Feedback for a first CPC design (1 Viewer)

[HypothesisNo8]

Hi everyone! I just joined up after lurking for a while and admiring the amazing designs by forum members). At this rate I don't think I'll be able to resist jumping into a CPC set at some point, but I'd like to tap into some of the collective wisdom of the community before jumping in head first.

I'd like to use the set to run small cash games, but just as importantly I'd be using them as game currency for board games and the like. The existing options for this (e.g. Apache Bank chips) haven't scratched the itch, so I wanted to design a set that wouldn't look out of place in the board game context, which meant a pretty pared down design for the inlay.

Cash games would be 1/2, would these denominations (1/5/20/100) be serviceable? I was playing around with adding a fifth (50? 10?), but I'd like to keep the set as compact as possible for portability. Haven't thought much about the chip breakdown for the set yet, so would appreciate suggestions.

All feedback is welcome! I slapped the inlay together pretty quickly, but any feedback there is especially appreciated.

 

[allforcharity]

No 10 or 50 for poker. Whether they are useful for your board games will be up to you to decide.

 

[warma]

Interesting inlay design; I like it. The 5 is a bit hard to read as it’s kinda thin against the background.

You’ve read the posts on thin outside rings? You’re familiar with the price for each level? You’re currently playing $1/$2 NL?

 

[HypothesisNo8]

Interesting inlay design; I like it. The 5 is a bit hard to read as it’s kinda thin against the background.

You’ve read the posts on thin outside rings? You’re familiar with the price for each level? You’re currently playing $1/$2 NL?

Agreed, the 5 face is a bit hard to read. Maybe a different font is in order.

I haven't seen any posts on outside rings, but I was a bit concerned on how inconsistent centering could affect a design like that. I'm familiar with the pricing levels though, yeah. Been messing around with 1/2, but I have seen a lot of cash sets going for .25/.50? Having two fracs in the set feels like it would feel a little bad for the non-poker usages though.

 

[warma]

25¢/50¢ just uses quarters, so only 1 frac.

Do a search for outer ring- there are several threads in the issue.

Keep at it, you’ve got something good there.

 

[AlbinoDragon]

Agreed, the 5 face is a bit hard to read. Maybe a different font is in order.

I haven't seen any posts on outside rings, but I was a bit concerned on how inconsistent centering could affect a design like that. I'm familiar with the pricing levels though, yeah. Been messing around with 1/2, but I have seen a lot of cash sets going for .25/.50? Having two fracs in the set feels like it would feel a little bad for the non-poker usages though.

Having done rings for my first set (ASM-era) I was given the suggestion of a larger ring than I had first submitted (closer to what you have) as it will help mask the de-centering of the cut out.

That said, most of the cuts are rater good on the chips I have (~5k of them) so that wasn't a huge issue. However, the de-centering is sufficient that a thin ring will show it.

I'd suggest getting the templates from CPC (halfway down this page: http://www.classicpokerchips.com/pokerchips/realclay/pricelist.htm ) and keep the ring the size of the red "without bleed" limit there.

 

[HypothesisNo8]

I'd suggest getting the templates from CPC (halfway down this page: http://www.classicpokerchips.com/pokerchips/realclay/pricelist.htm ) and keep the ring the size of the red "without bleed" limit there.

I did design on top of the CPC template, but thanks for that valuable data point. For reference, here's the thickness I'm working with at the moment:

Going right up against the red guide looks fairly thick, is the thinking that none of the actual inlays will cut up this thick?

 

[AlbinoDragon]

I did design on top of the CPC template, but thanks for that valuable data point. For reference, here's the thickness I'm working with at the moment: View attachment 1353460

Going right up against the red guide looks fairly thick, is the thinking that none of the actual inlays will cut up this thick?

View attachment 1353461

Sorry for the late-ish reply. Looking at your mockup, they don't cut quite that thick. (The chips I have had done are at home and I won't have pics for 2/3 of a day) but they aren't quite what you have here). However, I do have one on hand right now, which is "recent" and made by CPC as an anniversary chip to the original set is 75% that and turned out quite well:

The "bad" cut:

...and the "good cut":

These are opposite sides of the same chip, but represent the extremes of what the usual CPC centering of their cuts are.


I always order 10% extra with every CPC order, partly for sample sets and partly to make sure I have sufficient spares to satisfy my OCD. I suspect if you do the same you will have enough spares to weed out the worst of the offset cuts. My guess that between these images and your mockup, a ring at 2/3 to 3/4 the width of the red template ring will probably be safe if you want to lean on the thinner size for the ring.


Unrelated to this detail, overall the design looks promising. I approve of the more minimalist design and color matching. You're 90% of the way there to a very nice set of customs.

Keep us updated.

(The eternal suggestion here is to take your time with customs. I'd say print them actual size, put those in the environment you plan on using these in and look at them there for several days. Step away without thinking of them for a few days as well, so you can see them "fresh". My last customs took me nearly four months to get colors, spots and inlay "right, and they're probably my favorite of my six custom sets.)

 

[Machine]

I find it hard to read all of the chips, I like the idea, but because of the way my eye focuses its not good. I'm not sure if the water mark (CPC) is part of the issue or not.

 

[BPTDirector]

I too have a thicker ring on my chips and although some have the ‘bad’ cut issue I’ve never heard one person say a thing about it. We are perfectionists here.

 

[Eriks]

Sorry for the late-ish reply. Looking at your mockup, they don't cut quite that thick. (The chips I have had done are at home and I won't have pics for 2/3 of a day) but they aren't quite what you have here). However, I do have one on hand right now, which is "recent" and made by CPC as an anniversary chip to the original set is 75% that and turned out quite well:

The "bad" cut:
View attachment 1353503

...and the "good cut":
View attachment 1353504

These are opposite sides of the same chip, but represent the extremes of what the usual CPC centering of their cuts are.


I always order 10% extra with every CPC order, partly for sample sets and partly to make sure I have sufficient spares to satisfy my OCD. I suspect if you do the same you will have enough spares to weed out the worst of the offset cuts. My guess that between these images and your mockup, a ring at 2/3 to 3/4 the width of the red template ring will probably be safe if you want to lean on the thinner size for the ring.


Unrelated to this detail, overall the design looks promising. I approve of the more minimalist design and color matching. You're 90% of the way there to a very nice set of customs.

Keep us updated.

(The eternal suggestion here is to take your time with customs. I'd say print them actual size, put those in the environment you plan on using these in and look at them there for several days. Step away without thinking of them for a few days as well, so you can see them "fresh". My last customs took me nearly four months to get colors, spots and inlay "right, and they're probably my favorite of my six custom sets.)

I’ve been staring at those two photos but can’t determine what makes one of them ”bad”. You should probably stay clear of anything BCC

 

[AlbinoDragon]

I’ve been staring at those two photos but can’t determine what makes one of them ”bad”. You should probably stay clear of anything BCC

There's nothing "bad" about them at all. They are just a couple references that I happened to have on hand that show some extremes. Part of the reason why I used "bad" in quotes. They're totally fine to me and nobody at my game has ever mentioned them (though they also don't notice the any of my anniversary chips in when I introduced them, so that doesn't say much. )


I rode the BCC custom train a year before they closed up shop. Those are still in the box they shipped them to me and have never seen the felt, as disappointed I was with the whole experience. Still stub my toe on that box now and then.

 

[HypothesisNo8]

(The eternal suggestion here is to take your time with customs. I'd say print them actual size, put those in the environment you plan on using these in and look at them there for several days. Step away without thinking of them for a few days as well, so you can see them "fresh". My last customs took me nearly four months to get colors, spots and inlay "right, and they're probably my favorite of my six custom sets.)

Always a good suggestion. I'm usually too lazy to let designs "cool off" like this, but given the cost of entry, I'll try to force myself to take it slow, haha.

Thanks for the cut references. I'm thinking you're right and that splitting the difference between my original mockup and the red template guide would be the right balance, made that change in the mockup below.

I find it hard to read all of the chips, I like the idea, but because of the way my eye focuses its not good. I'm not sure if the water mark (CPC) is part of the issue or not.

It's probably a mix, the watermark is probably not doing it any favors (haven't been using the tool for long, is there a way to disable them?), but the thin parts of the font probably make it hard to read at a distance. A font like this adds readability, but I'm undecided on what it does for the design:

 

[SteveEH]

As mentioned, thinner are more noticeable when cut off center. Here's a random barrel of mine:

With the DSQ mold's inner debossed ring being almost the same size as 7/8 inlays, round inlays that are off center will sometimes "fall over the edge." I'd think this would accentuate the off center look.

 

[Eriks]

I rode the BCC custom train a year before they closed up shop. Those are still in the box they shipped them to me and have never seen the felt, as disappointed I was with the whole experience. Still stub my toe on that box now and then.

Let’s see em! There are those with a higher tolerance for BCC quirks

 

[warma]

As mentioned, thinner are more noticeable when cut off center. Here's a random barrel of mine:

View attachment 1353989

With the DSQ mold's inner debossed ring being almost the same size as 7/8 inlays, round inlays that are off center will sometimes "fall over the edge." I'd think this would accentuate the off center look.

Do you recall how thick that ring is?

 

[SteveEH]

Not sure about the ring size

 

[HypothesisNo8]

Thanks for the thoughts and feedback so far, everyone. I've been iterating on the inlay design and hit a point where some more feedback would be helpful. The big sticking point is the texture layer for the inlay's background--I keep going back and forth between the more minimalist and clean solid color and the visual interest that some kind of geometric texture would add.

 

[BobCranberry]

Hey these look great! I've fallen down the poker-chip board game upgrade hole too. What games are you thinking of using your chips for most? I'm planning to get a 300 set to cover mostly everything and for use in card games too, but I think that 200 would work for most bgs that aren't 13XX's.

On the latest designs I think the numbers pop a lot more which is great. I'd probably not go down the 21 route myself because the texture is a bit distracting for the eye.

I like that the slice was getting bigger relative to the value, that's a really nice touch, but perhaps with a texture is too many design elements. Maybe try keeping the texture of 19 but taking out the slice, or going for 18 which is really nice and clean

 

[MrWookie69]

The 100 is pretty busy. I'd consider making the inlay shape larger as the denoms get larger. Make so that diamond contains then entire denom...

Actually....looking at it again - I don't think you need that diamond behind the denoms. It's just making if visually fussy...

 

[HypothesisNo8]

Hey these look great! I've fallen down the poker-chip board game upgrade hole too. What games are you thinking of using your chips for most? I'm planning to get a 300 set to cover mostly everything and for use in card games too, but I think that 200 would work for most bgs that aren't 13XX's.

On the latest designs I think the numbers pop a lot more which is great. I'd probably not go down the 21 route myself because the texture is a bit distracting for the eye.

I like that the slice was getting bigger relative to the value, that's a really nice touch, but perhaps with a texture is too many design elements. Maybe try keeping the texture of 19 but taking out the slice, or going for 18 which is really nice and clean

Thanks! I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the "money upgrades" out there are lacking . I think I'd mostly be using them for Netrunner, until a euro or 13XX works its way into my rotation. What about you? Any designs in mind for our use-case?

I agree, I think those texture are probably a bit too busy and tip it over into "too many elements". I do like the progressing "slice", so I'd probably keep that over a texture. 18 still feels maybe "too clean", but I might be overthinking it!

The 100 is pretty busy. I'd consider making the inlay shape larger as the denoms get larger. Make so that diamond contains then entire denom...

Actually....looking at it again - I don't think you need that diamond behind the denoms. It's just making if visually fussy...

I'm not super locked on the diamond, but I feel like without something there the whole design feels a bit empty, since one of the edge spot colors wouldn't be represented on the inlay. Having the diamond grow across the denoms is an interesting idea, but having two design elements grow feels like overload to me. I appreciate the thoughts though; maybe something in place of the diamond, with no texture, would round out the design in a satisfying way.

 

[plain_sauce]

Hi everyone! I just joined up after lurking for a while and admiring the amazing designs by forum members). At this rate I don't think I'll be able to resist jumping into a CPC set at some point, but I'd like to tap into some of the collective wisdom of the community before jumping in head first.

I'd like to use the set to run small cash games, but just as importantly I'd be using them as game currency for board games and the like. The existing options for this (e.g. Apache Bank chips) haven't scratched the itch, so I wanted to design a set that wouldn't look out of place in the board game context, which meant a pretty pared down design for the inlay.

Cash games would be 1/2, would these denominations (1/5/20/100) be serviceable? I was playing around with adding a fifth (50? 10?), but I'd like to keep the set as compact as possible for portability. Haven't thought much about the chip breakdown for the set yet, so would appreciate suggestions.

All feedback is welcome! I slapped the inlay together pretty quickly, but any feedback there is especially appreciated.

View attachment 1353379


View attachment 1353376

The colors are right up my alley the inlay numbers seem to be getting lost in the design you have but as far as color scheme I think you have a winner.

 

[warma]

Thanks! I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the "money upgrades" out there are lacking . I think I'd mostly be using them for Netrunner, until a euro or 13XX works its way into my rotation. What about you? Any designs in mind for our use-case?

I agree, I think those texture are probably a bit too busy and tip it over into "too many elements". I do like the progressing "slice", so I'd probably keep that over a texture. 18 still feels maybe "too clean", but I might be overthinking it!


I'm not super locked on the diamond, but I feel like without something there the whole design feels a bit empty, since one of the edge spot colors wouldn't be represented on the inlay. Having the diamond grow across the denoms is an interesting idea, but having two design elements grow feels like overload to me. I appreciate the thoughts though; maybe something in place of the diamond, with no texture, would round out the design in a satisfying way.

You’re doing it right. Best to tinker and work out your designs here, rather than buy and regret.

 

[BobCranberry]

Thanks! I guess I'm not the only one who thinks the "money upgrades" out there are lacking . I think I'd mostly be using them for Netrunner, until a euro or 13XX works its way into my rotation. What about you? Any designs in mind for our use-case?

I agree, I think those texture are probably a bit too busy and tip it over into "too many elements". I do like the progressing "slice", so I'd probably keep that over a texture. 18 still feels maybe "too clean", but I might be overthinking it!


I'm not super locked on the diamond, but I feel like without something there the whole design feels a bit empty, since one of the edge spot colors wouldn't be represented on the inlay. Having the diamond grow across the denoms is an interesting idea, but having two design elements grow feels like overload to me. I appreciate the thoughts though; maybe something in place of the diamond, with no texture, would round out the design in a satisfying way.

Started with Lords of Vegas where it's just too thematic not to have them, then actually it was Netrunner too where we wanted something more weighty and thematic. Also used them in Kings Dilemma, and a few other euros like Brass.

I was originally thinking something a bit less poker chippy that could blend in more and not distract from the board game, now I'm thinking of something a bit more muted but closer to a poker chip style.

The two common upgrade options of Roxley Iron Clays, and Banks chips just don't do it for me

 

[HypothesisNo8]

Started with Lords of Vegas where it's just too thematic not to have them, then actually it was Netrunner too where we wanted something more weighty and thematic. Also used them in Kings Dilemma, and a few other euros like Brass.

I was originally thinking something a bit less poker chippy that could blend in more and not distract from the board game, now I'm thinking of something a bit more muted but closer to a poker chip style.

The two common upgrade options of Roxley Iron Clays, and Banks chips just don't do it for me

Lords of Vegas is such a good fit! At first, Netrunner made me want a more cyberpunk-flavored set, but I figured a set like that wouldn't be as broadly usable. But I bet a ceramic set designed specifically for Netrunner would be perfect...

The Iron Clays are what inspired me to try to figure out something better. I was also trying to stay away from a traditional poker chip look with no edge spots at first, but the spots serve such an important function. I'm happy with where I ended up with those. The Bank chips are kind of the worst of all worlds imo, haha.

You’re doing it right. Best to tinker and work out your designs here, rather than buy and regret.

For sure, just have to know where to draw the line and not tinker forever

 

[HypothesisNo8]

Another tweak of this one, playing around with removing the diamond, maximizing denom readability, and adding a bit of flair to the empty space. Not sure how something like this would read on an actual chip: some of the elements might be too thin/fine?