Pam" identical to the Tarot Original 1909?
Yup! They’re the same deck. Tarot Original 1909 had not yet come out in the US when I made this video, so I couldn’t include it…but they’re the same deck.
Have you seen the Tarot Original 1909 from Lo Scarabeo yet? It is forthcoming in June 2021 from their US imprint, Llewellyn. It also has the greenish tint in the “blues.” I wonder if this is a scan of an older deck that had faded colors? I have the Centennial from US games, which looks similar but the “blues” seem to be on point.
Hi Jonny, The Tarot Original 1909 is a reprint of the deck in the last of the three "wheatsheaf" boxes. It's not a horrible reproduction of a historic Pam B. (Centennial from US Games is based on the earlier Pam A.) Lo Scarabeo did make some photoshop choices with this B so that the images would best fit their skinnier aspect ratio. I haven't got a copy of Tarot Original 1909 yet as it isn't currently available in the US...but we shall see!
@@melissazupan6026 thank you for your response! I see that is appears that the 1909 is the last wheatsheaf deck in a different box. So “Original 1909” is a misnomer??? And they photoshopped the image? Why would they do this, is it because the original images are inconsistent in size?
@@jonnypolk2502 The original images are actually inconsistent in size, but I think the primary reason Lo Scarabeo photoshopped is because the dimensions of the card they used is narrower than the cards that Rider used. So Lo Scarabeo creatively crops, squeezes, or elongates areas of cards to make it fit. If you look at the bottom of the Fool card, for example, you'll see that the bottom of that card was elongated. The name "Original 1909" is a misnomer. The deck used for this was the Pam B, which was done in the late 30s and 40s. However, the founder of Lo Scarabeo is convinced it was the first deck, or the one published in 1909. So that's what they called their reproduction.
@@melissazupan6026 hi.. I am no expert at all here but isn't the ''dirty Pam'' the exact same photoshoped Pam B line work than the ''boring Pam'' or the Original 1909?
I am a newbie and my first and only RWS has been the Original 1909 and I feel cheated but also tryimg to find a genuine artistic value in it as a good Pam B reproduction.. but having only noticed the huge stretching of the bottom of the Fool bugs me quite a bit and need reasons to make peace with it 😅
Thank you for your very informative work!
Hello,why is it called boring pam? Thanks for doing this video! What's about the other decks in this series? The centennial, which also was released in a set as commemorative-set (very beauftiful!!) and as little version in a tin, then the 1910 and 1909 version and others in between of this publishers. I wish you nice easterholydays!
This was so cool. Thanks 🙏 💜
I think the deck with the titles on top and bottom of the card was printed by AGM. The line work seems to be same as the recent AGM printing of PAM A with crackle backs. I could be wrong but its just my observation. Maybe you could do a comparison of those two decks. :)
Do you have any insight on why Pam “B” and “C” had different line art? I have been trying to research this but haven’t found this question addressed directly.
Hi I have enjoyed seeing the different lo scarabeo versions and having the differences explained as well, but can I ask you: right at the beginning of the video you mention a "study" deck which has the pebble backs and lovely colours. It looks a bit like the AE Waite by Muller except for the lovely calligraphy. Would you mind telling me what deck that is please! It's lovely. Best wishes Adam
Hi Adam,
That deck was the "Study Deck for Tarot Course" that a Parkson Kwok uploaded to Make Playing Cards. He basically took scans of Kenji Ishimatsu's Pam A, did some minor photoshop to camouflage the worst damage (like on the 3 of pentacles), and uploaded it to MPC. I'm pretty sure this was supposed to be for his own private use...but he never took it down and the tarot community discovered it. I'd LOVE to know what he's got in his MPC creator balance at this point. :)
Here's the link to the deck: www.makeplayingcards.com/sell/marketplace/study-deck-for-tarot-course.html
Hi Melissa, wow! That's fascinating to read. Thanks so much for the helpful reply and the link to Making Playing Cards. I've never come across this deck in all my years of internet tarot travelling. A facsimile of a surviving Pam A with the crackled backs. That's awesome. Adam
Melissa, just for your reference. The Study deck is actually too red compared to a real Pam A.