What a great video…, I just reviewed the RWS by lo scarabeo on my channel and enjoyed your video very much… thank you for posting and I will keep on watching….😊
@@annerobinson2288 TH-cam can be as complicated or as simple as you want. I'm shooting all my videos on my phone, and I barely edit them. Sometimes I have to shoot them a few times to make them the way I want them...but it doesn't take terribly long. If you do want to share your Pam with the world but don't want to set up a TH-cam channel, I'll host the video for you.
Essian Mavex left a comment about this video and in it asked if I could do an Albano comparison. For whatever reason, his comment isn't appearing here. But my short answer to Essian (since I can't respond to him on his comment) is that I don't actually have a ton of Albano decks. I have one vintage 1968 one. And I'm sure I'll do comparisons with it at some time. I am, however, friends with a woman who has the most enviable Albano collection I know, and I'm sure that at some point either Moon Baby or I will collaborate with her.
Melissa, thanks for showing all the cards. The 6 of Pentacles and visible copyright info. are always dealbreakers for me. (so neither of these decks are going into my collection. You saved me money. Thanks again.)
@@annerobinson2288 A broken line on the scales is not the way Pixie intended it or it would have been on all the editions of the deck, and I believe it to be symbolic affecting interpretation. One has to know the other editions to know it's not supposed to be that way. What do you make symbolically of a pair of scales where the mechanism is broken? I read that as unjustness or unfairness. On most of the decks, it's just the opposite. It is properly balanced-equal treatment.
@@toadstooltarot I take it as a typo or printing error, like the Squiggly line on the Sun card of A, and D. It was obviously not intended. All of the versions contain creator errors or printing errors that I over look in reading them.
@@annerobinson2288 I'm glad you find it works for you. I get wanting to stay true to certain editions, and generally I don't mind little errors like the squiggly sun ray which I don't see as affecting the symbolism in a drastic way. And I understand wanting to stay true to certain editions. This is just one instance I can't forgive. It seems so easily remedied in updated versions and affects readings for me. Go ahead and collect the errant out of print edition if you can find one, but why keep the error in a popular reprint? That particular card's most important symbolic element is that set of scales. It's what that card is all about. I know it's a bone to pick I just can't let go of. I can't read symbols and then just say, oh, just ignore that, it's a printing error. Why even bother using that version of the deck when there are so many other correct versions? People take issue with Pixie's font not being used in some decks, but I don't see that as affecting readings...this, I do.
Good afternoon, I don’t know if you will see my message as this video is from few months ago already. I found on a website the original rider Waite printed in 1999 by Rider & Co/ Ebury publishing. As you said no chance to get the 1993 and the recent one, printed in China is just.....nothing to say about it. The PAM 3 could do, but size and card from Lo scarabeo are not my favorites. Do you think the one from 1999 might be like the 1993 ?? 🤔 As it is not US game and pretty old, could it be not printed in China ?? Thanks in advance for your advices and thoughts. Have a nice day
I am not a huge expert in the printing time line of the Original Rider Tarot. I know that the deck was originally put out in 1993 and was printed in Belgium. I *think* printing moved to Italy by 1999. The Italian decks are really yellow. Then around 2004, printing was moved to China. In general, I think most people prefer the Belgian deck over all, followed by China and then Italy.
@@melissazupan6026 on the informations written, it seems that it has been printed in the UK I might give it a try... I think it is early enough to not come from China with this really red saturated on most of cards. Otherwise I’ll get a Pam3. Thanks for your answer :) Enjoy your evening
What about the artists signature it doesn’t match. Look at the signature side by side with the same card. Doesn’t match. I think there was a different artist. A forger.
I don’t understand what you mean. I’ve looked at the PCS mark on these cards with these two decks on several cards and they are identical. Both of these decks do look different from your standard “yellow box” decks because the are based on Pam C/B decks, which were made when Rider recut the lithographic plates to use a new printing technology. They didn’t stick very close to Pamela’s original line art. The Yellow Box decks are based off the older Pam A/D decks linework.
What a great video…, I just reviewed the RWS by lo scarabeo on my channel and enjoyed your video very much… thank you for posting and I will keep on watching….😊
I just love tarot nerds
I like the Pam B that I have. Love the deeper reds and sage greens.
Crackle back and all. Love your comparisons.
Oooh! You have a Pam B? Anne...you HAVE to show it off on TH-cam! The world needs to see more of these decks! :)
@@melissazupan6026 I don't have any social media set ups and I don't know how to do a TH-cam video. What a lamester, huh?
@@annerobinson2288 TH-cam can be as complicated or as simple as you want. I'm shooting all my videos on my phone, and I barely edit them. Sometimes I have to shoot them a few times to make them the way I want them...but it doesn't take terribly long. If you do want to share your Pam with the world but don't want to set up a TH-cam channel, I'll host the video for you.
@@melissazupan6026 I do not have a TH-cam channel and wish I had the savvy to figure it out. Any suggestions?
@@melissazupan6026 I sent you an email response. Maybe you didn't see it yet.
Essian Mavex left a comment about this video and in it asked if I could do an Albano comparison. For whatever reason, his comment isn't appearing here. But my short answer to Essian (since I can't respond to him on his comment) is that I don't actually have a ton of Albano decks. I have one vintage 1968 one. And I'm sure I'll do comparisons with it at some time. I am, however, friends with a woman who has the most enviable Albano collection I know, and I'm sure that at some point either Moon Baby or I will collaborate with her.
Melissa, thanks for showing all the cards. The 6 of Pentacles and visible copyright info. are always dealbreakers for me. (so neither of these decks are going into my collection. You saved me money. Thanks again.)
You're welcome! Seriously, just avoid B/C decks. They're the ones with the broken string and no one ever corrects it because "Accuracy."
What about the 6 of Pentacles bothers you? If it is the broken line on the scales, that is the way it is on the 1930's Pam B.
@@annerobinson2288 A broken line on the scales is not the way Pixie intended it or it would have been on all the editions of the deck, and I believe it to be symbolic affecting interpretation. One has to know the other editions to know it's not supposed to be that way. What do you make symbolically of a pair of scales where the mechanism is broken? I read that as unjustness or unfairness. On most of the decks, it's just the opposite. It is properly balanced-equal treatment.
@@toadstooltarot I take it as a typo or printing error, like the Squiggly line on the Sun card of A, and D. It was obviously not intended. All of the versions contain creator errors or printing errors that I over look in reading them.
@@annerobinson2288 I'm glad you find it works for you. I get wanting to stay true to certain editions, and generally I don't mind little errors like the squiggly sun ray which I don't see as affecting the symbolism in a drastic way. And I understand wanting to stay true to certain editions. This is just one instance I can't forgive. It seems so easily remedied in updated versions and affects readings for me. Go ahead and collect the errant out of print edition if you can find one, but why keep the error in a popular reprint? That particular card's most important symbolic element is that set of scales. It's what that card is all about. I know it's a bone to pick I just can't let go of. I can't read symbols and then just say, oh, just ignore that, it's a printing error. Why even bother using that version of the deck when there are so many other correct versions? People take issue with Pixie's font not being used in some decks, but I don't see that as affecting readings...this, I do.
Good afternoon,
I don’t know if you will see my message as this video is from few months ago already.
I found on a website the original rider Waite printed in 1999 by Rider & Co/ Ebury publishing.
As you said no chance to get the 1993 and the recent one, printed in China is just.....nothing to say about it. The PAM 3 could do, but size and card from Lo scarabeo are not my favorites.
Do you think the one from 1999 might be like the 1993 ?? 🤔
As it is not US game and pretty old, could it be not printed in China ??
Thanks in advance for your advices and thoughts.
Have a nice day
I am not a huge expert in the printing time line of the Original Rider Tarot. I know that the deck was originally put out in 1993 and was printed in Belgium. I *think* printing moved to Italy by 1999. The Italian decks are really yellow. Then around 2004, printing was moved to China. In general, I think most people prefer the Belgian deck over all, followed by China and then Italy.
@@melissazupan6026 on the informations written, it seems that it has been printed in the UK
I might give it a try...
I think it is early enough to not come from China with this really red saturated on most of cards. Otherwise I’ll get a Pam3.
Thanks for your answer :)
Enjoy your evening
What about the artists signature it doesn’t match. Look at the signature side by side with the same card. Doesn’t match. I think there was a different artist. A forger.
I don’t understand what you mean. I’ve looked at the PCS mark on these cards with these two decks on several cards and they are identical. Both of these decks do look different from your standard “yellow box” decks because the are based on Pam C/B decks, which were made when Rider recut the lithographic plates to use a new printing technology. They didn’t stick very close to Pamela’s original line art. The Yellow Box decks are based off the older Pam A/D decks linework.