Design review for the Pharaoh's Club Paulson chips

[messenger309]

Damn you 10%... I was just getting over my broken heart as a result of selling my Rounders chips and was finally going to place an order with PC.com. Now I have to wait! Number 2 all the way! I bet you get these done faster than ASM anyway.

Rob

[TabascoJRC]

Have you confirmed that you are capable of getting custom inlay shapes?

If so , why the f did they not use a bigger inlay on the bond chips.

I bet that is why trademarks style is taking so long...I be they heard everyone's reaction and ran back screaming stop the presses hehe.

Oh yeah and my vote is for number 2 for exactly the same reasons as jojo.

A little note. If I were doing it I would think about it this way. You want a common element on every chip. A logo, I know the egytian theme is common, but still, for the chips to really be cohesive I think a common element is key, ie keep the pyramids on every chip with the text as the Casino logo, and change the watermark. or vice versa, but i think the element should be obvious. Simple and obvious. Especially if you are changing inlay shapes on every chip. I would just be careful about the chips looking modge podge with Very differnt graphics and different inlays.
my $.02 may be worth squat, however.

[Slow Play Ray]

[ QUOTE ]
A little note. If I were doing it I would think about it this way. You want a common element on every chip. A logo, I know the egytian theme is common, but still, for the chips to really be cohesive I think a common element is key, ie keep the pyramids on every chip with the text as the Casino logo, and change the watermark. or vice versa, but i think the element should be obvious.

[/ QUOTE ]

I agree 100%. The one thing I don't like about Foxwoods chips is that they are a "hodgepodge" of different designs, and really don't look like a cohesive set at all. I like the idea of only varying the watermark, and maybe the inlay color, from chip to chip. Just my opinion.

[jojobinks]

i think we might call that poll response overwhelmingly in favor of #2

[PhilTheThrill14]

#2 is sweet. I'm in for 1,000 to 1,200. Can't wait to see the other

[rickw]

Sounds like #2 is the winner so far. What does everyone think about the watermark? Although it's a nice idea, I'm torn -- is it too much detail for such a small area? The rest of the design is so simple, does it end up creating clutter?

I'd be curious to see what #2 looks like w/o the watermark.

Also, I agree with the "common element" / keep it simple theme mentioned above.

[PhilTheThrill14]

I like the watermark alot - I think it should be the only "item" that changes from chip to chip. For example - have the .25 chip have the Ankh as a watermark, have the $1 have a different symbol\image. Maybe even have them use the same symbols used on the chipcos, but in a much more subtle way (the watermark). Any thoughts? Shall I be quite and just get my money ready?

[MeridianFC]

It was a tough choice between #1 & #2, but #2 had a bit more of a classic look, which is my preference. The other Egyptians have a very modern look and they're on ChipCOs which are a more modern chip, so having a classic look for a classic clay chip seems to make sense.

BTW I didn't think any of the chip makers would let you use the non round shapes for inserts.

[Cassius]

As a aesthetics type thing, I would see what it would look like (on number 2) to ditch the sky over the pyramids, just have a clean line - I think it'll make the chip more centered as it seems to feel a bit top-heavy, if you will. Slick though.

[jon_1van]

Just like Uncle Scrouge in Duck Tails (if you didn't watch this cartoon as a kid you are old)