(Close Window)
Topic: Better ringbox/Lippincott box trick
Message: Posted by: Psycho Savager (Aug 28, 2011 09:29AM)
I'm determined to get a good ringbox trick into my routine. I based my version on David Stone's from The Real Secrets of Magic, but when practising among (non-magician) friends, I've found a problem that hinders the full impact of the trick:

The spectator quickly sees where the trick is going and works out that the ring must be already inside the box when I present it to them. Although they don't know how it got from my closed hand to inside the box, I feel that making that making the ring vanish at that point seems somewhat redundant.

Has anyone else encountered this? Are there any other good ringbox routines that you would recommend?
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Aug 28, 2011 10:35AM)
[b]Gaetan Bloom's routine with the Porper Strong Box is great.[/b]
You don't vanish the ring. You have a paper bag with a "lock" on it. Say you keep your valuables in it. Draw a slot and push the ring thru it -- tongue in cheek. When you take lock off bag and dump contents out there is a locked metal box and the ring is found in it. (this is a bare bones description).
Message: Posted by: Julie (Aug 28, 2011 11:31AM)
Hello PS

You might consider using a Rattle Box to vanish the borrowed ring. This is a very effective approach because even after you have loaded the audience member's ring into the Lippincott Box, she will believe her ring is still in the Rattle Box (thanks to the hidden rattle mechanism).

Definitely worth your time to research...

Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Aug 28, 2011 10:40PM)
Or have spectator hold "their" ring thru a handkerchief. This is a strong often overlooked yet magical way.
Message: Posted by: Michael Baker (Aug 30, 2011 01:08PM)
Avoid foreshadowing by keeping them convinced the ring (object) is still in play after the box is brought forth. Never set up a direct line of thinking (borrow ring, vanish ring, bring out box, ring is in box... duh.) A closed hand is somewhat less convincing also, especially if you've already vanished things from your hand (coins, sponge balls, etc.). Rattle device is better. So is ring under handkerchief. Both are subtle "convincers". When I have the luxury of performing before a somewhat larger group, I will often use a nest of boxes, which in my case usually involves a Lippincott-type device as the inner box. When I borrow the ring (or bill, etc.), I attempt to do so from one side of the room. I then switch-in a duplicate as I drop it into a glass. This glass is then handed to someone on the opposite side of the room to hold. This is a very strong ploy, as people can actually "see" the object in the glass. However, the one person best suited to identify their object, is in a position where identification is not really possible. It's a principle somewhat similar to performing with a Himber ring.

Ok, all that being said, there is something of value to building anticipation. In such a case, the foreshadowing does just this. But, it takes a carefully crafted script to keep the build going until the final reveal. Otherwise, the moment of epiphany caused by the foreshadowing becomes the perceived climax, and everything from that point forward is a downward spiral, i.e., anti-climatic. How does one do this?? There are probably many ways, but one way would be to reiterate the events leading up to this point, and to point up some key facts such as, the examination of the box to insure that it is impenetrable, etc.
Message: Posted by: Pete Biro (Aug 30, 2011 03:02PM)
Great Advice Mr. Baker.
Message: Posted by: Michael Baker (Aug 30, 2011 03:19PM)
Thanks! Yours too. I am very curious about the Gaeton Bloom idea with the bag. I can see other potential uses for this ploy.
Message: Posted by: ASCII (Aug 31, 2011 10:18AM)
I had the same problem, In the past I used a vanishing handkerchief (sanders), but still wasn't completely happy with is as I wanted the box (Lippincott) in view from the beginning.

so I changed the effect, I created a second vanishing handkerchief with a folded up playing card (instead of a ring)
And I do the routine with two people, borrow a ring from a lady, and when a man (not wearing a ring) tells me he has no ring, I offer to use a selected card instead. this allows you to vary the method and use both a load and a duplicate (and have the ring loaded and on the table before the card is even seleced!)

the key to this presentation is to build up the fact that the items will switch places (not disappear) I use a Houdini presentation claiming I will replicate his most famous trick the metamorphosis but you could easily adjust this to fit you.
Now when when the rings vanishes its quiet startling, then 2nd spectator verifies he does not have the ring and still has the folded up card.
then after a bit of byplay I move over to him, then the card vanishes 1st spectator confirms she nether has the card or the ring (more byplay)

doing it this way the ring and “the” card are in the box on the table, since (almost) the beginning
and the final reveal is not foreshadowed

this is just a brief rundown of it if you would like more detail let me know.

Has anyone else encountered this? Are there any other good ringbox routines that you would recommend?
Message: Posted by: Michael Baker (Aug 31, 2011 10:56AM)

This is an excellent solution!
Message: Posted by: Harry Murphy (Aug 31, 2011 11:03AM)
Great solutions here! All are now in my notebook! Presently I am using a Lippincott box made by Micael Baker.
Message: Posted by: ASCII (Sep 2, 2011 10:52AM)
Thanks, glad you liked it.
Like you mentioned in your post. I got the Idea from a Himber ring performance, and liked the idea of mixing the methods together.

On 2011-08-31 11:56, Michael Baker wrote:

This is an excellent solution!