|
|
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
So often it happens on this particular forum that people let their opinions be swayed by the fact that they don't want to offend some big name seller or creator. Well, nobody should be offended by a less than glowing review. You can’t please everyone. I think I have precisely described this review, “…less than glowing.“ It is not negative, but, in the end, I do not recommend the item.
With that in mind, I will start this review with two flat out statements. First, I think most who buy this will be very disappointed, especially in view of the big price tag. There are only so many ways you can make a single coin look like two coins and this is, in my opinion, not one of the best ways. It’s a great “camera gaff” where you can stand with it straight on to the viewers, but for a real world audience, you’re really going to have to manage the side views or they’ll be thinking they are seeing some dimes on steroids. In fact, before buying this I asked several people who had seen it demo-ed at Magic Live about it, and the most frequent response I got was, “…the coins were really, really thin…” Secondly, in an older thread here someone kept saying the coins could be examined. In fact, I think he asked how many ways he had to say it, the coins can be examined. Well, he either did not own a set or he flat out lied. The coins cannot be examined. How many ways can I say that? They cannot be examined. In the words of an old dealer, Gene DeVoe, here in St. Louis, "Sure, they can examine the coins. They'll know how it works, but they can examine them." The cannot-be-examined-factor is emphasized in the DVD instructions where Chris tells you to take precautions to not allow the edge of the gimmicked coin to be seen. If they can't even fully view it in performance, they certainly cannot examine it! And, if whoever made that statement is suggesting that you switch the gimmicked coin out for a regular coin, well, you just defeated the purpose of the gaff in the first place. That claim really is offensive to me. The coins cannot be examined period. Fortunately, most magicians don’t have the coins examined when they do this effect anyway. I believe you absolutely should, as suggested in Kohler’s routine, but it’s a matter of personal choice. I always do, under the guise of giving them a closer look at these “very old American coins.” Okay, all that said, the routine is okay. It is basically Chris Kenner's original Three Fly handling with a gaff, instead of a fourth coin. The gaff allows the hands to be cleanly shown at various parts of the routine and that does enhance the original work. But, to me, that is hardly worth $800 or even $600 for the Peace Dollar version. On the plus side, the DVD is very good. Chris Kenner gives clear concise instruction going into every detail of the routine, even discussing body language to enhance the illusion. The camera work is clear and helpful. If you really want to learn this specific routine, you will have no trouble understanding every step of the work. Regarding the "mysterious" last coin; the one shown on the DVD is one erroneously credited to Geoff Latta. It's the one you all know. Nothing new. I should mention, though, that I have been experimenting with this routine and replacing the rear coin with a Peace Dollar Blackout. If you think about it, that makes the "mysterious" last vanish a real possibility and, as Bro. John Hamman used to say, if you're going to gaff something and nobody gets to examine it, you might as well gaff it to the hilt. It would really take nothing more than carefully planned choreography to avoid showing the tail side of the Blackout. Frankly, I'll probably never perform it, but it's fun to play with. In the final analysis, I think the whole U3Fly thing has now been run into the ground, at least from a perspective of a gaff. I mean, as I said, how many gaffs can you come up with to make one coin look like more than one? Before I took the plunge on this one, I really tried to research it by asking several people who either owned one or had seen it in person at Magic Live about it. I didn’t expect them to tip the work. My main concern was that I did not want to spend several hundred dollars to get what essentially amounts to a silver dollar sized Johnny Wong coin. Well, despite all the claims otherwise, that is pretty much what I got. I won’t tell you which one, but there is a Johnny Wong coin where part of it is almost exactly this gaff. And, at a fraction of the cost. Of course, it is only half dollar size. Finally, speaking of cost. I’ve said before that I don’t know enough about machining, etc. to know what cost is involved in making a gaffed coin. But, when I compare this to, say, Joe Porper’s “The Fly” which has certain characteristics of this gaff, plus an additional mechanical aspect, plus the fact that you get TWO such mechanical gaffs, one for the left hand and one for the right hand, and all this in Morgan Silver Dollars at the price of the Peace Dollar version of Superfly, it just seems that Superfly is much more expensive than it should be. I hope the silly metal tin case didn’t contribute much to the cost. Okay, so bottom line, unless you REALLY love the U3Fly effect and methods, or you collect the gaffs created for the trick, I would not recommend this. Bob Kohler’s original still remains the best gaffed approach to this trick, in my opinion, and I suspect it might remain the champ even after U3Fly2. This is strictly my opinion. You may or may not agree. Thanks for reading. |
NexusMagicShop Elite user Sunny California 434 Posts |
Great points made... I have seen so much negativity thrown towards a product without relevance. Many of the opinions have zero merit as many forum users are making speculative comments. Then you have those that judge a product negatively based on packaging alone. Where is the logic in that? Some of my favorite effects have come in for lack of a better term glorified sandwich bags. I would rather see a great product in a plastic bag then the inflated cost because of packaging. And it's no reason to give a product a negative rating.
An opposite example would be True Astonishment while I feel it is a terrific product and packed full of useful magic content. I feel in this case the content should be available as an optional nine DVD set without the puzzled wooden box. That could potentially make this knowledge more affordable to most people. Okay I don;t want to get too off topic, that said I appreciate this review and your comparisons. You make some great points. - My Thoughts
Jason of BackroomMagic
www.BackroomMagic.com/| Mobile friendly magic forums and blogs www.twitter.com/Nexusmagicstore |
MJ Marrs Inner circle Los Angeles 1124 Posts |
Hi Runwayjag, you've always been thorough in your reviews, so thanks for taking the time to write them. I remember doing research on the Wireless Wizardry "Comedy Card in Balloon" years ago and your positive review was reassuring.
I do, however, take exception to the statement that the SF coins can't be examined. I normally don't hand out props for examination, but I have been performing with SF for the past couple of weeks and I had the coins on occasion casually examined. Quite a bit of the people I perform for socially and during gigs are science/engineering types; these folks are intelligent, observant, problem-solvers by nature, however, the three coins being looked at aroused no suspicions. As you're well aware, the coins are "worn," and therefore naturally have qualities about them that older coins should have, such as not being identical in appearance. I have some non-gaffed worn coins that also have variety in appearance. I think this variation openly masks the fact that there is something sneaky about the coins. Although, I didn't allow more than a cursory check of the props while conversing about the historical significance of the Peace Dollars (which is quite interesting in and of itself by the way). Just out of curiosity, did you have the coins looked at during performance? As to the vanish of the last coin on the DVD, quite a number of knowledeable magicians including, I believe, Richard Kaufman, Eric DeCamps, and others, have stated over the years that the "move" used by Kenner (which he credits in his TOOC book) was developed by Latta. In fact, if I recall correctly, Latta discussed coming up with the move here on the forum several years ago. I haven't read anything over the years to the contrary, so are we talking about the last vanish on the DVD or the "miracle" vanish sometimes mentioned during discussions of Kenner's ungaffed version of Three-Fly? In any event, Three-Fly has long been a favorite routine of mine to play with and perform. I love Kohler's U3F and use it in conjunction with the Fitch-Kohler holdout and I'm certain that U3F2 will be stellar (as is everything that Kohler releases). In fact, I've been carrying my SF set in Kohler's wonderfully made coin case. I've also enjoyed Paul Wilson's "Completely Crowded." Super Fly truly is a work of genius in my opinion and I'm quite pleased with the investment. All the best, MJ |
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
Thanka for your thoughts, but my perspective of what most magicians mean when they something can be examined is that the object can be handed to a spectator freely and he may look the object over with limited scrutiny. That cannot be done with Superfly. I hadn't even removed the coins from the little holder in the tin and I saw the gaff right away. And, I'm not talking from a magician's point of view; the coin was clearly not normal.
So, yes, maybe you can show the coins to them (being careful of the edges as admonished by Chris himself,) but you absolutely cannot hand the gaff to a spectator. The coin vanish well precedes Geoff Latta and was published long before Jeff was probably even known outside of his own area. The booklet in which it appears is a much overlooked little booklet. If you really want the real history of how that move came about to be the last coin vanish, I'd be happy to tell you in a PM. My assocation with Chris goes WAY back when he was still in high school. In fact, I wrote his first book, The Right Stuff which contains many of the items later re-published in Totally Out of Control. I'm delighted to hear that you are happy with your investment. I still think most magicians would be disappointed, even at the lower $600 price. But, to each his own and I appreciate your comments. As I said, these are my opinions and some may not agree. Take care. |
MJ Marrs Inner circle Los Angeles 1124 Posts |
Runwayjag stated:
"So, yes, maybe you can show the coins to them (being careful of the edges as admonished by Chris himself,) but you absolutely cannot hand the gaff to a spectator." Hi, actually I have had the three SF coins handed out and looked at with no problems whatsoever. Like I mentioned previously each of the older looking worn coins from the 1920s has its own unique characteristics, so not having all three coins exactly identical in appearance has raised no suspicions. Of course the manner in which the coins are "inspected" isn't ever the focus of my attention; rather it's done casually. Moreover, due to a very special and clever quality of the gaff the performance angles aren't as bad as one would think. Something I really appreciate is how the three coins can be handled so freely (i.e. tossed from hand to hand) and looked at, even with extreme scrutiny, while they are spread out in the palm of my hand. As Kenner mentions, one certainly should be cognizant of the sidelines during a couple of points in the routine; but the ultra clean shows are well worth the attention to choreography in my opinion. Best, MJ |
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
I can't reveal the work, but if I could I'd post a photo of the gaffed coin and let prospective buyers judge for themselves. If you handed the gaffed coin to a spectator he had to be blind not to see AND feel the work. If you did a steal to hand it to him (I think you understand what I mean,) the wafer thinness had to be noticed. Well, if you're getting away with it, more power to you, but I would never hand the gaff intact or separate to a spectator.
Anyway, I'm glad it's working well for you. I'll stick to Kohler's. Take care. |
magiclee71 Loyal user 215 Posts |
In my opinion if you handled the inspection of the coins the exact same way as it is done in U3F you shouldn't have a problem. Kohler hands one specific coin to one spectator and the other coins to someone else to where they never come together to be inspected all together. You can hold back just like you do in Kohler's U3F and accomplish the same IMO.
|
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
That's what I meant when I said, "...If you did a steal..." and I will admit there is a chance a layman would not notice the thinness of the examined coin, but I, personally, would not take the chance of arousing that suspicion. It is MUCH too thin, in my opinion. But, as I said, more power to those who like it and are using it and get away with examination.
I'm really posting this to answer all the PM's I've received in one swipe. Sorry, I did not mean I would take a photo and send it to anyone who asked! In fact, it would not be right for me to photograph the gaff for anyone at all and I hope my post didn't suggest that I would do so. That would not be fair to Jamie or Chris. I know it's a big investment, but I'm afraid you'll just have to come to your own decision based on all the posts here, both mine and others. |
Michael Dustman Inner circle Columbus, Ohio 1220 Posts |
Well I am late to the party but magiclee made the point I wanted to make when I read John's first post on this thread.
I am the one who posted on the original thread that the coins can be examined and as a long time coin worker, I am standing by that. Just a bit of background, I was neither oblivious to the gaff or lying. I had first seen a prototype Chris had 2 years ago at Magic Live and got to play around with a more refined set for a couple days this past February when Jamie was in Columbus, so yes I had handled the gaff. I have been using this since picking it up at Magic Live and love it. Sometimes I hand out the coins and sometimes I don't, but no spectator has never questioned anything. I handle it the same way I handled my Kohler Ultimate 3 Fly. You had one coin out to 3 different spectators. You hold the gaff back. Just like you did with Ultimate 3 Fly. Just like you would with an ungaffed version of 3 Fly. You hand out 3 coins, you don't hand them the 4th. I have a lot of respect for John and have valued his reviews over the years. I was surprised by his first post because while I don't believe he was attacking me outright, I don't think he quite understood why I was saying 3 coins are handed to a spectator for examination and they will find nothing wrong. But to make an argument based on examination of a gaff and say U3F is better (which I also have and love) and SF can't be examined is totally wrong. They both would be handled the exact same way. And I have come up with two easy ways of ditching the gaff at the end. John is definitely entitled to his opinion and I think for the most part he gave what every buyer needs to know. I simply disagree on examniation of coins. I have not had one person notice anything, and it has gotten use in quite a few strolling gigs in the last six weeks. |
GeorgeG Special user Thousand Oaks, CA 977 Posts |
One observation is that not many "spectators" have seen or even handled old silver dollars and would have no idea of dimensions/thickness unless they handle a gaff one and a regular one simultaneously, perhaps.
|
patrick66 Veteran user The Netherlands 384 Posts |
Runawayjag, thank you VERY much for saving me a lot of money.
To .... with Superfly! :) |
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
Okay, this will be my last post on this subject. In response to George, I did take into consideration that most laymen probably would not know the thickness of a silver dollar. However, even with that factor in mind, the gaff I have here in my hand is WAFER thin and I think it would be noticeable. I believe my description "dime on steroids" is very accurate. At least as far as my particular set goes.
I recall that in a couple instructions/ads for some Johny Wong coins he, too, states the coins can be examined. I don't think it's a good idea to hand those out either. Too thin and they're only half dollars. Now, maybe there's a chance that I just got a poorly made one (not likely from Schoolcraft, but maybe,) and mine is thinner than these other sets? So, I will clarify my statement and specifically state that MY set, which is a Morgan Dollar version and was made by Jamie, could not possibly be examined, neither the entire gaff or any part of it, without arousing suspicion or at least making a laymen wonder what the deal is with the thin "toy" coin. And, Michael, you are correct, I was not attacking you; but absolutely my set could not possibly be examined except by maybe a child who has no knowledge of even the thickness of a penny. I also want to mention that I clearly said that most magicians don't have the coins examined in the context of a routine of this type anyway, so the examinability factor is only of consequence to any who do. Most do not. If examinability is important to you, I still stand by my no recommend. And, finally, I want to reiterate my early statement that my review was not a negative review; simply less than glowing. I guess I could sum it up by saying I usually try to help magicians who might be on the edge about buying something very expensive. This is very expensive. If you are on the edge, I would personally not recommend you take the plunge. If you can afford it, but it's a little sacrifice to swing it, I would not recommend you buy it. I think a magician in either of those categories would be disappointed. If, however, you are an avid collector of coin gaffs and can easily afford it, why not? To put it in even more pespective, I'm content with this purchase, not ecstatic, not happy or excited as I hoped I would be, just contented. Hope that clarifies things a bit. Take care everyone. |
cairo Elite user 406 Posts |
Is there any reason that anyone feels this version is superior the the Kohler routine?
|
Joe Mauro Inner circle 1133 Posts |
I posted this on anothe rthread.
Mr. Medonza said "MY set, which is a Morgan Dollar version and was made by Jamie, could not possibly be examined, neither the entire gaff or any part of it, without arousing suspicion or at least making a laymen wonder what the deal is with the thin "toy" coin". That's a stark contrast to someone that says they can be examined. I think Mr. Dustman and Mr. Mendoza are being truthful based on their individual criteria for what can be handed out. I respect both gentlemen and appreciate anytime they post thoughts or reviews. It would be nice, on an $800 trick, if photos or a video clip were shown so the consumer could decide if the coins can be examined. Mr. Kenner is a Café member and he's the only one that can clear this up.
~Joe
|
runawayjag Inner circle 1085 Posts |
Okay, I take it back. THIS will be my last post on the subject. In my last post I kiddingly suggested that maybe I got a poorly made one with a thinner coin than other sets. Ironically, I just got another set, this time Peace Dollars, and, to my amazement, it IS a thicker coin! I can hold my Morgan gaff (the front part,) next to the Peace Dollar gaff and the latter is almost twice as thick.
So, my error....at least the Peace Dollar version can be examined. My Morgan Dollar version could never be examined...it is literally wafer thin. So, now you can judge for yourself if you think it is worth the expense. I would say this, if you are going to buy it, buy the Peace Dollar version if you really plan to do it. Okay, I'm done. |
Andi Peters Inner circle 1330 Posts |
I inspected the gaffs and they are nowhere near the quality of Mark Mason's Come Fly With Me. That remains my favourite version unless U3F 2 beats it, but I doubt it.
|
Michael Dustman Inner circle Columbus, Ohio 1220 Posts |
Thanks John for coming back and making that distinction.
I got a Peace set and the set I saw earlir this year was Peace as well. I have not had the opportunity to see a Morgan set. |
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
John, the notion of using a blackout coin for the last vanish is sound.
Also the notion of using a blackout as part of a gaffed set for coin routines. A recent issue of genii magazine tipped a workable one handed vanish using a blackout-like gaff that bears directly on this. @jm, would you kindly scan/send me the book with the coin vanish? Or...may I borrow your copy of the book or buy it from you? Seems a perfect day to ask and move toward putting an old matter to rest where it belongs. Best wishes, JonT. Email addresses on profile.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Kenner/Schoolcraft Superfly: A Real Review (1 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.07 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |