[plainprogrammer]

The tile of a card you don't own now shows the card image exactly as supplied, with a visible "Not owned" marker below it, instead of the image at 45% opacity.

Closes #65

Why

Scryfall's image guidelines say "Do not blur, sharpen, desaturate, or color-shift card images." A faded image blends with the page behind it. The maintainer compared four rendered looks on 2026-10-13 and chose this one (spec 021, decision 1).

What changed

• The image. An override in collector/additions.css returns the unowned tile's image and its no-image placeholder to full opacity. components.css is the design-system export and isn't edited; the override wins by stylesheet order.
• The marker. catalog/entries/_tile adds a "Not owned" c-tag on a row of its own under the set and language tags, inside the link, so a screen reader hears it as part of the tile's name. Nothing is laid over the image.
• Level buttons. An unowned tile is one line taller, so the add button sits at the foot of its cell and a row that mixes owned and unowned tiles keeps its Add buttons level.
• Owned tiles, collection tiles, scanner candidates and the rows that mark unowned with muted text are unchanged.
• Spec 021 (spec, plan, verification), a new pattern document docs/design-system/components/UnownedTile.md, and a bullet in TileAdd.md. The export's ItemTile.md still describes the fade; UnownedTile.md says the published design system should drop it at its next export, when the override can go.

Screenshots

	Before	After
Desktop, light
Desktop, dark

Phone, light	Phone, dark

Decisions for you

The ruling settles the look. These were the implementer's to make and are recorded in spec 021 as decisions 2 to 8; the main ones:

1. The marker is a c-tag, not a pattern of its own. Chip.md describes the tag as "for data"; the scanner already uses one for a status phrase.
2. The dashed frame stays. It is the export's, it was in the look you chose, and it never touches the image.
3. The copy is "Not owned".
4. Open, not acted on: whether the ×N quantity badge on the image counts as a "stamp" under the same guideline.

Verification

• bin/ci: passed, 1354 examples, 0 failures, 1 pending (the art agreement spec, unrelated).
• Specs seen failing first: request specs for the marker on both pages that render the tile, and a system spec that reads computed style in Firefox. Opacity is 1 with no filter or blend on every unowned tile (0.45 before), and a mixed row's Add buttons are level.
• spec/design_system_files_spec.rb now fails on any new rule that fades or filters a c-tile. It pins the export's opacity:.45, so a corrected re-export needs that expectation edited.
• One independent read-only review (Opus): no code defects; it compared the after shots with the chosen look. Its follow-ups are the last five commits.
• Not verified: a real screen reader and a real phone.

Known limits

• In a typical search most tiles are unowned, so the marker repeats on most tiles.
• Each row with an unowned tile is about 26px taller.
• The tile's card name is read twice by a screen reader (the image's alt text and the name); this predates the branch.
• docs/roadmap.md still lists Decide whether fading unowned card tiles fits Scryfall's image guidelines #65 as waiting for a ruling.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code