Card Design & Photography

[RGM81]

For all of the talking about grumbling about headshots and airbrushed images that ITG has to use for their cards, why isn't there more discussion of the design on some of Upper Deck's cards?

This has been something on my mind for a while now, and I guess having just broken a box of UD2 and really enjoying the photography used in the franchise has brought it back to the forefront.

Compare:

Champs


SPx


Collector's Choice:


ITG Between the Pipes:


Centennial:


Of these cards, only one uses a relatively full-body action shot that doesn't have the game taken out of the background. What difference is there between the BTP and CC card visuals?

I think what I'm getting at is that with all of the beautiful photography that exists out there of NHL players (courtesy of folks like Dennis Brodeur) why doesn't UD use more on-ice action shots in its products? You like at a product like Ice, SP Authentic, even The Cup - yes it's a full image of the player but on some generic background that really removes them from the game.

It's even worse on autograph and memorabilia cards - if you had the choice of a design looking like this:



or like this:



Which would you prefer? Yes, the latter image is an 8x10 but imagine how much better a hard-signed auto would look on a card without all of the clutter featuring an in-game photo?

Discuss.

[reoddai]

If you're talking just base cards, in the same way that I dislike ITG's head shots and use of backgrounds, I similarly dislike UD's SPx, CC.

As for Champs, the background is clean and classy. As for Centennial, a total lack of background, a nice action shot and a liberal sprinkling of Habs logos make for a decent looking card. A tasteful shinny UD logo out of the way isn't a problem.

Alternatively, this is exactly what's wrong with the other base cards you picked
CC - a head shot with poor border and an ugly logo that's the second or third thing that you look at
SPx - busy of the busy with Price being the second thing you might look at after the huge 'X' - but at least you have the small tasteful logo and Habs logo as well
ITG's base - at first glance, the background looks busy and the shading makes it hard to determine that the background is an arena. The lack of smooth lines makes the design look more simplistic than it really is. Straight, bold lines give the image a hard look. It also feels like there's wasted space given to the background and the three red stars that could have been given to a more photo without sacrificing the card background.

As for the 8x10, yes it looks like a big card. I just can't hold it in my hand. I can frame it or something, but I like cards because they fit in my hand.

hope to read some more discussion.

Cheers,
reoddai

[SkyFire47]

aside from some repetitiveness in UD's designs, i have no complaints. while ITG can't be faulted for the images they're restricted to, they've simply never matched UD in terms of actual design. that's just my opinion though.

i feel UD tries to keep it more modern whereas ITG, having a niche in prospects and vintage players, tries to keep it more retro. if ITG gets their license back, they'll seriously need to hire a better designer. from what i hear, they have great breaks in their products but i'm not one for breaking an ugly product.

[RGM81]

If you're talking just base cards, in the same way that I dislike ITG's head shots and use of backgrounds, I similarly dislike UD's SPx, CC.

As for Champs, the background is clean and classy. As for Centennial, a total lack of background, a nice action shot and a liberal sprinkling of Habs logos make for a decent looking card. A tasteful shinny UD logo out of the way isn't a problem.

Alternatively, this is exactly what's wrong with the other base cards you picked
CC - a head shot with poor border and an ugly logo that's the second or third thing that you look at
SPx - busy of the busy with Price being the second thing you might look at after the huge 'X' - but at least you have the small tasteful logo and Habs logo as well
ITG's base - at first glance, the background looks busy and the shading makes it hard to determine that the background is an arena. The lack of smooth lines makes the design look more simplistic than it really is. Straight, bold lines give the image a hard look. It also feels like there's wasted space given to the background and the three red stars that could have been given to a more photo without sacrificing the card background.

As for the 8x10, yes it looks like a big card. I just can't hold it in my hand. I can frame it or something, but I like cards because they fit in my hand.

hope to read some more discussion.

Cheers,
reoddai

On the 8x10 part, I was thinking along the lines of "imagine if they could have the actual cards looking like that" - of course they'd have to have the name & logos and such in there, but I'd take that any day over something like this:

[reoddai]

On the 8x10 part, I was thinking along the lines of "imagine if they could have the actual cards looking like that" - of course they'd have to have the name & logos and such in there, but I'd take that any day over something like this:

Oh yes. I whole heartedly agree. I always imagined that UD S1 and 2 really looked like a shrunken 8x10. Could that be why they're so popular?

Cheers,
reoddai

[tavares97]

the design also has alot to do with the price of the cards. COllecotrs choice are line art backgrounds that a 9 yr old could reproduce in 30 min... the higher up the chain the more grahic intensive the artwork...trust me, I did professional graphic arts for many years and its a HIGHLY expensive business to do this sort of stuff... I only like the art backgrounds as cutting players out and designing this stuff is a true art form, and requires great skill and imagination. I also love the S1-S2 as its clean, true, and printed on a very glossy stock. A true hockey card has to have the action, not a artists generic background.
keep the BASE fully action orientated and the inserts artist orientated...makes for clearence for autos and jersey, etc.

[OPCfan]

I'm not a graphic designer but I play with Photoshop from time to time. I think they don't go for the action shots because, like the previous poster said, it's harder to select the player out of the background. But you can't really blame ITG. They don't have an NHL license so they have to get creative to avoid displaying the logos. UD has gotten lazy though as I have seen them recycle the same graphic in different sets.

Case in point:








Sorry for the large pics.

That said I really want to like ITG, I really do. They have great value, great hits and they're Canadian and I want to support them but the designs of the cards just turn me off. I know it sounds stupid but the design matters to me. Why, I don't know. I started collecting in the late 90s when everybody was making their designs as elaborate as possible and as a kid I kind of went "oooohhh shiny", then again that's when I got into vintage OPC too . UD has gotten lazy with the designs a bit too. Probably what happens when you're the only licensed company and you produce a bazillion different sets. I think the UD designs from 95-96 to about 98-99 are some of their best work (I really do like 07/08 OPC premier though). I've been really unimpressed by the design of Series 1 and 2 since about 06/07.

Speaking of 8x10 I think Pinnacle had a jumbo sized set back in the day. Those cards that came in a can, that was a creative idea too although not practical (Anybody have the Roy from that set BTW?). I miss Pinnacle, Pacific, Donruss, Fleer and of course O-Pee-Chee. Does anyone really think this monopoly thing is a good idea? I hope ITG gets licensed and can get a hold of the OPC brand name to bring them back to Canada again.

[tavares97]

if OPC came back to Ontario, I would work there...as long as my bebfit package included a case of cards a month! lol

[RGM81]

I've noticed the recycled image thing a few times as well - check out Carey's SP Authentic and Victory rookies. It's kind of disappointing when a marquee set release uses the same photo as the lowest of the low-end sets. There's some others I've noticed that with as well - if my memory serves his Ice RC and Rookie Headliners insert use the same photo. UD isn't the only one to do this, of course, as I just noticed yesterday that Benoit Pouliot's autograph in H&P in 08-09 and 09-10 uses the same image of him.

I know that it costs money to acquire rights to these photos and everything and so you want to get your money out of them, but if there were a way to space it out over releases or make it less obvious, that'd be great.

[tavares97]

yes, I agree GRM81...ecspecially with all the advances in graphi arts now, even the same graphic can be changed dramatically. Escpecially when it comes to Carey Price, I honestly feel every card of him looks the same..if i just looked at 15 cards of him in a white jersey then 3 in a red one, id swear they were still the same pic...its rare to get a pic of him not in his stand up position with his glove up...

I found the best balance between card design was HABS Centennial...use of great photogrpahy, and slight photoshop work...toing down the hue and saturation on someonf the newer hero's and punching up th eold vets was amazing! the ghosting on the bottom gave the cards a beautfiull softness for the sharp clean logo, and slick pin striples...even to the back, this is where is was more graphic heavy...i liked that....I am the BIGGEST FAN of 08-09 HABS CE! lol
propably why im just finishing my 4th complete set #1-300 lol