A thread for those supplementing their Jack sets with other Paulson RHCs and IHCs, either overlabeled or with inlay replacements.
Last edited:
-
This site contains affiliate links. If you choose to make a purchase after clicking a link, Poker Chip Forum may receive a commission at no additional cost to you. Thank you for your support!
*Faux* Jack pr0n thread (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Taghkanic
- Start date
OP
OP
Terrible’s 50c pieces overlabeled as Jack 25centers:
Last edited:
OP
OP
Terrible’s Lagrange $5s overlabeled as Jack $5s:
Last edited:
OP
OP
Sunset Beach 43mm T5000s and $100s overlabeled as Jack 10K and 25K tourney chips:
OP
OP
Mixed into the larger Jack cash and tourney sets:
OP
OP
Note: Above there are some navy blue Jack $20s -- I bought a rack of these already modified by another PCFer with @Gear labels. I believe the base chips were Horseshoe Cleveland $2s.
There are also some Jack Cincinnati $2s above, which are real Jacks just not from Detroit. They are *much* nicer in person than in my pics. One of my favorite chips.
There are also some Jack Cincinnati $2s above, which are real Jacks just not from Detroit. They are *much* nicer in person than in my pics. One of my favorite chips.
Last edited:
OP
OP
Last edited:
OP
OP
To be honest, I really wanted to use Cancun 5s as the reds, because I love the edgespot colors... At first I was not too happy with my Terrible's purchase for these, but once the labels were on they grew on me.
OP
OP
I will contribute when I finish my T2000s!
Last edited:
detroitdad
Royal Flush
OP
OP
@detroitdad Love the 100s... What’s the base chip?
Meanwhile, you threw me for a loop there with the black 1s.
Meanwhile, you threw me for a loop there with the black 1s.
Jack $500s are just to much and I had these inlay removed Clevelands sitting around unused.
OP
OP
Anthony Ferguson
Flush
Murdered AS $20s. Gear labels.
I still haven't worked out the rest of the set. I have all the chips for this lineup, although I may substitute AS $25 chips for the BTP T5000 chips for my intended Jack $500,000.
Also thinking of swapping the Jack $5ks if I could find 140 more of them.
I still haven't worked out the rest of the set. I have all the chips for this lineup, although I may substitute AS $25 chips for the BTP T5000 chips for my intended Jack $500,000.
Also thinking of swapping the Jack $5ks if I could find 140 more of them.
Last edited:
Not to change the topic, I think it still relates, but I'm curious to hear what people think of trying to color match the outer part of the inlay on the label, to the chip itself. In these two chips, one is meant to be the same shade of blue. In my experience, often this looks better in person than it does in photos, but really depends on the lighting in the room. But when it's noticeable, it's really shatters the illusion.
The 25k just matched an edge spot. It may not look like any original chips, but it will always look 'correct', as in it won't be so obvious that it's a label.
Actually, even on the "real" Jack chips, the color on the outer part of the inlay doesn't perfectly match the chips - look at how much darker the green is on the inlay than on the chip itself on the $25s pictured above. So because of that, anything in the ballpark looks fine to my eyes. I personally do prefer keeping that pattern though, not using an edge spot color.
OP
OP
This is something that I debated and discussed with Gear when ordering my labels...
On the real Jacks, the colored part of the inlay is pretty much always darker than the base color of the chip. Sometimes a lot darker.
I don’t know why they chose to do that. Maybe it was a mistake; or maybe they wanted the label to appear more inset. The darker color tends to recede.
My usual inclination would be to try to match the base color of the chip as best as possible. With my faux red 5s, the label color turned out pretty close to the base — maybe a hair darker. And I think that looks really good.
With the pink fracs, it is impossible to print the color as hot as my base chip. Inevitably, the printed label is going to be less saturated. So he matched the hue as close possible but the colored portion of the label is a little darker. I think that looks good as well.
On the Sunset Beach blue chip, we aimed to match things up a little more. The label is just a little less saturated and a little darker, and that seems to help make it look more realistic.
Lastly, on the white Sunset Beach IHC: I didn’t want the non-black portion of the label to be either white or gray. I didn’t think it looked good in my mockups. So we went with the bluish-green matching one of the edgespots, which also picks up the blue of another spot a little. But that choice was very specific to the white base chip. Also, this is my highest value chip, and it won’t see a lot of action. So I don’t mind it being a little unusual in that way—it should stick out.
.
So overall, I don’t know… If you’re trying to make them look exactly like the other Jacks, the label color should probably be similar to but darker than the base color. But my approach was to try to figure out would look best on each chip and not stick with one inflexible formula.
Last note: the lighting at my tables is bright, but with a slightly yellow, warmer feeling. That tends to even out a lot of small differences in the base/label colors. If I was using these chips under cold fluorescent lighting, the differences would be a lot more obvious. So all I’m saying is it might be worth taking to account what type of lighting you have.
On the real Jacks, the colored part of the inlay is pretty much always darker than the base color of the chip. Sometimes a lot darker.
I don’t know why they chose to do that. Maybe it was a mistake; or maybe they wanted the label to appear more inset. The darker color tends to recede.
My usual inclination would be to try to match the base color of the chip as best as possible. With my faux red 5s, the label color turned out pretty close to the base — maybe a hair darker. And I think that looks really good.
With the pink fracs, it is impossible to print the color as hot as my base chip. Inevitably, the printed label is going to be less saturated. So he matched the hue as close possible but the colored portion of the label is a little darker. I think that looks good as well.
On the Sunset Beach blue chip, we aimed to match things up a little more. The label is just a little less saturated and a little darker, and that seems to help make it look more realistic.
Lastly, on the white Sunset Beach IHC: I didn’t want the non-black portion of the label to be either white or gray. I didn’t think it looked good in my mockups. So we went with the bluish-green matching one of the edgespots, which also picks up the blue of another spot a little. But that choice was very specific to the white base chip. Also, this is my highest value chip, and it won’t see a lot of action. So I don’t mind it being a little unusual in that way—it should stick out.
.
So overall, I don’t know… If you’re trying to make them look exactly like the other Jacks, the label color should probably be similar to but darker than the base color. But my approach was to try to figure out would look best on each chip and not stick with one inflexible formula.
Last note: the lighting at my tables is bright, but with a slightly yellow, warmer feeling. That tends to even out a lot of small differences in the base/label colors. If I was using these chips under cold fluorescent lighting, the differences would be a lot more obvious. So all I’m saying is it might be worth taking to account what type of lighting you have.
Last edited:
OP
OP
(Shorter answer: When in doubt, just let Gear choose the color. He’s seen a lot more of these labels on chips than anyone.)
Anthony Ferguson
Flush
That's a fine looking set!
OP
OP
Those blues make a strong case for matching the base color. (Did they sell?)
Thank you! You never forget your first set of Paulsons... Although I'm in the process of taking the labels off at the moment and selling them / doing something different with them if they don't shift.
The blues are awesome... I can't believe they still haven't sold though, haha!
My relabelled $5 is very similar to yours, which is why I love yours so much.
Haven't posted any real photos of my new tournament set yet, actually!
Don't get me wrong, I love my Paulsons, but I love more the fact that these chips were something like $4 for each rack of 100 — and then about $70 dollars shipped (and maybe $30 import tax, I can't quite remember) from the USA to the UK by @SeanGecko. Bargain!
They look, feel, stack and shuffle SO great for the money. Can't wait to get them into play for my first tournament of 2020 this weekend!
Don't get me wrong, I love my Paulsons, but I love more the fact that these chips were something like $4 for each rack of 100 — and then about $70 dollars shipped (and maybe $30 import tax, I can't quite remember) from the USA to the UK by @SeanGecko. Bargain!
They look, feel, stack and shuffle SO great for the money. Can't wait to get them into play for my first tournament of 2020 this weekend!
aahh real fracs...
what do you actually use for $100s? I use primaries for my tourney set and my one barrel of secondaries for my cash set ( haven't needed a single one yet, but good to be prepared!)
How do you think the Cinci $2 would work as a quarter with the Jack's? Assume no dirty stack issues?
Thanks
Grant
I think they will work great as a frac. I checked them as a $20 vs the $1 and $5 and there was no dirty stack issue (@Taghkanic you have these now do you agree?).
Only issue is the spot is pretty complex so some may not like the progression to the simpler $1.
Thank you for the feedback! I'm always keeping my eyes peeled for a cool/good frac option, I'd still need to find some to murder if I went this route.
I'm not too worried about spot progression as it doesnt seem like casinos really care that much. Especially with the Jack's.
Create an account or login to comment
You must be a member in order to leave a comment
Create account
Create an account and join our community. It's easy!
Log in
Already have an account? Log in here.
