Content Creators
  • Content count

  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

  • Feedback


MTGandME last won the day on February 18

MTGandME had the most liked content!

About MTGandME

  • Rank

Contact Methods

  • Website URL
  1. Well, it's a thing now, you can't stop. Lol
  2. I saw that BCW makes card storage hotel boxes, and I was seriously considering buying them until my wife showed me her show storage box, and I realized I could get something that holds twice as many cards, is easily far more sturdy, and was only slightly more expensive. Room is always a concern. What I like about these is that they support stacking (through dowels) and can be anchored to the wall, so they can be stacked a bunch of times.
  3. So I spent the better part of the day working on a replacement for the Codex Magica. While I love the look and feel of the original, as configured it was no longer expandable and only held around 25,000 cards. I'm now up to somewhere around 60,000 and while I'd eventually like to pick up or build a library file for the collection, until then, I've come up with a good compromise solution. In the attached photos, the wooden drawer is the original Codex Magica. Rescued from the curbside about 5 years ago, it served well as an MTG storage cabinet with some simple modifications (dollar store foam core cut to line the wood and act as row and set dividers) at a total cost of about $6. The white shelves in the new photos are the same as this shelf, just a different color: They used to sell them at Lowes too, but I can't find them onsite now. They run $30 each, but we already had one. To store the cards, I originally checked out BCW's site to buy some bulk 800 count boxes (priced at $28.00 per 50), but shipping is only 'free' after a larger purchase, and they would have been around $60 (still a good deal), so instead I found a seller on that had 50 boxes for $40 shipped, so we settled on that. To make the labels, there's a font online called Keyrune which is supposed to have all the set icons in TTF format, but I had issues with newer set symbols, so I used a combination of the font and transparent logos from the mothership, put them in a powerpoint slide, and then printed them 9 slides per sheet. A couple simple cuts and some glue stick and you've got a set box. The system's still far from perfect; because I collect playsets, for example, most large sets once complete will take 1.5 boxes or so. But for now, there's only a couple of sets that don't fit and I still have some gift boxes to store those.
  4. Heyo, I tried to send a donation, but I'm not certain it went through (looks like it stalled on the swirly icon). If you don't get one from me, let me know and I'll resend. Charles
  5. Hey, they're reprinting Jace TMS and Azusa. Already better.
  6. This is what I'm planning to do too! It's a great project for my first cube, and honestly I had a lot of fun playing the set.
  7. Thing is, if this ends up hurting them, it would take likely take many years. They don't need to worry about us rando's when 1% of their contributing creators meet their partnership requirements. The advertising for those 1% will likely end up being more lucrative, mainly for YouTube but also for the creator. We all talk about a 'different platform' like it's a viable thing. If we compare online independent video to the cable industry, I think YouTube isn't the online analogue of Comcast. Instead, it's the online analogue to the Cable industry. Sure, there's OTA alternatives in this analogue, as well as streaming services, bootleg vhs/dvd rips, etc. And yes, cable is on the downswing, but it took them 10+ years to start adapting to these changes, and they're still around. Anyhow, it sucks that they did this. I was particularly taken aback by the suggestion/implication in the official statement that small/upcoming creators are a negative influence on youtube and are not appealing to advertisers. My gut tells me this decision is driven by YT's increased manual review of their videos to continue earning top revenue from advertisers just not scaling to channels with less than a certain threshold of activity. I've always enjoyed watching my adsense account slowly increase even though I can't withdraw from it. It was this weird point of pride that somehow, my little videos had generated some ad revenue (about $30 since may). But if I was measuring my channel's success by the ad revenue I've earned, it's an abject failure. Channels aren't financially viable until they're hitting hundreds of thousands of subscribers, have secured sponsorships, generate original products or are directly funded (patreon, for example). Heck, I spent more than $30 on the tripod for the first camera I was using last year, not to mention the hundreds (err... thousands <meek>) of dollars I've probably spent on Magic in the past year. I'd have to increase my income a hundred-fold to cover that and consider the channel 'financially' successful. But you know what? I don't care. I'll still make my weekly videos, I'll still buy magic stuff and bulk lots because I enjoy doing it by itself. Because this isn't my job (as much as I would enjoy that), it's my hobby. And I love getting the positive feedback, talking with other creators, watching the stuff people make, cringing at some of it (even my own stuff). It's fun. It's entertaining. I'll throw it on in the background when I'm doing housework. I'll listen to it while I'm gaming online. It's just always around, and I like that I'm able to contribute to that. And I'll keep doing it until it's no longer fun. -Charles