jmd wrote:I suspect the latter. viz,
EnriqueEnriquez wrote:[...] the images in many decks were reversed as part of the dynamic of the printing process
Me too.
But I'll also add that I don't think the cardmakers made a lot of "mistakes."
I think they knew what they were looking at, and they knew what was important, and they knew what didn't matter to the subject at hand.
Yes, I think the Vieville images are reversed from the majority of decks that set the "standard" imagery.
But I also think it doesn't make any difference.
I think the images read the same either way.
I think the artist copied a print of a reference deck, and didn't bother to flip the drawing to account for the reversal of the woodblock.
Or, perhaps even more likely, the artist drew the image directly on the block, rather than on a sheet of paper.
As to the "exceptions", or cards that are not flipped....
I think it's misguided to presume that an artist should have the consistency of a machine.
I have no problem believing that he corrected some images, but not others.
Perhaps he "corrected" the first few, then got tired, or bored, or just had a whim.
"Intentional Fantastic Revelation" is way, way,
waaaay down the list.