(Close Window)
Topic: Michael Ammar store unprotected ?
Message: Posted by: Stefmagic (Jun 18, 2010 12:59PM)
I just make a little visit to Michael Ammar web site and I realised that his store was not protected by secret password to avoid access to lay people.

The fact is the Michael Ammar performed on TV and a lot of people google his name on the internet. We always cry out loud that there is too much exposure about Magic but what about a popular magician (Ammar for exemple)letting anybody see what he's selling on his magic store ?


What's your opinion about unprotected store of popular magician ?
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 18, 2010 02:07PM)
My opinion? Not unintentional... as I see it, it is open season... $$$
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 18, 2010 02:17PM)
Seriously? The last brick & mortar magic shop that I've visited that had a protected "Magician's Only" section closed in the late 70's. For that matter, I've never seen a single magic retail website that requires a password. Why should Michael's site be any different?
Message: Posted by: Donal Chayce (Jun 18, 2010 04:15PM)
[quote]
I've never seen a single magic retail website that requires a password. Why should Michael's site be any different?
[/quote]

I have, in fact, come across a handful of retail websites that require a password to enter; e.g., you have to correctly answer one or two basic questions about magic history.

(Offered with no intent of staking a claim in this debate.)
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 18, 2010 05:46PM)
Got it. Since a lot of people do it all is good. Wow.
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 18, 2010 06:56PM)
I'm not saying it's right, Danny; just today's norm. I very much preferred the days of shops like Earl Edwards' in Norfolk or U.F. Grant's in Columbus. You had to prove some level of skill in magic before being allowed access to the inner sanctum. It simply isn't that way any longer and that genii will never go back into the bottle. Does this really have to degrade into a chest-thumping session? You know I'm not one of these "in your face" posters.
Message: Posted by: LobowolfXXX (Jun 18, 2010 07:27PM)
Much ado about nothing. The "protected" sites I see stop long enough to ask you what The Professor's last name was. I guess that keeps out people who don't have 2 free seconds or access to Google, but seriously, what's the difference?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 18, 2010 11:34PM)
I don't think that the "protection" is of any use in the least. Magic shops for as long as I have seen them in living color don't care about anything except if you can pay the bill.

The idea that "secrets" exist is just laughable anyhow if you ask me in the first place. I just hate when there are differing standards for who can and can not sell which secrets and to whom. Once it is ok to sell a "secret" first of all we should call it something else for it is no longer a secret now is it? Second of all nobody gives a hoot about selling secrets, but give them away and now we have problems.

Skip, I just want to get past the stpuid justifications.
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jun 18, 2010 11:58PM)
So, why is there so much hate for the Masked Magician? He isn't doing anything different. It's all about making money, and apparently the Masked Magician is doing just that. His shows must be somewhat popular because magicians keep talking about his t.v specials, and FOX keeps making them.

I agree there is a huge double standard in the magic industry. The art of magic is becoming more and more about greed than protecting it.
Message: Posted by: Stefmagic (Jun 19, 2010 07:13AM)
I don't talked about Magic shop that lay people could find anywhere if they have interest in Magic. What I'm talking about is a magician that performed on tv. Many people will google Michael Ammar on the web to learn more about him and vlam! they find the store section!


And other comment... Magician produced DVD for magicians and want their secrets to be keep among the magic community (sold to magicians) but in other hand, magic shop owners have to pay the bills and will try to sell DVD to anybody who can pay for it. That mean unprotected web site, selling item on ebay, etc. Isn't ironic at some point ?

So magicians, who produced DVD for financial reason (gain money), are somehow responsible for their lost! If not, they'll sold DVD and books underground like it was some years ago. Open market mean more money for everybody but it means also more exposure to lay people.

Richard Osterlind wrote a post about pirating DVD but by producing so much DVD, mr Osterlind make a lot of money (the reason he produced them) but also open himself to exposure and pirating! If you don't want so much pirating, you only produced limited DVD and you sell them underground. that way, you limited the risk.
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 19, 2010 08:27AM)
Magic is a business. In order to survive as a magician, one needs multiple income streams; show fees alone simply aren't going to do it for most of us. For some this means a "day job" or a working spouse. For others it's product sales, authoring books and DVDs, podcasts, blogs, lecture tours and so on. As in any business, you do what you must to pay the bills.

Purists consider the Tarbell Magic Course as the ultimate exposure. No less a pro than Houdini originally considered creating the public course but handed it to Dr. Tarbell due to other commitments. The mail-order lessons were available to anyone with a dime to spare through advertisements placed in popular dime novels and police gazettes.

Houdini, Blackstone, Thurston, Gibson and others all created and sold magic books and effects to the lay public. Houdini built a career on publicly exposing magic techniques used by charlatans and crooks to bilk people. No password or secret handshake required - and this was nearly 100 years ago. Why should we expect such measures today?

In Tarbell's own words, ""There is a big difference between a magician and a man who does tricks...Fundamentally, the making of a magician is no different than the making of other professional people. One must be trained in the mechanics, the alternate methods and be skilled in the presentation in order to meet any conditions which may arise."

Knowing the "secret" does not diminish the art behind the magic or the skills of the true magician. Exposure is hugely overrated; but that's been debated to death and back already.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 19, 2010 08:44AM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 09:27, Skip Way wrote:
Magic is a business. ...
[/quote]

No. Magic is magic.
There is at present a business of selling the means to do tricks as a commodity and using the term 'secret' as a crude sort of branding.
I suspect that very few who play with and/or perform tricks also study, much less believe in, magic.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 19, 2010 09:07AM)
Why are fees not enough again? Skip I am not trying to be confrontational but indeed magic fees should be enough.
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 19, 2010 09:35AM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 09:44, Jonathan Townsend wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 09:27, Skip Way wrote:
Magic is a business. ...
[/quote]

No. Magic is magic.
There is at present a business of selling the means to do tricks as a commodity and using the term 'secret' as a crude sort of branding.
I suspect that very few who play with and/or perform tricks also study, much less believe in, magic.
[/quote]

I don't know their minds, but I suspect that the Copperfields, Burtons and Tellers, to name a few, would disagree with you, Jonathan. Magic as entertainment and a commodity is a business and a very lucrative one for those who can make it work.

I do agree with you and Dr. Tarbell that very few of those who dabble in tricks ever develop into magicians. They play a bit then move on to some new shiny experience. Respectfully, so what? What about those relatively rare few who received a magic set, bought a magic book or learned a routine from YouTube who went on to become true masters - or at least serious enthusiasts.

[quote]On 2010-06-19 10:07, Dannydoyle wrote:
Why are fees not enough again? Skip I am not trying to be confrontational but indeed magic fees should be enough.
[/quote]

I appreciate that, Danny. I've learned a great deal about myself from our early discussions...and guys like you and Jonathan have influenced more than a few of my opinions.

Maybe these fees are sufficient for someone with a steady list of clients in a lucrative market, but one can sometimes double or triple those fees with back-of-room and outside sales. I suppose it depends on one's goals and obligations.

Dr. Tarbell, Blackstone, Mark Wilson and Walter Gibson certainly didn't need the money when they penned their magic courses for laypersons. They didn't require proof of intent, an oath of secrecy or prior magic knowledge to purchase their tomes. They made a business decision based on a clearly defined demand.

My first magic book at the age of 10 was Walter Gibson's 188pg hardcover [b]Magic Explained [/b]which sold for thirty-five cents. That book started me on an incredible journey that has yet to end. If I had required a password or prior approval to purchase this and future books, I would probably have missed out on many wonderful experiences.

So I ask you and Jonathan: Do we condemn these men as exposers or thank them for opening the doors that many of us walked through? If we owe them our thanks, then why should we look askew at a modern master like Michael Ammar for following their lead?
Message: Posted by: Stefmagic (Jun 19, 2010 09:51AM)
Magician that need others income sources are NOT the one that authored books or DVD. Do you think Michael Ammar for exemple needs this to live ? Do you think Richard Osterlind needs this to pay his bills? I don't think so. The magicians and mentalists that published books and DVD are those who make a confortable living with their shows (corporate and private) and/or lecture tour.

Magicians make magic a business because they always want more and more money. It's the same about corporation that cuts jobs to save money to be able to give more profits to shareholders.

The magicians that fees are not enough are not the one publishing material! Those that published materials (book and DVD) are wealth and doesn't need it to make a good living. But, they are the first to cry out loud about exposure and pirating! It's ironic...

The exemple to follow about selling magic is Jerome Finley. Yes, his books are pricey but that way, he only sold his material to serious performer. He material is mostly kept underground and he want to know about the buyer before accepting selling something (he do that for Taboo treatise for exemple).
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 19, 2010 10:00AM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 10:51, Stefmagic wrote:
Magician that need others income sources are NOT the one that authored books or DVD. Do you think Michael Ammar for exemple need this to live? ... Magicians make magic a business because they always want more and more money.
[/quote]

As I said...
[quote]Dr. Tarbell, Blackstone, Mark Wilson and Walter Gibson certainly didn't need the money when they penned their magic courses for laypersons. ... They made a business decision based on a clearly defined demand. [/quote]

Do you really think that when the likes of Robert-Houdin, Thurston, Houdini and Hermann became magicians fame and fortune wasn't their goal? Of course they wanted more. Why shouldn't they? Why shouldn't Michael? Why shouldn't I?

I don't understand this aversion to profit and living the best life one can given the skills one develops...which is at the heart of any entrepreneurial endeavor.

Seriously, you make it sound like Michael is selling state secrets. We're talking entertainment here, not treason.

[quote]But, they are the first to cry out loud about exposure and pirating! It's ironic... [/quote]

They also have the inherent, ethical and legal right to publish their own creations and exchange them for monetary gain. If that right steps on your sensitivities as one who wants to keep the "secrets" of magic confined to a chosen few...respectfully, there really isn't much you can do short of boycotting his efforts.

They also have the ethical and legal right to protest the theft of that creation without just compensation.

As stated earlier in this tread - Much ado about nothing.
Message: Posted by: Stefmagic (Jun 19, 2010 10:09AM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 11:00, Skip Way wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 10:51, Stefmagic wrote:
Magician that need others income sources are NOT the one that authored books or DVD. Do you think Michael Ammar for exemple need this to live? ... Magicians make magic a business because they always want more and more money.
[/quote]

As I said...
[quote]Dr. Tarbell, Blackstone, Mark Wilson and Walter Gibson certainly didn't need the money when they penned their magic courses for laypersons. ... They made a business decision based on a clearly defined demand. [/quote]

Do you really think that when the likes of Robert-Houdin, Thurston, Houdini and Hermann became magicians fame and fortune wasn't their goal? Of course they wanted more. Why shouldn't they? I don't understand this aversion to profit...which is at the heart of any entrepreneurial endeavor.

Seriously, you make it sound like Michael is selling state secrets. We're talking entertainment here, not treason.
[/quote] Please, Stop talking about Houdin,Blackstone, Thurston, Houdini, etc... We are in the 2000s now. I don't care what happen 50 years ago. Internet wasn't there at this time. Today, we're facing a different challenge about exposure and pirating. If we close our eyes on it, imagine what it'll become in 10 years ? 20 years ago, I was astonished about David Copperfield illusions and dreamed about it. today, 10 years old boy can google Copperfield illusion on the web and find instantly all the secrets about his illusions. The world around us changed and we need as a community to change too. Internet give more access to exposure and pirating and as a community, we need to stop publishing tons of materials like never before. We must go more underground again but instead of doing this, we produced more and more materials... Magicians are killing their own secret art! Magic was always a secret and well guarded art...not today anymore because nobody care about it. all that count is to get more money in our pocket!

What I started about Michael Ammar is that a known magician like him that done tv show, should have his magic store protected because thousands of lay people will search about him on the web and as a magician, you should at least, try to avoid lay people find your magic materials that you are selling. Lay people saw Michael Ammar on tv and they go to his personal web site to know more about him, maybe trying to hire him and you have his magic store with all his secrets tricks just one click to the side of his contact information??? you think it's ok ? Exposure begin here...

For me, that doesn't make sense. I always saw professional performer like Paul Brook, Jerome Finley, Patrick Redford, etc. have password protected page for their materials.

***sorry about the writing, english is not my language
Message: Posted by: Servante (Jun 19, 2010 10:22AM)
Magic is a craft.
It may be elevated and become art.

When money is collected with profit in mind, it becomes business.
When an audience is charged money to observe it, it becomes show business.

Show business is two-thirds business, one-third show.

-Philip
Message: Posted by: Skip Way (Jun 19, 2010 10:25AM)
Paul Brook, Jerome Finley, Patrick Redford and Michael Ammar are the modern day equivalent of Robert-Houdin, Thurston, Houdini and Hermann. It's a viable comparison. Michael appears on television and sells his creations on an unprotected website. Blackstone appeared in the greatest theaters of his time and sold his in the lobby. The point is, the "secrets" of magic have been sold to the lay public by top name performers since the beginning. It is nothing new and it is exclusively Michael's decision whether or not to password protect his webstore.

As I said, the argument against exposure is moot. With YouTube, Google and the vast wealth of CD's, DVD's, books, magazines and catalogs available to the general public today, this quest to reel in exposure is meaningless. The cows are long, long gone!

Just to be clear - I'm not happy about that fact. I would happily return to those days when magic skills were guarded among peers, masters and apprentices. If every true magician made and kept an oath today to guard all current and future secrets and to share them only within a protected brotherhood, it would change nothing. Practically everything there is to know about magic is already out there for those willing to search for it and put two and two together. Why continue to beat this poor bag of bones that used to be a horse any further?

Regardless, I respect your opinion and honor your dream. I hope we can simply agree to disagree.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 19, 2010 01:09PM)
Magicians started a slow throat slit when they took cuts in fee to sell back of room crap. I guess this is where it leads.
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jun 19, 2010 01:49PM)
Times have indeed changed. many of the names mentioned would of frowned upon what is going on today. The internet brought in a whole new way to expose and market magic tricks. Instead of the big names standing up against such exposure, they decided to jump on the band wagon.

Why let all the little people make money off of selling tricks, or revealing a Bobo switch with a new routine. I remember when it all started. Some of the more bigger names in magic were against these new sites by unknown people selling tricks, or giving them away for nothing.

Ellusionist used to be heavily criticized in the begining for selling tricks to the open market. Then, those who did the complaining started their own websites to do the exact same thing.

That's the problem with ethics and such. They no longer exist when money is involved. Who can blame anyone. semi-pro, restuarant, and close-up magicians were starving for years because they loved performing magic. It only paid well to a very few. Now the doors are wide open, and even the resturant worker can make a pretty good living performing and selling magic.
Message: Posted by: Stefmagic (Jun 19, 2010 02:25PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 14:49, Gospel Dan wrote:
The internet brought in a whole new way to expose and market magic tricks. Instead of the big names standing up against such exposure, they decided to jump on the band wagon.
[/quote] This is exactly my thought! We know exposure and pirating exist, so Why the BIG names of today magic don't stand up against it ? Why BIG names in Magic decided together that the next great trick or the next book or DVD will be sold differently from the way it is today ? It's not to late to change but it need will by everyone and the desire to make our craft better.

The problem today is that we don't talk about "magic craft" anymore but about "magic market", money is more important than the craft we love! I read an other post that Richard Osterlind decided that he'll never do another DVD again! that's the start! Here a BIG names that decided to do something about pirating! Congratulation Mr. Osterlind.

I remember days where the only way to get ideas and material from a performer was to go to a lecture or convention.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 19, 2010 03:16PM)
Well, but wait a minute. Did Mr. Osterlind create his own dilemma by not restricting who could buy his DVD?
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jun 19, 2010 03:31PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 16:16, mandarin wrote:
Well, but wait a minute. Did Mr. Osterlind create his own dilemma by not restricting who could buy his DVD?
[/quote]

Is it a trick question. :)

If not, my answer would be yes.

here is a twisted example. The more guns that are allowed to be out in the hands of the public, the more gun related crimes there will be.

The more magicians release DVD to the open market, advertised all over the internet, the more chances of pirating will happen.

If you leave your valuables in your car, and leave your car unlocked in an area you are unfamiliar with. In a place where just anyone could come by, and someone steals stuff from your car, you have to blame yourself as well for not locking your car in the first place.

Let's say you did lock your car, but someone still broke in. At least you took enough common sense on your part to at least lock your doors. The next step would be to not park your car in that area anymore. If all you do is whine and cry about the person who broke into your car, and do nothing on your part to prevent it from happening again, then part of the responsability falls onto your shoulders.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 19, 2010 07:31PM)
Not a trick question, Dan... I really feel magicians who put their work out on DVD or easy download should realize what will happen to it. I certainly do not condone what is going on, but we live in a world of "finders keepers". If I had anything of value to offer to the magic community, I would put it in a 500 page tome that only the most serious students of magic would ever get through. DVD's are meat for the piranha now days...

Jim
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jun 19, 2010 08:35PM)
I will say it again.

We want to buy and sell secrets but we don't want exposure.

Therein lies the dilemma.

I've no answers.

:online:
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 20, 2010 12:31AM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 21:35, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
...

We want to buy and sell secrets but we don't want exposure.

...
[/quote]

What's with this "we"?

Performers want to get paid for doing shows. Magic (using the mechanics of guile to elicit delight for an audience) is a performing art. The business of making tools of the craft available is very awkward when what's being sold is not the property of those who wish to do the selling. This business gets even more awkward when the target market is the public at large.

IMHO it might help to lose the language about "secret" and any other branding which suggests there is something illicit about the items one can buy. One could just as well ask if an item has any value whatsoever to the inventor who would sell it in an open market rather than simply use it in their work and pass it on as a trust to those who they feel it would benefit.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 20, 2010 08:26AM)
I prefer the "passing" of secrets as opposed to the sale of them.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 20, 2010 12:16PM)
" it might help to lose the language about "secret"..."

How 'bout "tricks of the trade"...
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 20, 2010 12:24PM)
Mardarin, I like the direction you are working toward in this.
Since most here are not in the business of performing, our trade - it's more like "latest clever tricks from (insert brand name here)" ?
Message: Posted by: Servante (Jun 20, 2010 05:16PM)
I've been thinking about this. Jonathan's got a good point to follow. If they're not secrets...they're skills.
It's like, let's say, the makeup artist who can build prosthetic noses and chins...create fanciful characters for movies and television and stage. We say, "Wow, how did he do that?", though we know how...vaguely.
The point is, I guess, we appreciate the art with which the skills are performed, for we are entertained by them...though not all people in the audience WANT to be makeup artists...or magicians.

Or painters. We can admire what Rembrandt paints...and we know how to paint, more or less...but it is the talent...and the skill...and the art...with which he painted it that gives it value.
But if he wrote about it and called it his "secret," we might spend entirely too much time squinting at the painting under a microscope to reveal it.

So, yes, perhaps if we no longer call them secrets, no one will care to suss them out.
Message: Posted by: mormonyoyoman (Jun 20, 2010 08:03PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 08:13, Stefmagic wrote:

Richard Osterlind wrote a post about pirating DVD but by producing so much DVD, mr Osterlind make a lot of money (the reason he produced them) but also open himself to exposure and pirating! If you don't want so much pirating, you only produced limited DVD and you sell them underground. that way, you limited the risk.
[/quote]

Yikes! Do you have any idea of what you're saying, or how offensive this would be to law-abiding citizens?
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 20, 2010 09:05PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-20 21:03, mormonyoyoman wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 08:13, Stefmagic wrote:

Richard Osterlind wrote a post about pirating DVD but by producing so much DVD, mr Osterlind make a lot of money (the reason he produced them) but also open himself to exposure and pirating! If you don't want so much pirating, you only produced limited DVD and you sell them underground. that way, you limited the risk.
[/quote]

Yikes! Do you have any idea of what you're saying, or how offensive this would be to law-abiding citizens?
[/quote]

I'm pretty sure he meant "without advertising in public, including sites like this, in person and only to those who he feels would keep his work safe" - ie what some call the magic underground.

Think "need to know" when you discuss a trick with someone and you're on the way toward a more safe magic community.

The internet publication of works by folks other than the copyright holders are, IMHO, a symptom of the secret-disappointment-feeling cheated cycle folks go through while seeking "that trick which will make me..." item in the market.
Message: Posted by: mormonyoyoman (Jun 20, 2010 09:36PM)
I'm not sure, Jonathan. He sounded to me very much like the inhuman statement of "Look at how she dresses. She deserved to get raped." For goodness sake, let's blame the victim instead of the monsters!

*jeep!
--Grandpa
Message: Posted by: mormonyoyoman (Jun 20, 2010 09:52PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 16:31, Gospel Dan wrote:

here is a twisted example. The more guns that are allowed to be out in the hands of the public, the more gun related crimes there will be.
[/quote]

A false syllogism at best. This causes the rest of your argument (Anyone who puts out a DVD deserves to be ripped off) to be false.

And who's the nut who is claiming that Richard, Michael, etc are rich? Copperfield, yeah - he has an island. But where did the nut get his facts?

*jeep!
--Grandpa
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 20, 2010 09:57PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-20 22:36, mormonyoyoman wrote:
I'm not sure, Jonathan. He sounded to me very much like the inhuman statement of "Look at how she dresses. She deserved to get raped." For goodness sake, let's blame the victim instead of the monsters!

*jeep!
--Grandpa
[/quote]

Grandpa - you might be surprised at what people believe and say in some places.

The strategy of blaming the victim for the crime is a tried and true method of keeping some discussions from happening.
Message: Posted by: aradia (Jun 21, 2010 03:35PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-20 22:36, mormonyoyoman wrote:
I'm not sure, Jonathan. He sounded to me very much like the inhuman statement of "Look at how she dresses. She deserved to get raped." For goodness sake, let's blame the victim instead of the monsters!

*jeep!
--Grandpa
[/quote]
I find it moderately amusing that you point out a false syllogism, and yet just prior you make an appeal to emotion. Pirates are hardly on the same level of monstrosity as rapists. But ok, I'll take the rape tack:

If everyone knows that going out with a certain individual will result in being raped, and you go out with him, and he rapes you -- yes, some of the responsibility is on you. Sorry, but it's true. Each person is responsible for his/her own actions. If the consequences of an action are known with any certainty whatsoever, then one has very little basis on which to complain if one chooses to engage in that action. But don't conflate taking responsibility for one's own actions with taking responsibility for someone else's actions.

Guess what? Books and DVDs get pirated. If someone doesn't realise that, they are painfully naive. If you put out a book or DVD, there is a very real possibility that it will be pirated. If the consequence is unappealing, do not engage in actions which can (and likely will) lead to such a consequence.

Or, to paraphrase: Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me.
Message: Posted by: Pakar Ilusi (Jun 21, 2010 04:28PM)
Won't go with the rape analogy here. It's apples and durians really...

Not directing this to anyone in particular.

This much is true, if you don't realize that today in 2010, that your Published work will be pirated and distributed on the Net, then you're just willingly closing your eyes to quite a well known fact. Burying your head in the sand won't make the danger disappear.

Don't publish if you don't want to be pirated at all.

At least not now, hope it's remedied in the future...

Just my take on it...

:online:
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 21, 2010 04:38PM)
Agreed, Pakar! And, if that meant that lots fewer magicians tried for the gold with DVD'S and the like, I would posit that things would be lots better! More of a market for good magicians, since the run of the mill would not be there, and magic would be "magical" rather than everyone knowing the secrets which reduces it to theater, or worse...
Message: Posted by: Whit Haydn (Jun 21, 2010 07:04PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-21 17:38, mandarin wrote:
Agreed, Pakar! And, if that meant that lots fewer magicians tried for the gold with DVD'S and the like, I would posit that things would be lots better! More of a market for good magicians, since the run of the mill would not be there, and magic would be "magical" rather than everyone knowing the secrets which reduces it to theater, or worse...
[/quote]

I suspect that the mediocre will rule, and the "good magicians" will simply no longer find it worthwhile to create great effects and publish them. People will just stop sharing.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 21, 2010 08:47PM)
Perhaps rule the niche market - but it will still be the best performers who rule the stage and the best craftsmen and innovators whose works those performers will seek out.
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jun 22, 2010 08:30PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-20 22:52, mormonyoyoman wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-19 16:31, Gospel Dan wrote:

here is a twisted example. The more guns that are allowed to be out in the hands of the public, the more gun related crimes there will be.
[/quote]

A false syllogism at best. This causes the rest of your argument (Anyone who puts out a DVD deserves to be ripped off) to be false.

And who's the nut who is claiming that Richard, Michael, etc are rich? Copperfield, yeah - he has an island. But where did the nut get his facts?

*jeep!
--Grandpa
[/quote]

I never said that anyone who puts out a DVD deserves to be ripped off. You clearly missed the point, and are completely misrepresenting my statements. Please don't put words into my mouth.

If a person is going to complain and whine about how all their DVD's keep getting pirated, and shared on torrent sites, but keep pumping out more and more DVD's to the mass market, then it's just like what aradia, and Pakar Ilusi said.
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 22, 2010 10:52PM)
Lets get the pitch forks and torches and we can storm Ammar's castle. Sounds like fun.

Or...yea lets not do that. Seems as if the guy has done plenty to advance the art.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 23, 2010 08:54AM)
Like Penn & Teller...

http://magic.about.com/b/2010/06/16/penn-teller-no-true-beauty.htm?nl=1
Message: Posted by: Micheal Leath (Jun 23, 2010 08:45PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 09:54, mandarin wrote:
Like Penn & Teller...

http://magic.about.com/b/2010/06/16/penn-teller-no-true-beauty.htm?nl=1
[/quote]

Are you one of those who think that Penn & Teller are exposing magic? Penn & teller put on the best show I have ever seen. They have done much more for magic than 99% of all the other magicians I've seen.
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jun 23, 2010 09:48PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 21:45, Micheal Leath wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 09:54, mandarin wrote:
Like Penn & Teller...

http://magic.about.com/b/2010/06/16/penn-teller-no-true-beauty.htm?nl=1
[/quote]

Are you one of those who think that Penn & Teller are exposing magic? Penn & teller put on the best show I have ever seen. They have done much more for magic than 99% of all the other magicians I've seen.
[/quote]

I'm just wondering if you read the article? And yes, Penn and Teller exposes magic. Penn admits to exposing magic. (lol) :)
Message: Posted by: Micheal Leath (Jun 23, 2010 11:25PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 22:48, Gospel Dan wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 21:45, Micheal Leath wrote:
[quote]
On 2010-06-23 09:54, mandarin wrote:
Like Penn & Teller...

http://magic.about.com/b/2010/06/16/penn-teller-no-true-beauty.htm?nl=1
[/quote]

Are you one of those who think that Penn & Teller are exposing magic? Penn & teller put on the best show I have ever seen. They have done much more for magic than 99% of all the other magicians I've seen.
[/quote]

I'm just wondering if you read the article? And yes, Penn and Teller exposes magic. Penn admits to exposing magic. (lol) :)
[/quote]

I did read the article. Maybe I should have not have worded it like I did. I should have asked if he thought Penn & Teller were ruining magic with their exposure?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 24, 2010 06:20AM)
Oh god not again.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 24, 2010 10:04AM)
In deference to Danny, I must respectfully refrain from answering your question, Micheal...
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 26, 2010 05:50PM)
Similarly in an attempt to NOT bait you, I say nothing.
Message: Posted by: Mr. Mystoffelees (Jun 26, 2010 06:20PM)
Gratzi!
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 27, 2010 08:32AM)
So we're down to "speak no evil" and the other two monkeys are out doing as they please?
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 27, 2010 11:51AM)
No Jonathan we are at a point at which we know the opinions of each other and simply do not want to argue them again out of respect or boredome. I wish one of those monkeys was a "mind your own business" monkey. But that is tough to sum up with a simple gesture like hands over eyes, ears or mouth.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 27, 2010 11:55AM)
I was thinking of the back and forth between Dan and Michael - effectively leaving "hear no evil" and "do no evil" to run wild on the internet since speaking out against an open market seems useless.
Message: Posted by: TheAmbitiousCard (Jun 30, 2010 02:32AM)
As long as Ammar is selling the tricks I don't see a problem.
Everyone has the right to buy a trick.
I don't think anything except laying down some cash is required.

Just like at a magic store. Anyone can walk in and buy a trick.

Am I missing something?
Message: Posted by: Review King (Jun 30, 2010 11:00AM)
So, the section of a Public Library that has magic books should be password protected from.....the public? Hmmmm.....
Message: Posted by: Dannydoyle (Jun 30, 2010 01:57PM)
I enjoy the position of "once I have learned THEN everything should be secret.
Message: Posted by: Jonathan Townsend (Jun 30, 2010 04:01PM)
[quote]
On 2010-06-30 12:00, Review King wrote:
So, the section of a Public Library that has magic books should be password protected from.....the public? Hmmmm.....
[/quote]

Seems like just magicians need a password. Not writers, casual readers, publishers...
Message: Posted by: alpha alex (Jun 30, 2010 07:26PM)
Really??
Ammar is entitled to sell his dvds any way he wants
I am one of those that learned a lot from his secrets of card magic
what´s the difference between finding them in a magic store by accident or buying them over the internet?
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jul 1, 2010 12:35PM)
In the end it doesn't really matter. If someone is so intent on finding out how a trick is done because they can't stand being fooled, there is nothing to stop them. Albeit. It only hurts them because if they have no interrest in magic, but just can't stand not knowing, then everytime they find out a small part of their inner child dies.

To those who honestly want to learn magic because they love performing and entertaining for others, they too will find ways to learn. As they learn, they will more than likely also appreciate the art of magic enough to realize that it's not the secrets that need to be protected as much as the inner child of each of our audiences.
Message: Posted by: aradia (Jul 1, 2010 02:04PM)
[quote]
On 2010-07-01 13:35, Gospel Dan wrote:
In the end it doesn't really matter. If someone is so intent on finding out how a trick is done because they can't stand being fooled, there is nothing to stop them. Albeit. It only hurts them because if they have no interrest in magic, but just can't stand not knowing, then everytime they find out a small part of their inner child dies.[/quote]

I see this mentioned a lot, but I don't buy it (at least, not 100%). I readily admit that I LOVE finding out how something is done. I'm curious by nature... a hacker... a creative problem solver. Magic speaks volumes to me on that level. Does that hurt my enjoyment? Is my inner child all shriveled and emaciated? Hardly. ;) When I watch someone performing, I get to choose whether to simply enjoy the illusion or whether to analyse it. Honestly, I think that studying so much has given me more opportunity to simply enjoy the illusion. I know I can figure out how to replicate it, given a little bit of time, so I feel no compulsion to find out the details. Knowing that I'm able to figure it out means I don't have to figure it out (errr... something like that).

[quote]To those who honestly want to learn magic because they love performing and entertaining for others, they too will find ways to learn. As they learn, they will more than likely also appreciate the art of magic enough to realize that it's not the secrets that need to be protected as much as the inner child of each of our audiences.
[/quote]

Very, very true! The friend I'm slowwwwwly teaching right now is very much like me. She's very curious. She MUST know how something works. Not knowing drives her crazy. So I bribe her a little bit at a time, dangling the carrot and giving her little bites along the way, all the while trying to remind her that it's ok to be curious, and it's ok to want to know "how it's done", but that there's an equally important aspect in the enjoyment and appreciation of the illusion itself. I've been working on some of the tricks from True Astonishment, and demonstrated a couple to get her feedback on my presentation, all the while reminding her that even though she feels compelled to learn how they're done, she should also take time to simply enjoy the illusion. I don't think the two are necessarily mutually exclusive.

If the enjoyment is gone after finding out how a trick is done, it was likely never there in the first place. Their inner child was probably dead and buried long ago. =(
Message: Posted by: alpha alex (Jul 1, 2010 02:21PM)
I am against exposure on youtube and forums and whatever
but not against buying a dvd or book and learning the secrets
it doesn't help at all the password protected sites you could also google the question to get the answer.
Message: Posted by: Dan Bernier (Jul 1, 2010 05:51PM)
At aradia:

I'm referring to those who don't enjoy being fooled. They feel that their intellect is being insulted, and have to know everything. There's nothing we can do for them. They will find out whatever they want to find out, no matter how hard we make obtaining the information or methods.
Message: Posted by: aradia (Jul 2, 2010 12:27PM)
[quote]
On 2010-07-01 18:51, Gospel Dan wrote:
At aradia:

I'm referring to those who don't enjoy being fooled. They feel that their intellect is being insulted, and have to know everything. There's nothing we can do for them. They will find out whatever they want to find out, no matter how hard we make obtaining the information or methods.
[/quote]

If they really believe their intellect is being insulted, I doubt there's anything left of their inner child. Sad, really. I can't say I see a problem with wanting to know "everything", or even simply seeing an illusion as a puzzle instead of entertainment (that IS entertainment for some people); I'm a glutton for knowledge. =D But I definitely know the kinds of people you're talking about. I have to wonder what happened to... well... their sense of wonder.
Message: Posted by: MT (Jul 31, 2010 02:09AM)
Yeah, it's a real bummer that a layman can just log onto Ammar's website and buy the secrets just like that. But that's true about any magic trick pretty much. What can be done?
Message: Posted by: Turk (Aug 23, 2010 03:48AM)
Other than people who either affirmatively want to learn the secret or people who affirmatively want to learn the art, how many people are going to plunk down serious money on a whim? The fact that a true lay person can access Michael Ammar's web site, presupposes at least three things:

1. He's heard of Michael Ammar and is curious enough to Google his name and then go to his site in the first place. And,..for what?

2. Having gotten onto the site, he knows what he is looking for and what all those items with strange sounding names actually are...and do.

3. Even actually having a general knowledge of what a certain something is or does, he is willing to pay money for things that he, at best, barely knows anything about.

Additionally, with layman, I believe that most magic secrets are relatively safe and, even if generally known, such secret will not be realized or revealed by a performance [i]that is well performed and that is original in nature (and is not just the parroting back of the "off-the-shelf instructions" that came with the trick[/i]).

In this regard, I'm reminded of a beginning magician friend of mine that once showed me a hoary old card trick he had just learned out of a beginning magic book. Not a bad effect but the performance was "right out of the book". The following week, I performed the "Fogel's Triple Prediction" effect that was in Eugene Burger's "Intimate Power" manuscript. My magician friend's jaw dropped and he [i]repeatedly[/i] begged me to show him how that effect was performed...not realizing that the principle involved was used in the very same effect that he had shown me the week before!!

After refusing to explain the effect to him for well over an hour, and, after repeatedly advising him that I didn't need to explain the effect since he already "knew it" and had, in fact, shown it to me the week prior,...after all that, I finally revealed the explanation and he just sat there stupefied as he realized that he did actually know the secret and that it was the performance and the scripting that had caused him to be fooled. That day, my friend learned one of the real secrets of magic.

I relate that story only to suggest that original well-thought out scripting and well done performances will preserve the secret from the layman--including those who know the underlying secret.

Now, that said, if someone goes onto the Internet and posts the secrets of the latest David Copperfield or David Blaine illusion [i]and makes specific reference to that effect and the named magician[/i], such revealed information can be extremely damaging to such magician.

Just my $00.02 worth.

Mike

P.S. I just flashed back to one of my favorite magicians, David Williamson. I have all of his videos and even tho I have watched them repeatedly, David's misdirection and timing is so strong, he still "fools me" every time. By that I mean, my eyes follow where he wishes me to look and my mind "sees" what he wishes me to see. I love watching and learning and re-learning from the masters. The point is...if I, who know how the "effect goes" is still fooled every time, what chance does the casual layman. They may generally know a magic principle but, in the hands of a master, they don't realize that it has just been used. They just won't recognize it when they "see" it.
Message: Posted by: noble1 (Aug 23, 2010 09:04AM)
The net is the public library of our era.