MArcomage

What is in the picture for Sorrow?

It's clearly, uh... the fallopian tubes of a jellyfish? A fruit flan dropped from a 12-story building? An acid trip distilled into an 80x60 pixel jpg?

They've done a pretty good job of prettying up the card images, but that's one of the ones that remains pretty inscrutable to me. I wonder why they can't use less compressed images for cards. Would it really be a big bandwidth hit?

This picture should contain demoralized men, but if you can suggest a better picture / card name, then I'll be sure to check them out.

What about a graveyard imagine?
http://yfrog.com/16graveyard1p
http://yfrog.com/08graveyard2p

_I think both pictures suggested would be better than the current one, but it depends on how they look resized. I also expected a picture of a sitting soldier crying into his hands would be better. Could you show us the larger version of the current picture?
_Oh, and on card sizes, I think they make them that size to keep from cluttering up the page. I wouldn't want them larger. However, I would like a list of where the original pictures came from, some I might like to save.

As I've expressed in the past, I too support the notion of giving credit to the sources for the images used on the cards, even if it's a tiny button in the Decks section or a list tucked away on some corner of the site.

Djinn, I'm not necessarily saying make the dimensions of the cards bigger. I was just talking about using better quality images. Many (though not as many as before) images have very noticeable compression artifacts (look at, say, Merchant and Foundations).

Thanks to X-Factor vast majority of card pictures were refined, but feel free to submit a new picture for any card.