(Close Window)
Topic: Metal Phone by Calen Morelli and Joao Miranda
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 13, 2020 02:18PM)
In August of 2018 Calen Morelli and I met in Las Vegas for the first time.

I had heard Calen was carrying around a black briefcase with never before seen methods inside.

This is where Calen showed me his prototype for his metal phone routine.

Once back in Portugal, my obsessive mind took this concept and engineered an internal locking mechanism that took this beautiful routine to a level some might say borderlines a piece of art.

This was an unexpected collaboration that brought about a truly amazing offering to the magic community.



Metal Phone is a state of the art gimmick that allows the performer to create a reality shattering moment using a borrowed bill or credit card and what appears to be a normal phone.



The partnership between Calen Morelli and Me resulted in a state of the art gimmick with no equal:



⁃ Each Metal Phone is built in 304 AISI Stainless Steel, meaning it will not get stained overtime and will stay forever with the same beautiful finish.

⁃ Patent pending locking system that only with an external tool allows the effect to reset and be performed again.

⁃ The manufacturing process of each Metal Phone is very complex taking over 2 days of machinery work + 1 day of hand labor to finish.

⁃ Metal Phone is very easy to perform right outside the box



Metal Phone is much more than your traditional magic trick. It is piece of art that you will be proud to own.

Comes complete with the gimmick, silicone case with slit and five camera stickers.

Metal phone is designed by Calen Morelli and engineered by Jo„o Miranda.


Each unit is proudly manufactured in Portugal.

PRE ORDER YOUR UNIT HERE: http://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=130

[youtube]WS8fk6mggGU[/youtube]

[youtube]9d_CUO2c7sw[/youtube]

[youtube]u7ik8M1bwg0[/youtube]
Message: Posted by: Magic KL (Feb 13, 2020 02:25PM)
Soooooooo good!! I love it!!
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 02:26PM)
Thatís very nice
Message: Posted by: scott0819 (Feb 13, 2020 02:30PM)
Thatís a fun take on the old brass block matchbox and also Jamie D. Grantís Industrial Revelation.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 02:31PM)
Industrial revelation to the next level.

Ordered.

The locking mechanism sold it for me.
Message: Posted by: magicmind (Feb 13, 2020 02:47PM)
$249 for metal + $20 for 100 "camera" stickers + $20 for 20 phone covers + $20 for silicone case to look more like a phone in case you want to make a switch after using your phone in a previous trick.

Total $309 to gt started with this effect.
It is a beautiful piece of engineered metal, but making it look like a phone costs even more. Good luck with this thing, I hope it is well received.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Feb 13, 2020 02:51PM)
Not trying to spoil the fun here. If you like this and can make this work: good for you. However I personally can't see a spectator thinking anything other than "there was a hole in this, but you somehow closed it." To me this screams "puzzle". A beautifully made puzzle, absolutely, but a puzzle.
Taking the sticker off to reveal it's not a phone is a nice surprise, but if you think people will believe that you pushed a credit card through a solid piece of metal I think you are fooling yourself. It's just like cigarette through quarter: a surprising moment, but not something that will leave them mystified. To me this is Tenyo 2.0.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Feb 13, 2020 03:04PM)
^ I was thinking the same thing. Very Tenyo.

It does look pretty nice and all but it lost me at the part when you reveal "Guess what, it's not a phone after all" and you start peeling off stickers. Between that, and the slit case, it now just seems like a magic store prop.

There is a simplicity and a purpose to Industrial Revelation that just makes sense. The block of steel in IR is just that. A block of steel.

Here you are basically saying at the end, "it was never a real phone to begin with...just a trick phone made of metal." .

Anyway, I do hope others enjoy it and I'm sure it is very well made.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 13, 2020 03:05PM)
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 03:14PM)
The one thing thatís going to completely f@@@ this up is if someone types in metal phone into google and the advert appears, or a youtube secret revealed video.

I hope this has been considered.
Message: Posted by: reignofsound (Feb 13, 2020 03:15PM)
Are all the extra add ons needed?
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Feb 13, 2020 03:23PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set. [/quote]

Start with Inject. Then Silhouette. Then Optix. Then this. :lol:
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 03:27PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, reignofsound wrote:
Are all the extra add ons needed? [/quote]

I would suggest the camera lens stickers but nothing else.
Message: Posted by: Daisydog (Feb 13, 2020 03:28PM)
That looks really good, and probably a bit easier to carry around than IR. I really love my IR and it gets great reactions. So....I don't know what to do!!!
Message: Posted by: RNK (Feb 13, 2020 03:31PM)
I actually feel it doesn't matter what version you use, they will all generate the same reactions. I think the phone is just a more modern version of this type of effect.
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (Feb 13, 2020 03:46PM)
I wouldn't want anyone to drop this!!!! I would be very cautious who you hand this to for examination.
Message: Posted by: Magic KL (Feb 13, 2020 03:47PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
The one thing thatís going to completely f@@@ this up is if someone types in metal phone into google and the advert appears, or a youtube secret revealed video.

I hope this has been considered. [/quote]

Maybe change the name to something else?
Message: Posted by: strollingmagician (Feb 13, 2020 03:48PM)
Nice. This is Industrial Revelation by Jamie Grant.
2020 is the year of stealing and re-marketing other magicians life work.
No laymen can google Jamieís version and find it.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Feb 13, 2020 03:53PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, strollingmagician wrote:
Nice. This is Industrial Revelation by Jamie Grant.
2020 is the year of stealing and re-marketing other magicians life work.
No laymen can google Jamieís version and find it. [/quote]

You do know Industrial Revelation is based on a really old idea, yes?
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 13, 2020 03:55PM)
Don't lose the external unlocking tool otherwise you will be left with a very expensive block of metal. While I like the updated, modern look of the phone, it is WAY expensive especially with the add-ons as compared to IR. Since IR is not currently being manufactured, this might be an alternative, albeit and expensive one, for those who want to do this type of routine.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 13, 2020 04:00PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, magicinsight wrote:
Don't lose the external unlocking tool otherwise you will be left with a very expensive block of metal. While I like the updated, modern look of the phone, it is WAY expensive especially with the add-ons as compared to IR. Since IR is not currently being manufactured, this might be an alternative, albeit and expensive one, for those who want to do this type of routine. [/quote]

Your comment is based on what exactly?

You donít even know what the tool is.

It is simple a small L hex key easily available anywhere if case you loose the one provided
Message: Posted by: elimagic (Feb 13, 2020 04:07PM)
I donít think the cost is terribly high as between the raw material cost, engineering, etc. Seems reasonable. Of course I wish it was cheaper just like I wish everything in life was but it doesnít seem unreasonable to me. What I struggle with is that it being a metal iphone clearly says itís a prop, specially made thing, instead of just a raw block of steel. It being in the shape of a phone, to me, seems to scream special prop. Now of course, this is magician thinking and I donít think 99% of spectators will be anything other than floored if presented properly. The locking mechanism is really interesting and if it does what joao says it does (which iím inclined to believe him obviously) then thatís a huge leap forward in the effect.

Nice joao. Iím in the fence but leaning towards placing the order.
Message: Posted by: Jared (Feb 13, 2020 04:24PM)
I agree that this looks terrific (nice work by Joao and creative concept by Calen), but penetration effects (in general) never seem to garner the reactions that I hope for. It seems like most spectators view these type of effects more as a puzzle instead of an amazing demonstration performed by a skillful magician. As much as I enjoyed Jamie Grant's technical marvel "Industrial Revelation" it never cracked my starting line-up of 'go-to' effects for strolling because I got better reactions from effects which are easier (less heavy) to carry around while working. If I eventually buy this it will be to satisfy my own curiosity as a hobbyist and magic collector.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Feb 13, 2020 04:36PM)
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through.
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 13, 2020 04:40PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, magicinsight wrote:
Don't lose the external unlocking tool otherwise you will be left with a very expensive block of metal. While I like the updated, modern look of the phone, it is WAY expensive especially with the add-ons as compared to IR. Since IR is not currently being manufactured, this might be an alternative, albeit and expensive one, for those who want to do this type of routine. [/quote]

Your comment is based on what exactly?

You donít even know what the tool is.

It is simple a small L hex key easily available anywhere if case you loose the one provided [/quote]

My comment was based upon the ad that states the locking mechanism is patent pending so I assumed that the tool to unlock the special locking mechanism was specially made. Since the tool is common, that certainly makes it convenient if it is misplaced. Good luck with your new product.
Message: Posted by: cardbiker (Feb 13, 2020 05:07PM)
Very disappointed that itís not something more original this has been done to death over the years
Message: Posted by: michael640 (Feb 13, 2020 05:18PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
The one thing thatís going to completely f@@@ this up is if someone types in metal phone into google and the advert appears, or a youtube secret revealed video.

I hope this has been considered. [/quote]

Couldnít agree more - this looks fantastic but why not simply apply common sense and not name it exactly as someone would describe it?
Message: Posted by: TuneHV (Feb 13, 2020 05:19PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through. [/quote]

Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Feb 13, 2020 06:00PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected. [/quote]


What don't you follow? When you push a pin through a matchbox, that's not a trick. You can push a pin through any matchbox. The trick is when the block is revealed.

When you put a coin through a card box, that's not a trick either. The card box might be empty. Or maybe there's a hole in the deck. The trick is when the block revealed.

When you push a card through a phone, that's ALREADY a trick. So saying "Actually it wasn't a phone, it was a block of metal" is a climax that isn't a climax. It doesn't up the stakes at all.
Message: Posted by: TuneHV (Feb 13, 2020 06:11PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
Not sure I follow this. You would expect matches to be in a match box, then realize it is a brass block. You would expect cards inside a card box, then reveal it is a steel block. You would expect a phone inside a phone case, then reveal it is a metal phone. Every previous example you are revealing it was something else solid. I can understand the concern with this being an object that doesnít exist, but not that it was something different than expected. [/quote]


What don't you follow? When you push a pin through a matchbox, that's not a trick. You can push a pin through any matchbox. The trick is when the block is revealed.

When you put a coin through a card box, that's not a trick either. The card box might be empty. Or maybe there's a hole in the deck. The trick is when the block revealed.

When you push a card through a phone, that's ALREADY a trick. So saying "Actually it wasn't a phone, it was a block of metal" is a climax that isn't a climax. It doesn't up the stakes at all. [/quote]

I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Feb 13, 2020 06:33PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction. [/quote]

I think you're making my point. The trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some way. Then the reveal of the metal block heightens the impossibility. I don't think you get that effect if the spectators thinks there's a phone in the case. It you had a trick where something penetrated a block of silver and then you revealed it to be a block of gold, that would still be impossible but wouldn't necessarily make much sense as a reveal.

Similarly, if you did the Tenyo trick from a few years ago where a silk penetrates a phone, would it be stronger to say "Actually it wasn't a phone. It was a block of steel that I made look like a phone." I don't think so.
Message: Posted by: JCheng (Feb 13, 2020 07:22PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
I'm a little confused by this trick. The original brass block penetration had you pushing a match through a matchbox, then revealing there was a brass block inside, making what happened impossible.

Industrial Revelation scaled the trick up in size, so you were pushing a coin through a (potentially empty) card box, and then revealing the block.

Here you're pushing something through your phone and then revealing it wasn't your phone it was something ELSE solid. Why exactly? I think I'd be more impressed if it was the phone.

Another potential issue I see is that the object isn't completely encased so they might think the block was simply levered downward from the case, allowing the card to pass through. [/quote]

I agree.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 07:40PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction. [/quote]

I think you're making my point. The trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some way. Then the reveal of the metal block heightens the impossibility. I don't think you get that effect if the spectators thinks there's a phone in the case. It you had a trick where something penetrated a block of silver and then you revealed it to be a block of gold, that would still be impossible but wouldn't necessarily make much sense as a reveal.

Similarly, if you did the Tenyo trick from a few years ago where a silk penetrates a phone, would it be stronger to say "Actually it wasn't a phone. It was a block of steel that I made look like a phone." I don't think so. [/quote]

Although I get what youíre saying, my perspective is that any rational spectator will almost immediately assume that there is no phone under that case, and that it is actually just a phone case shell with a slit in it. Itís this rational assumption that you must use to your advantage, in order for the metal block reveal to have an impact.

When performing the penetration, call out the fact that they probably think there isnít actually a phone in the case (whether a spectator thought this or not is irrelevant, make them think this).... because obviously itís not possible to push a credit card right through a mobile phone. Then admit that if thatís what they thought, they were correct, there isnít a phone. Point towards the camera, and reveal that itís just a sticker. The spectators at this point will be following the path you want them to, and The reveal will no longer feel like:
ďHa you thought I was penetrating gold, but it was actually silverĒ,
but more like:
ďSee you fell for it just for a second, you thought I was doing the impossibleĒ - only to reveal the Ďimpossibleí actually happened.

previous iterations relied on this concept as well... at first the spectators assume the deck is full, then they see the penetration and rationally change their assumption; deck is empty or the cards have a slit in them. The magician will play with this line of thinking, thatís why the metal block reveal works.

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 07:50PM)
Just adding: Iíve rewatched the full performance, and Calen letís the spectator hold the metal block while in the case, which does make the metal block reveal a tad redundant. Though it does still get a good reaction.


Personally I wouldnít let them hold it... I would want to build upon the idea that there isnít anything under the case. That way, the reveal has serious weight to it.:. Pun intended.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Feb 13, 2020 08:12PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, tomd wrote:

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally. [/quote]

yes, with Industrial Revelation, IF they think you are actually penetrating a normal, ungimmicked deck of cards, then the metal block reveal is somewhat pointless as well. (But most people will come up with their own conclusion, because the box does go out of site if you use a real deck. So it easy to assume the box was switched or there was something funny about the cards.)

Doing THIS trick (metal phone) without showing the phone first may seem like a solution, but then you have different issue. You'll push the card through and people will assume the case is empty. Then you'll tell them it's actually not empty and they'll think "No way is his phone in there." And they'll be right, it's not your phone, it's a metal block. Why? Especially since the phone would have been equally impressive and much more logical. The only answer must be that there's something special about the metal block.

With all that in mind, I'm sure the trick still gets a nice reaction and would be fun to perform. It just doesn't seem like an effect where all the pieces fall perfectly into place which is what I need if I'm going to spend a few hundred dollars on something.
Message: Posted by: TuneHV (Feb 13, 2020 09:05PM)
I think they missed a big opportunity here with the case.


They are offering these fake "covers" for the front of the phone to show the penetration 360 degrees:
https://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=131

I cannot begin to understand the point of these as it looks so fake and you can clearly a piece of paper in the video. If anything, it immediately raises suspicion as to why that is there and detracts from the magic. But showing the penetration 360 does add to the mystery much like its predecessors (which could be viewed at all angles) and elimates the idea of you just angling the phone out of the way like a form of sleight of hand.


Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

This way you can clearly show the penetration 360 degrees with no suspicion and it builds up the mystery of what is inside the case. It also opens up some interesting presentations such as "You're probably thinking to yourself there is no phone inside this case as that would be the only explanation, right? Though if you look here, you can see the camera, so it must be inside... that leaves only one last way this is possible... that it was all just an illusion. See, there is no phone inside the case - this is just a sticker, and this... is not a phone, but a solid piece of metal."

To the point above, the climax is shifting to an impossible oddity, and being able to show the case from both sides builds up this mystery. I also like the idea of slowly opening the flip case to reveal the metal phone as it just makes the reveal that much more impactful.

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 09:25PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, tomd wrote:

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally. [/quote]

yes, with Industrial Revelation, IF they think you are actually penetrating a normal, ungimmicked deck of cards, then the metal block reveal is somewhat pointless as well. (But most people will come up with their own conclusion, because the box does go out of site if you use a real deck. So it easy to assume the box was switched or there was something funny about the cards.)

Doing THIS trick (metal phone) without showing the phone first may seem like a solution, but then you have different issue. You'll push the card through and people will assume the case is empty. Then you'll tell them it's actually not empty and they'll think "No way is his phone in there." And they'll be right, it's not your phone, it's a metal block. Why? Especially since the phone would have been equally impressive and much more logical. The only answer must be that there's something special about the metal block.

With all that in mind, I'm sure the trick still gets a nice reaction and would be fun to perform. It just doesn't seem like an effect where all the pieces fall perfectly into place which is what I need if I'm going to spend a few hundred dollars on something. [/quote]

I donít disagree with most of that. ďWhy the metal block? It must be specialĒ is a valid point. But what I donít understand is why you think there is a difference between this and IR.

Revealing a metal block in this trick may lead the spectators to feel like itís part of the method, but equally the spectators would come to the same conclusion with IR (if the same presentation was used).
Sure, actually revealing the phone at the end would make more sense in Calens performance, but so would revealing a full un-gimmicked deck of cards in IR (again, if it was the same presentation) . whatís the difference?

The only difference I can see is in the performance videos for each trick (on their respective webpages):

Calen implies there is a phone in the case the entire routine. He invites them to try the penetration themselves, and it doesnít work for them (implying the phone is there), he has them hold the phone and case (and implies the phone is there), and finally tells them to feel the weight (which all but confirms the phone is there)... so when he reveals the metal block, it catches them off guard but it doesnít make sense.

In John Archers performance of IR (on IRís official webpage) he spends the entire routine playing with the spectators assumptions. At first they assume the deck is full, but when he uses the coin to penetrate the box their assumption changes and he plays with it. He starts saying itís possible the cards have a cut in them, or that maybe there are no cards in the box. This makes sense of the metal block reveal, because he can use a spectators correct assumption against them... there are right to assume that there are no cards. I think thatís why it hits so hard.

I donít mean to trample on Calenís performance, I enjoyed how he interacted with the spectators... However, I agree with you Joe when you say that the most logical ending with that presentation is for a phone to be revealed... not a metal block. Which leads to the conclusion that the metal block must be special.

However, if you used a John archer style of performance with metal phone, you would end up in same theatrical place as he does with IR...
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 09:28PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I think they missed a big opportunity here with the case.


They are offering these fake "covers" for the front of the phone to show the penetration 360 degrees:
https://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=131

I cannot begin to understand the point of these as it looks so fake and you can clearly a piece of paper in the video. If anything, it immediately raises suspicion as to why that is there and detracts from the magic. But showing the penetration 360 does add to the mystery much like its predecessors (which could be viewed at all angles) and elimates the idea of you just angling the phone out of the way like a form of sleight of hand.


Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

This way you can clearly show the penetration 360 degrees with no suspicion and it builds up the mystery of what is inside the case. It also opens up some interesting presentations such as "You're probably thinking to yourself there is no phone inside this case as that would be the only explanation, right? Though if you look here, you can see the camera, so it must be inside... that leaves only one last way this is possible... that it was all just an illusion. See, there is no phone inside the case - this is just a sticker, and this... is not a phone, but a solid piece of metal."

To the point above, the climax is shifting to an impossible oddity, and being able to show the case from both sides builds up this mystery. I also like the idea of slowly opening the flip case to reveal the metal phone as it just makes the reveal that much more impactful.

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this. [/quote]
Couldnít agree more, a flip case is so much better. I donít understand why you want to sell the idea that you are actually penetrating the phone, because the metal block becomes redundant.

You end up the in place joe has pointed out: you are exchanging a penetration of a logical metal object, to an illogical metal object. You want them to assume there is no phone, and a flip case would do the job.
Message: Posted by: zachwyman (Feb 13, 2020 09:54PM)
This looks really cool, however, the price tag is deterring. Style of phones change over time drastically - even this metal phone does not match up with the latest iPhone camera. Great idea, however not long lasting considering the world of technology we live in.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 10:20PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, zachwyman wrote:
This looks really cool, however, the price tag is deterring. Style of phones change over time drastically - even this metal phone does not match up with the latest iPhone camera. Great idea, however not long lasting considering the world of technology we live in. [/quote]

Thatís certainly not the case (pun intended) nowadays. I can guarantee you that I will keep my iPhone X until it completely dies on me, probably in 10 years time. Lots of iPhone owners have older models and are content with them. Why? Because people do not want to spend over a Grand on a new phone that only takes nicer photos. Those days are over. You NEVER see a queue outside Apple stores when new models are released nowadays.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 10:22PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, zachwyman wrote:
This looks really cool, however, the price tag is deterring. Style of phones change over time drastically - even this metal phone does not match up with the latest iPhone camera. Great idea, however not long lasting considering the world of technology we live in. [/quote]
Yep, not a trick you will be performing in 20 years... but I can see it lasting way longer than most people will keep it in their repertoire. Here are the flagship phones from 10 years ago: https://www.phonearena.com/news/10yearchallenge-This-is-what-flagship-smartphones-looked-like-10-years-ago_id112854

Some of those phones are ugly and out of date, others are very similar in appearance (apart from maybe the front facing buttons, which you wouldnít see in this routine anyway). Up until a month ago I had a 5 year old phone, my girlfriend has a phone that was released in 2013, and there are 100ís of different phone designs, I could see this lasting 7 years+ until the gimmick starts to look out of date.

7 years is more than enough time to get your moneys worth.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 10:29PM)
Here are the flagship phones from 7 years ago: https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/www.zdnet.com/google-amp/article/top-10-smartphones-of-2013-theres-one-thats-best/

Phone designs actually havenít changed much at all since then. Itís like we hit a sweet spot and have only made small modifications since. Whereas the change between 2010-2013 is huge in comparison
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 10:34PM)
Iíve already made that point Tom :confused: please read the whole thread.
Message: Posted by: JustJoshinMagic (Feb 13, 2020 10:42PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I think they missed a big opportunity here with the case.


They are offering these fake "covers" for the front of the phone to show the penetration 360 degrees:
https://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=131

I cannot begin to understand the point of these as it looks so fake and you can clearly a piece of paper in the video. If anything, it immediately raises suspicion as to why that is there and detracts from the magic. But showing the penetration 360 does add to the mystery much like its predecessors (which could be viewed at all angles) and elimates the idea of you just angling the phone out of the way like a form of sleight of hand.


Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

This way you can clearly show the penetration 360 degrees with no suspicion and it builds up the mystery of what is inside the case. It also opens up some interesting presentations such as "You're probably thinking to yourself there is no phone inside this case as that would be the only explanation, right? Though if you look here, you can see the camera, so it must be inside... that leaves only one last way this is possible... that it was all just an illusion. See, there is no phone inside the case - this is just a sticker, and this... is not a phone, but a solid piece of metal."

To the point above, the climax is shifting to an impossible oddity, and being able to show the case from both sides builds up this mystery. I also like the idea of slowly opening the flip case to reveal the metal phone as it just makes the reveal that much more impactful.

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this. [/quote]

To be fair, if you watch the video, he's not pretending its the screen of the phone, but rather it is a piece of paper. A lot of phone cases, have paper inserts like that in them when you buy them, so I believe the idea is to present it like that, not like its actually the screen of your phone
Message: Posted by: tomd (Feb 13, 2020 10:49PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iíve already made that point Tom :confused: please read the whole thread. [/quote]
You posted your reply 2 minutes before me, while I was in the middle of writing mine. I had no idea you said the same thing already.

Canít see into the future, I only pretend to for entertainment purposes. Sorry for agreeing with you 😂😂😂😂
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 11:02PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, tomd wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iíve already made that point Tom :confused: please read the whole thread. [/quote]
You posted your reply 2 minutes before me, while I was in the middle of writing mine. I had no idea you said the same thing already.

Canít see into the future, I only pretend to for entertainment purposes. Sorry for agreeing with you 😂😂😂😂 [/quote]

Ok Iíll let you off in that case (pun intended again) :rotf:
Message: Posted by: MarianoG (Feb 13, 2020 11:38PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set. [/quote]

Start with Inject. Then Silhouette. Then Optix. Then this. :lol: [/quote]

Lol and I thought my Sirix vanishing phone was out of place because it was an Iphone X!


https://sirixmagic.com
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 13, 2020 11:54PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MarianoG wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set. [/quote]

Start with Inject. Then Silhouette. Then Optix. Then this. :lol: [/quote]

Lol and I thought my Sirix vanishing phone was out of place because it was an Iphone X!


https://sirixmagic.com [/quote]

Demo video does not play.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 14, 2020 12:59AM)
The response to this effect has been overwhelming.

Important: The Metal Phone will be shipped in April as mentioned in my website.

However we are making just 200 units and 50% has been sold so far just in less than 12 hours.

After this batch is sold out the next batch will be available in July only.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Feb 14, 2020 02:22AM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MarianoG wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set. [/quote]

Start with Inject. Then Silhouette. Then Optix. Then this. :lol: [/quote]

Lol and I thought my Sirix vanishing phone was out of place because it was an Iphone X!


https://sirixmagic.com [/quote]

Demo video does not play. [/quote]


Here:

https://youtu.be/5nAwBFvVnz4
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 14, 2020 07:20AM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, Ceierry wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, pegasus wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MarianoG wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
I don't know how yet, but I feel there's an ability to perform this with Optix in there somewhere in a mini set. [/quote]

Start with Inject. Then Silhouette. Then Optix. Then this. :lol: [/quote]

Lol and I thought my Sirix vanishing phone was out of place because it was an Iphone X!


https://sirixmagic.com [/quote]

Demo video does not play. [/quote]


Here:

https://youtu.be/5nAwBFvVnz4 [/quote]

Thank you. Great routine by Mariano in the link, too.
Message: Posted by: strollingmagician (Feb 14, 2020 07:50AM)
Wow! Marianoís trick is only $40?
Message: Posted by: MarianoG (Feb 14, 2020 08:02AM)
Letīs return to Joaoīs and Calen excellent effect.

It comes to mind that if I place a metal-vinyl sticker on my phone gaff, it becomes a vanish of his metal phone (after a switch, of course).

It would be a perfect follow up, a vanish and reappearance of the metal unit somewhere else.
Message: Posted by: elimagic (Feb 14, 2020 09:12AM)
After thinking about it, I have an idea of where to use it so my order is placed. Very curious about the locking gimmick but I do believe, like I said before, the locking mechanism warrants the release. I do wish the name was so easily searchable though.

Just my thoughts.

Eli
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Feb 14, 2020 09:13AM)
My problem with this is the same as some have hinted at but havenít said directly.

It would be significantly more impressive if you turned the case around and an actual cellphone was in it. This is what the spectator is expecting and their brain is pumped and primed for the impossibility of that, and then you say ďna, just kidding. Itís not a phone. Itís a piece of metal.Ē Why? It would be more amazing if it were actually a phone.

Madison
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 14, 2020 09:20AM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MadisonH wrote:
My problem with this is the same as some have hinted at but havenít said directly.

It would be significantly more impressive if you turned the case around and an actual cellphone was in it. This is what the spectator is expecting and their brain is pumped and primed for the impossibility of that, and then you say ďna, just kidding. Itís not a phone. Itís a piece of metal.Ē Why? It would be more amazing if it were actually a phone.

Madison [/quote]

The reactions we got from real life performances say the exact opposite.
Message: Posted by: elimagic (Feb 14, 2020 09:27AM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MadisonH wrote:
My problem with this is the same as some have hinted at but havenít said directly.

It would be significantly more impressive if you turned the case around and an actual cellphone was in it. This is what the spectator is expecting and their brain is pumped and primed for the impossibility of that, and then you say ďna, just kidding. Itís not a phone. Itís a piece of metal.Ē Why? It would be more amazing if it were actually a phone.

Madison [/quote]

The reactions we got from real life performances say the exact opposite. [/quote]

This is my experience using ID for years as well. The same argument could be made that putting a folded bill or coin through a card box saying it is empty, and then dumping out a full deck of totally normal playing cards, but instaead of doing that, dumping out a giant bar of steel has never failed to deliver crazy reactions.

I think the same thing may be true of this as well. Yes, it would still be incredible if you turned around the case and there was a fully normal phone, but that is what they have been primed for. It is the subterfuge of it being a solid bar of steel that gets the reaction.

I agree, it doesn't really make sense if you analyze it, but, I think the sheer surprise and shock to the spectator would probably lead them to not care. All they know at that point is that they put their card through a solid block of steel that they are now holding and there is no hole.

It's an odd one for sure but we will see. My gut reaction as that the reactions will be very good.
Message: Posted by: ash2arani (Feb 14, 2020 09:49AM)
I think there is a key difference between IR/Matchbox and this one which is what Madison is alluding to:

The spectator tends to create the effect in their head. With IR, the effect they create is a deck with a slit or empty box or whatever. That is plausible and therefore, the revelation is shocking and surprising.

With this version, they already create this amazing effect in their mind of the bill penetrating a phone. That is magical in their mind however the magical effect is taken away from them. Yes, a more surprising effect has taken place instead.

In my opinion, the reactions will still be strong no matter what version of this effect is used. I believe all effects like this one will be shocking and garner reactions due to the nature of the effect and the steel block which does not fit in their train of thought watching the effect.

Also, I am not a fan of a slit in the case. A slit in a card box can make sense as the box is viewed as a disposable item. A case is not. I mean, who puts a slit like that in their case. Again, my nitpicks only.

With that said, I am sure the craftsmanship is great and the locking mechanism is a great plus. I may pick this up in the future if I figure out how to make it fit for me. I already see the potential in it.

But in the meantime, I believe IR is the superior version.

Just my 2 cents.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 14, 2020 09:50AM)
The reactions you see in the trailer are 100% honest.

We never met anyone before.

I think their reactions speak by themselves if you have doubts about how powerful this effect is.
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Feb 14, 2020 10:12AM)
Just want to be clear, I think the effect is very nice and itís clearly well made.

Iím not saying the reactions are faked. I trust they are real because they get a big shock when they see a piece of steel because they donít expect.

But with all due respect, I donít think you can say, ďThe reactions we got say the opposite.Ē In order to test what Iím saying, you would have to do the effect once where itís a steel block and then again where itís a cellphone and see which one gets a bigger reaction.

But honestly, the steel block probably would get a more VISIBLE reaction because of the shock factor. Just perhaps it being an actual cellphone would make it linger in their mind a bit more.

Obviously, we will never really know because there is no way to do it with a real cellphone. So until then, it will have to be a block of steel :)

Madison
Message: Posted by: MadisonH (Feb 14, 2020 11:10AM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:

Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this. [/quote]

This is a fantastic idea and makes it all the more workable, IMO.

Jo„o, do you think there is a possibility of this? I may be on board if so

Madison
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 14, 2020 11:42AM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MadisonH wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:

Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this. [/quote]

This is a fantastic idea and makes it all the more workable, IMO.

Jo„o, do you think there is a possibility of this? I may be on board if so

Madison [/quote]

Have to agree. If not it wouldnít be too difficult to make your own with a Stanley knife. Obviously youíd need an iPhone X flip case.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Feb 14, 2020 12:00PM)
Using a flip case would then create an effect virtually identical to IR. But I think I still prefer the plain old chunk of steel over a beautifully formed piece of steel in the shape of a phone.

Granted, the locking system is a very nice improvement but the trade off of having to add the fake camera piece so it's not simply one piece of metal. No one ever discovers the secret of IR anyway so I already feel very confident handing it out. But the locking is obviously an advantage if you'll be doing this at the magic club.

But to be honest I've never found this effect to get incredible reactions anyway. Sponge balls blows it away by at least tenfold but maybe that's just me.
Message: Posted by: threadman77 (Feb 14, 2020 12:03PM)
I believe this is absolutely more workable with a flip case and spectators believing a phone is inside. I think this line of thought slipped through the creation and I bet 90% of the buyers will explore that avenue. More work in trying to prove it is a phone with stickers and fake cases. I don't think part of the effect should be making them believe your piece of steel was a phone. It's a bit confusing to the climax.
Message: Posted by: magicinsight (Feb 14, 2020 12:03PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, videoman wrote:
Using a flip case would then create an effect virtually identical to IR. But I think I still prefer the plain old chunk of steel over a beautifully formed piece of steel in the shape of a phone.

Granted, the locking system is a very nice improvement but the trade off of having to add the fake camera piece so it's not simply one piece of metal. No one ever discovers the secret of IR anyway so I already feel very confident handing it out. But the locking is obviously an advantage if you'll be doing this at the magic club.

But to be honest I've never found this effect to get incredible reactions anyway. Sponge balls blows it away by at least tenfold but maybe that's just me. [/quote]

Agreed.
Message: Posted by: Phatmeat (Feb 14, 2020 12:04PM)
Hi Joao,

Do you intend on making the Metal Phone and its accessories available to magic dealers at some point? And if so, when do you think that will happen?
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 14, 2020 01:02PM)
Well thatís it then. Save yourself 200 Pounds and buy a couple of sponge balls instead.

:rotf: :rotf:
Message: Posted by: TuneHV (Feb 14, 2020 01:08PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, pegasus wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, MadisonH wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:

Instead, it would have been MUCH better if the silicone case was a flip case with a slit on both sides, like these:

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B075STDS9B/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_jCGrEbN1NAAFX

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B01FM1HUVS/ref=cm_sw_r_tw_dp_U_x_VCGrEbMMV6F64

I hope Joao considers making a flip case as an accessory option for this. [/quote]

This is a fantastic idea and makes it all the more workable, IMO.

Jo„o, do you think there is a possibility of this? I may be on board if so

Madison [/quote]

Have to agree. If not it wouldnít be too difficult to make your own with a Stanley knife. Obviously youíd need an iPhone X flip case. [/quote]

Yeah, could be done... but it would be nice if he offered it machine cut so it looked neater. Personally, I would even consider covering the camera cutout as that lends to the mystery and I donít think spectators would ever say Ďwhat about the camera cutout?í as they are too busy marveling at the metal phone at that point to even notice or care.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 14, 2020 01:45PM)
Yes. Agreed. Iíd rather not have to worry about stickers if Iím honest.

Instead of stickers it should be a small plastic cap fitted with a permanent sticker that fits perfectly over the locking (lens) device.
Message: Posted by: elimagic (Feb 14, 2020 02:10PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Yes. Agreed. Iíd rather not have to worry about stickers if Iím honest.

Instead of stickers it should be a small plastic cap fitted with a permanent sticker that fits perfectly over the locking (lens) device. [/quote]

But then you loose the effect of peeling the sticker off no?
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 14, 2020 03:17PM)
You just pull the plastic cap off. Not sure what the difference would be other than saving stickers.
Message: Posted by: JackMagic (Feb 14, 2020 03:45PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, Phatmeat wrote:
Hi Joao,

Do you intend on making the Metal Phone and its accessories available to magic dealers at some point? And if so, when do you think that will happen? [/quote]

If you like the effect best to purchase direct

If it was available via all the dealers that would put the price up by 60%
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Feb 14, 2020 03:56PM)
I've often seen products being released first only through the creator and later through dealers. But I've never seen that result in a 60% price increase. Could you explain what you mean?
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Feb 14, 2020 05:32PM)
Got one. Price is justified. Stickers are reusable
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Feb 15, 2020 03:13PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, Ceierry wrote:
Got one. Price is justified. Stickers are reusable [/quote]

What do you think of the hex screw visible on the exterior- I believe near where a lens would be?

Looks organic? Why do you need to ďlockĒ the unit in the 1st place? With the prior iterations there was little heat on the unit because of the consistency of the Florentine finish hiding the seam.

The beauty of IR and Matchbox was the heavy simple solid block - visually consistent florentine finish that there was nothing to see.

All the stickers and this and that. I don't know.

It will be interesting to hear feedback as I was tempted to get this but in thinking more, not sure if this improves on the past.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Feb 15, 2020 03:32PM)
Youn can remove the HEX screws if you want.

Looks organic yes. You don't need to lock, just if you want.

Stickers are reusable.

I'm planning on reviewing it and filming it ASAP.
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Feb 15, 2020 03:39PM)
With the hex screws removed - then youíve got two little holes there where screws used be correct?
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 15, 2020 03:59PM)
[quote]On Feb 15, 2020, saysold1 wrote:
With the hex screws removed - then youíve got two little holes there where screws used be correct? [/quote]

How about a metal bumper case, if itís the same dimensions as an iPhone X which I believe it is if it fits within an existing rubber case.

https://www.esrgear.com/products/iphone-xs-x-crown-metal-bumper-case/?set_country=gb&gclid=EAIaIQobChMIiNvN1MbU5wIVScreCh32fAsWEAQYBCABEgLyVfD_BwE
Message: Posted by: videoman (Feb 15, 2020 04:29PM)
This topic prompted me to get out both my IR and my Magic Inc deluxe brass matchbox (Cerillas Bloque), both of which I hadn't had out in a while, and it made me realize all over again how perfect they are and why I love them so much. They are just plain chunks of metal, which is exactly all they should appear to be. The simplicity is what makes their appearance so surprising and the metal blocks seem so innocent.

Joao does amazing work and I love so many of his incredible products. I'm sure the phone will do its job and many will cherish it. But I will stick with the plain and simple approach in this instance.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Feb 15, 2020 04:49PM)
I am not trying to be clever here but you have always been able to lock the brass match penetration version if you felt the need anyway .
Having said that this is beautifully made as ever by Joao but the only think I didnít care for personally was the screws around the camera area .
That wasnít a deal breaker but that truly did hit me as soon as I saw it live ( without any additional add on purchases )
Obviously I wasnít a layman and knew where this was heading but for £200 I felt that was fair dues Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Robert Houdin 78 (Feb 16, 2020 12:26PM)
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, videoman wrote:

But to be honest I've never found this effect to get incredible reactions anyway. Sponge balls blows it away by at least tenfold but maybe that's just me. [/quote]

I agree. That's just you.

R.
Message: Posted by: Tommytallica (Feb 16, 2020 12:43PM)
This looks awesome!
I do however prefer the deck box sized version.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Feb 16, 2020 04:56PM)
[quote]On Feb 16, 2020, Robert Houdin 78 wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, videoman wrote:

But to be honest I've never found this effect to get incredible reactions anyway. Sponge balls blows it away by at least tenfold but maybe that's just me. [/quote]

I agree. That's just you.

R. [/quote]

Yes, that has certainly been my experience but I don't think its unusual. I think if you competently performed both effects, sponge balls would be far more memorable to most spectators. The penetration effect will be perceived as a puzzle in many (most?) cases.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Feb 17, 2020 12:52AM)
I agree completely, videoman. This is smth that mostly excites magicians, not lay people. Nothing wrong with that, but you shouldnít be kidding yourself when you buy this.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 17, 2020 02:22AM)
[quote]On Feb 16, 2020, videoman wrote:
[quote]On Feb 16, 2020, Robert Houdin 78 wrote:
[quote]On Feb 14, 2020, videoman wrote:

But to be honest I've never found this effect to get incredible reactions anyway. Sponge balls blows it away by at least tenfold but maybe that's just me. [/quote]

I agree. That's just you.

R. [/quote]

Yes, that has certainly been my experience but I don't think its unusual. I think if you competently performed both effects, sponge balls would be far more memorable to most spectators. The penetration effect will be perceived as a puzzle in many (most?) cases. [/quote]

I do not want to offend you but what you are mentioning is absolutely incorrect as it is a very minimalist form of thinking.

EVERY magic trick on earth can look like a puzzle IF they are presented exactly like that, a puzzle!

It is up to the performer to create a good presentation and add layers of impossibility and psychology into them, and for Metal Phone me and Calen did that job for you, with the justification of the slit in the case (which is to allow the magician to show an optical illusion to the spectator) or even the transformation in their hands of the phone into a heavy object (later to be shown the actual stainless steel phone).

Lets grab on the classic and old matchbox effect. If you don't place layers of psychology and simply present it like: Here I have a matchbox and I will pass it thru with a match and look inside is a block of metal, this is how most magicians would present and yes that would be like a puzzle.

Think about it.. when David Copperfield presented the passing thru the Great Wall of China he did not just passed thru a simple wall... it was all justified and had the layers of impossibility and psychology I mentioned before: the history he told to connect both people of either side of the wall, the radar, the spandex cloth where you could see him protruding from the wall, the people around to prove the magic, and the list goes on and on.

If David passed thru the wall simply like you would do your standard matchbox penetration, well, sorry to say but it also would be perceived as a puzzle.

Remember, the secret to good magic is not in the prop but in the performer.

Metal Phone IS a great and powerful magic effect and is NOT a puzzle, unless you perform it incorrectly.
Message: Posted by: tenchu (Feb 17, 2020 06:15AM)
I'm pretty sure that eventually some magician will perform this on TV and will destroy everyone with it. It's a quality gimmick with a lot of potential.

Mike
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 17, 2020 08:20AM)
I agree that itís definitely in the presentation.

If only you could show the gimmick beforehand as a solid block, then place it in the case, before the penetration it would make a big difference imo.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Feb 17, 2020 10:30AM)
[quote]On Feb 17, 2020, pegasus wrote:
I agree that itís definitely in the presentation.

If only you could show the gimmick beforehand as a solid block, then place it in the case, before the penetration it would make a big difference imo. [/quote]

In this case you donít need a phone case, nor phone, nor nothing... grab a block of steel and pass a card, because if you put the block on the case etc that become a puzzle..

The thing is, this project has been very well thought of. When you watch the instructions and how everything works, youíll not regret your purchase.

But as I said, Iíll review it ASAP
Message: Posted by: Doric (Feb 20, 2020 03:59PM)
Ryan Tricks has just posted his 'edgy' presentation of this trick using a razor blade. It's great, if somewhat faked. Find it on any good social media channel.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 26, 2020 09:01AM)
Fantastic look at it:
[YouTube]Wql2OtejBVY?t=187[/YouTube]
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 27, 2020 06:00PM)
User review:

I've had a chance to work with this. It can't be over-stressed that this is a beautiful, well-made and solid piece of work and magic. There are pro workers already using this and swearing by it (David Penn gave it one of his highest recommendations) and I agree. It resets quick, and will last forever. It's not cheaply made, and the price reflects that; anything of good quality will. And that's good for us, this thing feels indestructible.

Side note: any so-called discrepancy problem of it turning out not to be a phone? Doesn't matter; honestly it's purely inside baseball. Reactions are crazy (and there's a few videos floating out there of performances already). Super well made and just incredibly fun to perform. It feels good in the hands and looks great.

The instructional videos are short and to the point. From proper usage to tips for presentation, the videos cover it. You have the option to buy accessories but they are not needed. I did so for a few reasons, mainly to reserve the option to do so when I experiment with different handlings. In fact, David Penn doesn't even use the camera sticker or anything else but this case. If you do, all these add-ons can be reused with care in how you remove them.

Angles are not a concern, and with any good presentation this becomes far more than a puzzle which has been some people's reservations with effects like these in the past. It's relevant, modern, easy to carry and packs a punch, especially if you save it for "the big moment" in a gig. This IS going into rotation in my work.

Well done. Highly recommended.
Message: Posted by: emyers99 (Feb 27, 2020 06:40PM)
How long does reset take. Penn says too long for walk around.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 27, 2020 06:48PM)
I can do it in 30 seconds fairly easily. Done it in twenty as well.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 27, 2020 09:11PM)
Funny how people have this already. This was a pre-order for release in April. Reason why I got a refund.
Message: Posted by: emyers99 (Feb 27, 2020 09:16PM)
Iím guessing he brought a bunch to blackpool. Reset sounds quick enough. Maybe David meant that itís too fiddly to do in the open while strolling.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 27, 2020 09:21PM)
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Funny how people have this already. This was a pre-order for release in April. Reason why I got a refund. [/quote]

Huge sale at Blackpool for a finite amount of ready units. Sold out, and the rest are on preorder, although my understanding is the next batch ready for April are nearly sold out as well, then the next round won't be available until July.

[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, emyers99 wrote:
Iím guessing he brought a bunch to blackpool. Reset sounds quick enough. Maybe David meant that itís too fiddly to do in the open while strolling. [/quote]

Yeah, I think David means you have to be careful how and when you reset, but you for sure can, just discreetly. Or save it for a few groups, etc.
Message: Posted by: Mac_Stone (Feb 27, 2020 09:25PM)
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Funny how people have this already. This was a pre-order for release in April. Reason why I got a refund. [/quote]

You must have missed the part where he had a few to sell at Blackpool where he officially announced Metal Phone. I hope you don't regret refunding your preorder.
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 27, 2020 09:31PM)
Iím extremely glad I took the refund. I was one of the first to pre-order on his website, so I shouldíve taken precedence over cash buyers at Blackpool. Terrible customer service.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Feb 27, 2020 10:03PM)
^ Why so bent out of shape over this? If you like the trick, who cares if you have to wait another month or so? Not to mention you were on the other Blackpool thread where Joao disclosed that "the first batch will be available only at Blackpool."

You even responded to it. So it was no big secret that those at BP would get first dibs.

Not sure I understand your point of frustration on this thread?
Message: Posted by: videoman (Feb 27, 2020 10:12PM)
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iím extremely glad I took the refund. I was one of the first to pre-order on his website, so I shouldíve taken precedence over cash buyers at Blackpool. Terrible customer service. [/quote]

That's just silly. LOL.
Oh how I would love to see you release a product someday.
Message: Posted by: strollingmagician (Feb 27, 2020 10:25PM)
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iím extremely glad I took the refund. I was one of the first to pre-order on his website, so I shouldíve taken precedence over cash buyers at Blackpool. Terrible customer service. [/quote]

All pegasus does is complain about everything which we sadly have to sift through in order to find intelligent comments from others. Leave the Cafť alone pegasus and go take up stamp collecting. Complain all you want on those forums.
Message: Posted by: QuailCreek (Feb 28, 2020 12:17AM)
Well put strollingmagician
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Feb 28, 2020 02:33AM)
Pegasus is not just a yes man , I respect his opinions over the vast majority on these boards .
Ustaads , Neil S and Videomans are also some of the people I admire the most here too Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Feb 28, 2020 02:33AM)
Hey guys... it's your right to dislike Pegasus' comments and express the feelings you have about them. But he has a right to express his feelings as well. That's the nature of a forum.

And when it comes to intelligent comments... say what you will, but his sarcasm can be quite intelligent and funny. I agree there are a lot of people on the Cafť that clearly lack intelligence but the mythical winged divine horse isn't one of 'em...
Message: Posted by: ash2arani (Feb 28, 2020 02:34AM)
Does this look 'off' without the camera sticker? If I am to use it, I would not want to depend on refills and more importantly, I do not want the peeling sticker bit.

I believe the camera portion can be hidden while handling it but I am worried about the camera screws ruining the surprise early.

Any thoughts?
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Feb 28, 2020 03:45AM)
Sorry the unmasked you are another top fella .
You are right and people donít get humour I realise that you do , most of it is tongue and cheek and is obvs to me .
Makes you wonder how these people ever entertain anyone , they are so touchy and serious 🤷‍♂️Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: kieronthemighty (Feb 28, 2020 03:48AM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, ash2arani wrote:
Does this look 'off' without the camera sticker? If I am to use it, I would not want to depend on refills and more importantly, I do not want the peeling sticker bit.

I believe the camera portion can be hidden while handling it but I am worried about the camera screws ruining the surprise early.

Any thoughts? [/quote]

I donít bother peeling it if I found that it doesnít impact the performance.

Iím getting strong reaction from metal phone.

Itís a very different effect than industrial revolution which I own and love
Itís has multiple layer there more to it itís a very different effect.

The locking methods a nice touch

Kind regards

Kieron
Message: Posted by: kieronthemighty (Feb 28, 2020 03:50AM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, kieronthemighty wrote:
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, ash2arani wrote:
Does this look 'off' without the camera sticker? If I am to use it, I would not want to depend on refills and more importantly, I do not want the peeling sticker bit.

I believe the camera portion can be hidden while handling it but I am worried about the camera screws ruining the surprise early.

Any thoughts? [/quote]

I donít bother peeling it if I found that it doesnít impact the performance.



When I say I donít bother peeling it I mean I leave the sticker on the metal phone.

Iím getting strong reaction from metal phone.

Itís a very different effect than industrial revolution which I own and love
Itís has multiple layer there more to it itís a very different effect.

The locking methods a nice touch

Kind regards

Kieron [/quote]
Message: Posted by: mikenewman (Feb 28, 2020 07:35AM)
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, strollingmagician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iím extremely glad I took the refund. I was one of the first to pre-order on his website, so I shouldíve taken precedence over cash buyers at Blackpool. Terrible customer service. [/quote]

All pegasus does is complain about everything which we sadly have to sift through in order to find intelligent comments from others. Leave the Cafť alone pegasus and go take up stamp collecting. Complain all you want on those forums. [/quote]

Pegasus is awesome to have around here. Yes, he can be very sarcastic. I personally enjoy and laugh at his comments. He calls it how he sees it. How 'He' sees it, not you or me or anyone else... HIS opinions.

As gaz says, he has every right to be here and say whatever he wants. If he bothers you, just ignore his comments. No harm done. You can go to other forums as well if it gets too much for you here.

And yes, you have every right to dislike pegasus... or me even, or whomever.

We still welcome you though and hope you stick around... :)
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Feb 28, 2020 07:37AM)
But back to the effect: it's great.

:)
Message: Posted by: bonesly (Feb 28, 2020 07:57AM)
I road tested this at my stage gig.

Annoyingly this fell flat. Itís most likely a scripting issue, so probably needs a few more runs, but at the moment this doesnít work for Ďmeí on stage.

This would probably get a much stronger reaction in a close up setting when everyone can have a feel of the gimmick.

Problem is Iím not sure if it is strong enough to replace anything in my current close-up set.

Itís sort of a nice interesting thing to do as part of a set and itís feels like really cool filler, NOT a showstopper.

But, If Iím gonna walk around with a large heavy prop, it needs to be more than just a cool little mystery.
The matchbox seems more suited for close-up.

And as of now this doesnít really work for me on stage (using a close-up camera projected on a screen)

Just my honest opinion. Iíll give more feedback after a few more runs
Message: Posted by: mikenewman (Feb 28, 2020 08:07AM)
Great feedback! Thanks for sharing it.
I can see where it might not work for stage. But, I'm impressed you gave it a try!

I agree that it would be more effective for folks to handle it. So they can feel and see up close how heavy it is and how there are no slits.

I do not own this yet. But have IR, so I can attest that this will work great up close.

I think you should seriously give this one up though. Sell it to me. :)

Thanks again for sharing this excellent feedback!!!!!
Message: Posted by: bonesly (Feb 28, 2020 08:23AM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, mikenewman wrote:
Great feedback! Thanks for sharing it.
I can see where it might not work for stage. But, I'm impressed you gave it a try!

I agree that it would be more effective for folks to handle it. So they can feel and see up close how heavy it is and how there are no slits.

I do not own this yet. But have IR, so I can attest that this will work great up close.

I think you should seriously give this one up though. Sell it to me. :)

Thanks again for sharing this excellent feedback!!!!! [/quote]

Thanks. I really want to make this work on stage thatís why I bought it, itís such a clever gimmick and I feel it needs waay more appreciation from my audience.

I had IR previously and I thought that was a really cool version. I ended up selling it because it was more of a luxury trick I would do once in a while.
So it wasnít really worth the extra weight carrying it around. I use the matchbox instead. But I do think both are cool effects to have in your case to pullout when the moment is right.

If this doesnít work for me on stage then I will take up your offer 😊. £200 is a bit steep for me for a trick that I will only occasionally use in a close-up set.
Message: Posted by: Illucifer (Feb 28, 2020 10:56AM)
This is meant to be experienced and felt. I'd never have considered it for stage. It simply won't translate to the rest of the audience, but kudos to you for trying. This sort of thing soars or sinks on the framing and presentation and the personal experience of the spectator directly involved. Personally, I think if you're performing this as 'magic', you're not taking the best approach. This is an oddity, a puzzling moment. It's not really a magical penetration effect. You'll get 1000x more mileage and impact out of Misled or David Harkey's East Meets West for a penetration effect. This is meant to give the spectator's brain a short-circuit moment, and a very cool one. If you come at it from the angle of "Check it out - I can pass a card through my phone. Wait! It's actually not a phone, it's a piece of metal!", well, you're just going to confuse your spectator. Let THEM make false conclusions about what is happening and where it's leading.
Message: Posted by: bonesly (Feb 28, 2020 11:49AM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, Illucifer wrote:
This is meant to be experienced and felt. I'd never have considered it for stage. It simply won't translate to the rest of the audience, but kudos to you for trying. This sort of thing soars or sinks on the framing and presentation and the personal experience of the spectator directly involved. Personally, I think if you're performing this as 'magic', you're not taking the best approach. This is an oddity, a puzzling moment. It's not really a magical penetration effect. You'll get 1000x more mileage and impact out of Misled or David Harkey's East Meets West for a penetration effect. This is meant to give the spectator's brain a short-circuit moment, and a very cool one. If you come at it from the angle of "Check it out - I can pass a card through my phone. Wait! It's actually not a phone, it's a piece of metal!", well, you're just going to confuse your spectator. Let THEM make false conclusions about what is happening and where it's leading. [/quote]

Your100% right on this! Thatís exactly what happened on stage it was a puzzle that fell completely flat, and I didnít get that gasp from the audience that my ego needed! Lol!
The reason I wanted to test it on stage was mainly because of the size of the prop, and I also felt it is a fresh idea that hasnít been done in an auditorium b4.
But Iím stubborn, so I still wanna make it work! Iím gonna rescript it and change the beats of my routine focus give it another go and see .

I actually know another perform who did this on BGT audition (canít say his name) and apparently he brought the house down. His routine involved switching a real phone for the gimmick, so Iím thinking of going down that route
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 28, 2020 02:25PM)
We have only 25 Metal Phones left from the April batch.

Within the next few days we will sell out and we will start to accept orders for the NEXT batch which will be shipped in JULY only.

If you are on the fence act fast to avoid waiting 5 months for your Metal Phone.

Pre-order here: http://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=130
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Feb 28, 2020 07:50PM)
Joao I put my order in, I have and use regularly and really like my IR, I like this because the phone aspect is something I think will really play in todayís audiences. The locking is really interesting to me, Iíve only had a couple situations with my IR that someone has pulled enough on the block to separate it. Since then, I still hand it out but gaurd it and take it back if it seems like the person is savvy enough to pull it apart. The fact that this one locks , eliminates that concern and that is an improvement to me. Looking forward to using this, thanks and cudos for putting this out.

Nm
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 29, 2020 03:11AM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, magicnorm wrote:
Joao I put my order in, I have and use regularly and really like my IR, I like this because the phone aspect is something I think will really play in todayís audiences. The locking is really interesting to me, Iíve only had a couple situations with my IR that someone has pulled enough on the block to separate it. Since then, I still hand it out but gaurd it and take it back if it seems like the person is savvy enough to pull it apart. The fact that this one locks , eliminates that concern and that is an improvement to me. Looking forward to using this, thanks and cudos for putting this out.

Nm [/quote]

Thanks for the kind words.

We are officially sold out on Metal Phones (April batch).

We are accepting pre orders now for July.

A long wait but worth every minute waiting, I promise.
Message: Posted by: knownmagician (Feb 29, 2020 11:04AM)
Just put your order.. You wont' be sorry.

This item is incredible and I prefer this other than IR because it is not like "gimmick" item. It is modern approach to classic one.

GREAT JOB Joao to bring this item to magic community.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Feb 29, 2020 12:51PM)
This is beautifully engineered I must say , Joao does produce real quality in his engineering thatís for certain Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: pegasus (Feb 29, 2020 01:34PM)
[quote]On Feb 28, 2020, mikenewman wrote:
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, strollingmagician wrote:
[quote]On Feb 27, 2020, pegasus wrote:
Iím extremely glad I took the refund. I was one of the first to pre-order on his website, so I shouldíve taken precedence over cash buyers at Blackpool. Terrible customer service. [/quote]

All pegasus does is complain about everything which we sadly have to sift through in order to find intelligent comments from others. Leave the Cafť alone pegasus and go take up stamp collecting. Complain all you want on those forums. [/quote]

Pegasus is awesome to have around here. Yes, he can be very sarcastic. I personally enjoy and laugh at his comments. He calls it how he sees it. How 'He' sees it, not you or me or anyone else... HIS opinions.

As gaz says, he has every right to be here and say whatever he wants. If he bothers you, just ignore his comments. No harm done. You can go to other forums as well if it gets too much for you here.

And yes, you have every right to dislike pegasus... or me even, or whomever.

We still welcome you though and hope you stick around... :) [/quote]

Love you too Mike. Youíre always funny. I love your posts. I do not give a flying !@#$ what others think. Lol.

Also love Gaz and Unmasked. :love:
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Feb 29, 2020 01:46PM)
[quote]On Feb 29, 2020, knownmagician wrote:
Just put your order.. You wont' be sorry.

This item is incredible and I prefer this other than IR because it is not like "gimmick" item. It is modern approach to classic one.

GREAT JOB Joao to bring this item to magic community. [/quote]

Thank you Sir.
Message: Posted by: MagicBrent (Feb 29, 2020 09:51PM)
I so want this but for the price youíd think youíd get some of the paper covers and more stickers and not as extra accessories to buy. Just my humble opinion
Message: Posted by: MagicalEducator (Mar 2, 2020 01:14PM)
What really sold me is the fact that everyone has a phone and so to use one in a routine just makes sense. To me the age of the phone doesn't really matter as I still know some people with flip phone!. I think its very easy to present this as "Here's something you can try with your cellphone (card/etc. goes through). You can try but it won't work...that's why I use this!! Reals block of metal with a thud!

jeff
Message: Posted by: adamc (Mar 3, 2020 12:14AM)
Can I make a suggestion to the brilliant minds that are coming up with these fantastic ideas? Can you please come up with a name for your product that makes it difficult to google? If you search for "m*t*l ph**e m**ic tr**k", this thread is the first search result, and a promotional video for the effect is the top video result.

It seems like common sense in this day and age where everything can be googled so easily, so I really can't understand why effect creators keep using such obviously searchable names, unless of course they're doing this on purpose since their goal is to sell as many units as possible without caring about exposure, which could very well be the case.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 3, 2020 01:39AM)
I agree with your post. And I am afraid your last statement hits the nail on the head.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 3, 2020 01:43AM)
I would have named it... "Blocked Call" ;)
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 3, 2020 02:03AM)
Yeah thatís a good point, Iíll met plenty of laymen who will casually mention that they try and google methods... most the time they wonít find anything, but ďmetal phoneĒ is such a giveaway
Message: Posted by: adamc (Mar 3, 2020 02:26AM)
If enough people stopped buying tricks with obvious names, perhaps the creators would be forced to come up with better names...

Blocked Call is good, way better than Metal Phone!
Message: Posted by: leosx1 (Mar 3, 2020 03:30AM)
Very happy to have bought this fantastic modernized mini illusion in Blackpool. Concerning the name: Its not my problem if the spec wants to destroy the illusion for himself by doing a search after I showed him the illusion, my aim of astonishing him has been done. The chance of me running into a spec

that has already somehow googled this leans towards zero and even if so what no big deal just put it away and show him something else.
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Mar 3, 2020 07:18AM)
Canít wait for mine. Donít care about the name. Never had an issue with anybody looking up a effect. You can google almost any trick with out using the name and can get how it works most of the time. I looked up coin through solid block and got a video of how the match goes through a solid brass block.
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Mar 3, 2020 12:16PM)
[quote]On Mar 3, 2020, adamc wrote:
Can I make a suggestion to the brilliant minds that are coming up with these fantastic ideas? Can you please come up with a name for your product that makes it difficult to google? If you search for "m*t*l ph**e m**ic tr**k", this thread is the first search result, and a promotional video for the effect is the top video result.

It seems like common sense in this day and age where everything can be googled so easily, so I really can't understand why effect creators keep using such obviously searchable names, unless of course they're doing this on purpose since their goal is to sell as many units as possible without caring about exposure, which could very well be the case. [/quote]

YUP.

This is why we named our last book test "Celebrity Presage," a name which has nothing to do with the product and won't help with searching for it.

Marketing 101.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 3, 2020 12:30PM)
Yes that was a great and thoughtful move Brett , I wished more creators cared as much as you do about our art Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 3, 2020 12:33PM)
[quote]On Mar 3, 2020, leosx1 wrote:
Very happy to have bought this fantastic modernized mini illusion in Blackpool. Concerning the name: Its not my problem if the spec wants to destroy the illusion for himself by doing a search after I showed him the illusion, my aim of astonishing him has been done. The chance of me running into a spec

that has already somehow googled this leans towards zero and even if so what no big deal just put it away and show him something else. [/quote]

I totally agree.

Nowadays if any laymen wants to really find any information, they will find it. Even if the trick was called "#$#"$#$ the words metal phone appear naturally in magic forums, like the one you are at now.

I do not really think any laymen will care to search for it anyway.

The Celebrity Presage its the same... if anyone searches for "book magic celebrities" they will find a youtube review for the trick right away and a direct link to Penguin Magic right after.

Just do not overthink :)
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 3, 2020 01:00PM)
Itís a little bit different to be fair in the above example . There are 100ís if not 1000ís of books on celebrities , how many metal phone magic effects are there ? 1 to my knowledge Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 3, 2020 01:06PM)
[quote]On Mar 3, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
Itís a little bit different to be fair in the above example . There are 100ís if not 1000ís of books on celebrities , how many metal phone magic effects are there ? 1 to my knowledge Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

True, but I agree with Joao, if someone wants to find info on a trick, no matter the name, there is definitely a greater chance they will find it with the devious SEARCH!
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 3, 2020 03:03PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
Not trying to spoil the fun here. If you like this and can make this work: good for you. However I personally can't see a spectator thinking anything other than "there was a hole in this, but you somehow closed it." To me this screams "puzzle". A beautifully made puzzle, absolutely, but a puzzle.
Taking the sticker off to reveal it's not a phone is a nice surprise, but if you think people will believe that you pushed a credit card through a solid piece of metal I think you are fooling yourself. It's just like cigarette through quarter: a surprising moment, but not something that will leave them mystified. To me this is Tenyo 2.0. [/quote]

I agree with this sentiment. On top of that, I feel that one will get similar reactions when using that old block of brass in a matchstick box trick.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 3, 2020 03:22PM)
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, tomd wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Feb 13, 2020, TuneHV wrote:
I see what you mean now... assuming those other boxes are implied to be empty, then yes. I donít present IR by hinting the box is empty, I say that the only way this is possible is if the cards all have a slit in them - which would make sense if there were cards in the box (as I tip out the steel block). But youíre right that the climax is not the same climax as in the other versions, it just takes it in a different direction. [/quote]

I think you're making my point. The trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some way. Then the reveal of the metal block heightens the impossibility. I don't think you get that effect if the spectators thinks there's a phone in the case. It you had a trick where something penetrated a block of silver and then you revealed it to be a block of gold, that would still be impossible but wouldn't necessarily make much sense as a reveal.

Similarly, if you did the Tenyo trick from a few years ago where a silk penetrates a phone, would it be stronger to say "Actually it wasn't a phone. It was a block of steel that I made look like a phone." I don't think so. [/quote]

Although I get what youíre saying, my perspective is that any rational spectator will almost immediately assume that there is no phone under that case, and that it is actually just a phone case shell with a slit in it. Itís this rational assumption that you must use to your advantage, in order for the metal block reveal to have an impact.

When performing the penetration, call out the fact that they probably think there isnít actually a phone in the case (whether a spectator thought this or not is irrelevant, make them think this).... because obviously itís not possible to push a credit card right through a mobile phone. Then admit that if thatís what they thought, they were correct, there isnít a phone. Point towards the camera, and reveal that itís just a sticker. The spectators at this point will be following the path you want them to, and The reveal will no longer feel like:
ďHa you thought I was penetrating gold, but it was actually silverĒ,
but more like:
ďSee you fell for it just for a second, you thought I was doing the impossibleĒ - only to reveal the Ďimpossibleí actually happened.

previous iterations relied on this concept as well... at first the spectators assume the deck is full, then they see the penetration and rationally change their assumption; deck is empty or the cards have a slit in them. The magician will play with this line of thinking, thatís why the metal block reveal works.

If the spectators assume the phone is being penetrated, then yes the metal block is pointless... but equally, if spectators think you are actually penetrating a deck of cards with a coin, then the metal block reveal is also pointless..

I donít see a difference fundamentally. [/quote]

That still doesn't make sense. If you were to be able to push a card through a phone and then reveal that the phone was perfectly normal, that's the punchline. That's the climax. Here you are doing this amazing feat and then going tada, it's not even a phone, it's this odd block of metal made to hide in a phone case to make you think it's a phone! The fact that you are revealing this very odd object does not make the climax of a impossible penetration magical or impossible anymore due to the fact that they are left with this very odd object that clearly serves one specific purpose, this trick. Loses the impact and any notion of magic and makes it more of a puzzle. Even if one were to argue that nobody truly believes that the brass block in a matchstick box or IR is real and there must be a trick to it, there is at bare minimum this really great moment of magical astonishment, here you are going tadah look at this weird object which deflates that moment and just goes directly to puzzle territory.

Previous iterations made more sense because matchsticks are loose and cards are made of paper and the box can be perceived as being empty as to what the solution is. Here you are revealing a phone that isn't a phone and you even went as far as disguising it with a sticker over the lens, it's really just too odd of a object as opposed to a block of metal. A block of metal is not odd, it's just a block of metal. A block of metal meticulously designed to be disguised as a iPhone is a very odd object. Let's say all variations of this effect presents the same narrative (as you are implying) BUT the fact that this is a VERY odd object more or less I see as competing and deflating the magical climax which IR and the brass brick in a matchstick box has.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 3, 2020 05:05PM)
^ I have to agree. I and some other folks made similar statements way back when on pg 1.

Since then, though, I have come around to this trick.

The WPR review and demo definitely helped.. as they didn't fuss with the stickers which, like you, I think is pretty odd as well. You're still left with a curious object ...but I'm not bumping on that as much anymore.

I agree that a normal looking phone would make more sense. Or, just a thin, plain slab of stainless steel (though then I think you sacrifice the locking mechanism). But there is something interesting about being left with a metal phone... it leaves it open to many creative ideas, presentations, and transitions to other effects.

I may spring for this at some point. Just don't want to wait until July...I want it Nooooooooooow! ;)
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 3, 2020 06:14PM)
The matchbox brass penetration is in most magicians drawer because it has gone out of fashion with them .
In reality itís better the the phone imo and they are only making this look like a phone because phones are popular ( not in my performing world as I never want phones out as if they are texting etc they arenít watching my magic ) .
Inevitably its not and never was a phone and you can easily make the matchbox brass block lockable anyway ( if one must ) .
This is a luxury item and if you can afford it great but I guarantee you the engineering / method is 20 times better than the actual effect .
Hence no one is using the match box penetration in their A,B or even C sets anymore . They perhaps should be Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: dvno (Mar 4, 2020 12:06AM)
I performed for a lot of people who first said Ąhow did you do that?ď and after I didnít tell them they were going with Ąok IĎll google and figure it out.ď My personal problem with that is that it reduces some great magic acts to only buyable items and it comes to the specs mind that there are no difficulties in performing since you can easily buy the stuff. The spec usually wonĎt have a clue about audience management and other stuff going on that makes the whole package of performing. I often perform for the same people when showing new tricks. I donĎt know how the reactions would be when they always have the suspicion that there is only one item I bought recently and that does all the work - even if that is not the case. Nevertheless I do understand that it makes sense for a dealer to give their product an Ąeasy nameď.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 4, 2020 01:30AM)
Yeah but the book in this effect wouldnít even be the method in the spectators eyes . With a large block of metal that is the whole effect so again the wrong comparison imo Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: adamc (Mar 4, 2020 03:47AM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
Yeah but the book in this effect wouldnít even be the method in the spectators eyes . With a large block of metal that is the whole effect so again the wrong comparison imo Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

I agree 100%
Message: Posted by: magic_tony (Mar 4, 2020 05:33AM)
My opinion of the EFFECT: there is no logic in having a block of metal in the phone case. The trick would be more impressive if there was an actual real phone inside.

I mean, why would you have a block of metal in a phone case? You are therefore saying to the spectators - I can't do this trick with a real phone, so instead I have this special odd piece of metal in the case which is obviously part of the trick.

Is a block of metal more impenetrable than a phone made of solid glass/metal/plastic? No, so replacing the phone with a metal block is devoid of any logic.

Also, there is no way spectators will think the case is empty. The physics of handling a heavy vs light object are obvious to the human eye.

I think this type of effect only makes sense when the object that is normally inside the box or case would not prevent something being passed through, i.e. the matchbox version, otherwise there is no reason to swap whatever is normally inside.

However, I'm sure the METHOD is very clever and the block fun to play with, so I'm not knocking Joao's skills as an engineer and designer.
Message: Posted by: reignofsound (Mar 4, 2020 05:56AM)
If someone could make a gimmick where it passed through an actual phone then every magician would purchase I think.
Message: Posted by: Vogler (Mar 4, 2020 06:23AM)
The twist Ďit is not a phone, it is something elseí which is a non existent item clearly diminishes the climax. I really canít understand how this lame effect it is so popular. But Kardashian is popular too. If you really understand how magic works you don't like this trick. First time I saw it, my spontaneous reaction was Ďso whatí! I think this effect underestimate spectators intelligence . Sorry but my honest opinion.
Also using weird names for tricks it is mandatory in the internet age. Why make it easy for the spectator to find it? The answer ď I have done my work, I don't care Ď it is a bit cynical.
Message: Posted by: ash2arani (Mar 4, 2020 06:23AM)
I was wondering if the locking technology works because of the phone form factor or if a card case version can be manufactured with the same locking mechanism as this release?

Maybe Joao should consider the card case version. Or how about a book version where the pages are really a solid block. Maybe a pocket sized book. Or a stack of 'business cards' in which you can remove the stickers around the sides and the top and bottom real business cards and show that this is noting but a solid piece of metal.

I am interested in this for sure and I am sure this is brilliant method-wise, but I was wondering if another version of this is a possibility.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 4, 2020 12:20PM)
Quote
ďI think this type of effect only makes sense when the object that is normally inside the box or case would not prevent something being passed through, i.e. the matchbox version, otherwise there is no reason to swap whatever is normally insideĒ

I have to agree totally with the above Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 4, 2020 01:07PM)
As Joao stated, the weight of Metal Phone is 650 grams...which is just shy of 1.5 pounds.

IR is exactly 1.5 pounds...while amazing, it wasn't the most convenient to lug around and have on you. So it only gets limited, while effective, use for me.

I was liking the idea of Metal Phone because it seemed to be less cumbersome/practical in this sense. But at 650 grams, almost the same weight of IR, sounds like it will run in to the same issue.

Do those that have it carry it around with them in a pocket or something with no issue?
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 4, 2020 01:17PM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
As Joao stated, the weight of Metal Phone is 650 grams...which is just shy of 1.5 pounds.

IR is exactly 1.5 pounds...while amazing, it wasn't the most convenient to lug around and have on you. So it only gets limited, while effective, use for me.

I was liking the idea of Metal Phone because it seemed to be less cumbersome/practical in this sense. But at 650 grams, almost the same weight of IR, sounds like it will run in to the same issue.

Do those that have it carry it around with them in a pocket or something with no issue? [/quote]

Sorry the weight I mentioned is inside the whole packaging.

The real weight is 488 grams of the phone itself: https://ibb.co/DfsJ0w6
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 4, 2020 01:47PM)
[quote]On Mar 3, 2020, tomd wrote:
kissdadookie, maybe we will have to agree to disagree, but Iíve read your reply several timeís and a lot of your response is arguing about stuff I wasnít ever making a point about, and I actually agree with...

My point was only that I donít see a fundamental difference between ďthe box can be perceived as being empty as to what the solution isĒ and the phone case being empty as a perceived solution.

ďHere you are doing this amazing feat and then going tada, it's not even a phone,Ē, is not the way Iíd present or perform this, and I have since made it clear (in later replies, and even the reply youíve quoted) that if you present it this way the trick and reveal makes no sense whatsoever. Iíve put myself laymen mode and thought ďhow would I feel if I saw the penetration, what do I think my solution would be? and would I believe the phone was being penetrated?Ē and Iíd never believe for a second that there was a phone in that case.

my response (which you are quoting) was in reply to the claim that ďThe trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some wayĒ. His argument was that previous iterations Did have a pseudo explanation for the first phase, but this version does not and thatís the difference. I disagree, and I have since put this to the test (once). I showed my girlfriend the first part of the Performance clip (up until just after the penetration) and I paused the video and said to her, ďpretty cool right?Ē, her response was that this was an obvious trick, he never showed us the actual phone so there isnít one in the case. I know thatís only one example, but thatís exactly how I felt with IR (before I knew the twist), and she found a perceived explanation (or pseudo explanation) for the first penetration phase. which was what I meant by there being ďno fundamental differenceĒ. All three iterations have explanations for the first phase (IMO).

I would never say that the metal block in this trick looks normal, because it isnít, itís a really odd block. Whether I think it makes a difference I donít know, but I have no bone in that argument.

Would revealing a phone at the end make more sense? Yep, donít disagree with you. [/quote]

There's some confusion there because we do agree. LoL. What I was really commenting on was how there's a difference in how and when the magic moment/climax "sinks in" for the spectator (imo) for which this odd metal phone does this moment/climax in a way that is weaker than the block of metal for IR and the matchbox :D But yes, we do agree, LoL. I was more or less pointing out the nuances of the difference in how the audience would perceive it (the audience will think of a solution for this regardless of it being correct or not, except that the phone version imo has a shorter and lesser magic moment/climax due to the super odd object becoming the tada moment here whilst the other versions it becomes "wait a minute, how did this penetrate through solid metal?!?").
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 4, 2020 01:53PM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, reignofsound wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, mifftup wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Vogler wrote:
The twist Ďit is not a phone, it is something elseí which is a non existent item clearly diminishes the climax. I really canít understand how this lame effect it is so popular. But Kardashian is popular too. If you really understand how magic works you don't like this trick. First time I saw it, my spontaneous reaction was Ďso whatí! I think this effect underestimate spectators intelligence . Sorry but my honest opinion. [/quote]

Couldn't agree more. So, you thought it was a phone in there? WRONG. It's a phone-shaped piece of metal! SUCKER!

It just forces the spec to go: It's a phone, oh, no, no, it's not. Why isn't it a phone in a phone case? Well, because it's a gimmicked block of metal. Sigh. [/quote]



I totally disagree with you.

First because I have performed the effect countless times and your magic theory could not be more wrong.

Why do I say this?

The reactions I have with this effect don't lie.

You can say whatever you want but what matters are the reactions that me and magicians are having in their repertoire with this exact effect.

You have never performed the effect (and never will probably) so you can keep your theory while the reality is the exact opposite.

I think that having a steel piece is much stronger than the phone... the screen could slide to the side... etc etc.. but a steel block that weights 650 grams is a different reality.

Donít like it? Ok!

The reactions are good? They are simply unbelievable does not matter what you say.

If you do not believe my words just perform it in close up and you will soon confirm I am right.

Anyway you just need to watch the promo.. 100% real reactions.. no actors or stooges of any kind were used ;) [/quote]



I still think a real phone would look magical. [/quote]

Go ahead.. create it :) [/quote]

Obviously that can't be done with a working and functional phone without a swap between a dummy gaff phone and a real phone thus you guys came up with this weird block of metal made to be disguised as a phone. This doesn't make the effect strong though, the solution you came up with is because you can't find the solution to the better effect (penetration through a real phone). LoL. You and I and everyone else in here knows that a straight penetration through a real phone is way more magical and a way better trick, the fact that you can't find a solution to that does not actually warrant this weaker version of the IR and the old matchbox trick. It's a weak argument. I'm also sure that you get great reactions but that's not the complete experience for the audience. One has to consider what the moments are, how long the suspension of disbelief lasts, what kind of questions and solutions the audience thinks about after the fact and after you have left, etc. That's all part of the effect and the experience of the effect for the audience.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 4, 2020 01:54PM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Mar 3, 2020, tomd wrote:
kissdadookie, maybe we will have to agree to disagree, but Iíve read your reply several timeís and a lot of your response is arguing about stuff I wasnít ever making a point about, and I actually agree with...

My point was only that I donít see a fundamental difference between ďthe box can be perceived as being empty as to what the solution isĒ and the phone case being empty as a perceived solution.

ďHere you are doing this amazing feat and then going tada, it's not even a phone,Ē, is not the way Iíd present or perform this, and I have since made it clear (in later replies, and even the reply youíve quoted) that if you present it this way the trick and reveal makes no sense whatsoever. Iíve put myself laymen mode and thought ďhow would I feel if I saw the penetration, what do I think my solution would be? and would I believe the phone was being penetrated?Ē and Iíd never believe for a second that there was a phone in that case.

my response (which you are quoting) was in reply to the claim that ďThe trick only makes sense if the first phase feels explainable in some wayĒ. His argument was that previous iterations Did have a pseudo explanation for the first phase, but this version does not and thatís the difference. I disagree, and I have since put this to the test (once). I showed my girlfriend the first part of the Performance clip (up until just after the penetration) and I paused the video and said to her, ďpretty cool right?Ē, her response was that this was an obvious trick, he never showed us the actual phone so there isnít one in the case. I know thatís only one example, but thatís exactly how I felt with IR (before I knew the twist), and she found a perceived explanation (or pseudo explanation) for the first penetration phase. which was what I meant by there being ďno fundamental differenceĒ. All three iterations have explanations for the first phase (IMO).

I would never say that the metal block in this trick looks normal, because it isnít, itís a really odd block. Whether I think it makes a difference I donít know, but I have no bone in that argument.

Would revealing a phone at the end make more sense? Yep, donít disagree with you. [/quote]

There's some confusion there because we do agree. LoL. What I was really commenting on was how there's a difference in how and when the magic moment/climax "sinks in" for the spectator (imo) for which this odd metal phone does this moment/climax in a way that is weaker than the block of metal for IR and the matchbox :D But yes, we do agree, LoL. I was more or less pointing out the nuances of the difference in how the audience would perceive it (the audience will think of a solution for this regardless of it being correct or not, except that the phone version imo has a shorter and lesser magic moment/climax due to the super odd object becoming the tada moment here whilst the other versions it becomes "wait a minute, how did this penetrate through solid metal?!?"). [/quote]
Fair enough mate, your point makes sense.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 4, 2020 02:38PM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
As Joao stated, the weight of Metal Phone is 650 grams...which is just shy of 1.5 pounds.

IR is exactly 1.5 pounds...while amazing, it wasn't the most convenient to lug around and have on you. So it only gets limited, while effective, use for me.

I was liking the idea of Metal Phone because it seemed to be less cumbersome/practical in this sense. But at 650 grams, almost the same weight of IR, sounds like it will run in to the same issue.

Do those that have it carry it around with them in a pocket or something with no issue? [/quote]

Sorry the weight I mentioned is inside the whole packaging.

The real weight is 488 grams of the phone itself: https://ibb.co/DfsJ0w6 [/quote]

Thanks for clarifying. This a considerable difference.

Can you sell me the one in pic? ;)
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 4, 2020 02:55PM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
As Joao stated, the weight of Metal Phone is 650 grams...which is just shy of 1.5 pounds.

IR is exactly 1.5 pounds...while amazing, it wasn't the most convenient to lug around and have on you. So it only gets limited, while effective, use for me.

I was liking the idea of Metal Phone because it seemed to be less cumbersome/practical in this sense. But at 650 grams, almost the same weight of IR, sounds like it will run in to the same issue.

Do those that have it carry it around with them in a pocket or something with no issue? [/quote]

Sorry the weight I mentioned is inside the whole packaging.

The real weight is 488 grams of the phone itself: https://ibb.co/DfsJ0w6 [/quote]

Thanks for clarifying. This a considerable difference.

Can you sell me the one in pic? ;) [/quote]

It is my own first final prototype sorry :)
Message: Posted by: MagicalEducator (Mar 4, 2020 08:29PM)
If your audience is Googling your work then the problem might be your presentation. Many folks here are missing the point. The effect is only a tool. If you present it as a puzzle then people arenít going to feel a magical experience. What makes it magic is you, your script and your presentation. If you canít do that then maybe then perform something else that speaks to you but donít blame the tool or the person who made it or the name of it. Phones are a popular item and doing something thatís not an app is a good idea. In the end itís not a phone but thatís kind of the surprise. Just like itís not a box of matches or a deck of cards or a phone. I came up with several presentations for this morning on my commute and am looking forward to receiving mine which is in the April batch. Thanks Jo„o for ALl of the amazing items youíve created for our community!

Jeff

ďRecently Iíve been having trouble with my iPhone. I think it might have something to do with this (penetrate phone). Then again I think the problem might be...Ē
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 5, 2020 12:50AM)
With the magic box version as you push a needle through the specs may think so what you push it through a box of wooden matchsticks . Itís then a big kicker when you tip out a solid brass block that fits snuggly in the box .
The phone itís no way from the off and the anti climax is itís no way at the end because it wasnít a phone after all but a gimmicked steel block .
The match box has magic there as can be perceived several ways like I watched him closely and I never saw him get the brass block in there after the penetration . It must have gone clean through how !
It leaves them scratching theirs heads way more imo Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 02:59AM)
[quote]On Mar 4, 2020, MagicalEducator wrote:
If your audience is Googling your work then the problem might be your presentation. Many folks here are missing the point. The effect is only a tool. If you present it as a puzzle then people arenít going to feel a magical experience. What makes it magic is you, your script and your presentation. If you canít do that then maybe then perform something else that speaks to you but donít blame the tool or the person who made it or the name of it. Phones are a popular item and doing something thatís not an app is a good idea. In the end itís not a phone but thatís kind of the surprise. Just like itís not a box of matches or a deck of cards or a phone. I came up with several presentations for this morning on my commute and am looking forward to receiving mine which is in the April batch. Thanks Jo„o for ALl of the amazing items youíve created for our community!

Jeff

ďRecently Iíve been having trouble with my iPhone. I think it might have something to do with this (penetrate phone). Then again I think the problem might be...Ē [/quote]

Thanks so much for the kind words Jeff.

Most of my magic idols have bought Metal Phone including the biggest names in Magic and that makes me and my team really proud.

I was really obsessed with this and the audience reactions when we tested the effect made it all worth it :)

25% of the July batch is now sold out.

We thought a lot on several ways to make the production faster but in this case we cannot do it since the quality is our top priority.
Message: Posted by: baal (Mar 5, 2020 03:11AM)
I love it how Jo„o canít take any criticism. Also funny how no one see a terrible presentation on the trailer- ďTry to pull it apart , it doesnít workĒ, why would you even say that? Itís like doing a card trick with marked deck and saying - try to find marked cards. Doesnít make any sense . I think this have potential, but itís one of those tricks that itís not needed. Itís like producing wallets for left handed people. Please change my mind as I liked it when I first seen the trailer, but I watched it when I was tired.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 03:17AM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, baal wrote:
I love it how Jo„o canít take any criticism. Also funny how no one see a terrible presentation on the trailer- ďTry to pull it apart , it doesnít workĒ, why would you even say that? Itís like doing a card trick with marked deck and saying - try to find marked cards. Doesnít make any sense . I think this have potential, but itís one of those tricks that itís not needed. Itís like producing wallets for left handed people. Please change my mind as I liked it when I first seen the trailer, but I watched it when I was tired. [/quote]

I can take criticism. I am always looking to improve my creations and accepting criticism (but good and justified one) is crucial.

If one magician / creator thinks he knows everything there will be no evolution in magic (the same happens with any other area).

If everyone in the world loved yellow it would be a sad world.

I understand some people donít like... other simply love it.

You don't like? Ok.

The world moves on :)
Message: Posted by: baal (Mar 5, 2020 04:01AM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, baal wrote:
I love it how Jo„o canít take any criticism. Also funny how no one see a terrible presentation on the trailer- ďTry to pull it apart , it doesnít workĒ, why would you even say that? Itís like doing a card trick with marked deck and saying - try to find marked cards. Doesnít make any sense . I think this have potential, but itís one of those tricks that itís not needed. Itís like producing wallets for left handed people. Please change my mind as I liked it when I first seen the trailer, but I watched it when I was tired. [/quote]

I can take criticism. I am always looking to improve my creations and accepting criticism (but good and justified one) is crucial.

If one magician / creator thinks he knows everything there will be no evolution in magic (the same happens with any other area).

If everyone in the world loved yellow it would be a sad world.

I understand some people donít like... other simply love it.

You don't like? Ok.

The world moves on :) [/quote]


Oh itís not like I donít like it. I did really loved it when I first seen it. But more Iím thinking about it -its not the best product- seems like its bit rushed.
And talking about criticism - thatís what you just did- you just acknowledged the fact of liking or not , and couldnít answer any of my points about performance . Itís weak. As same as the effect. Personally I would work on it little bit longer before selling it to make sure everything is polished, and the effect is as strong as possible. But itís all up to the individual. I can see that the product itself itís a masterpiece but everything else is just weak. But what do I know. Iíve been only performing for almost 20 years.
It has potential, but just because people buying it doesnít mean itís good. There is lots of bad performers out there , any many of them just buying stuff to buy it.
The world moves on.
Iím back to working on script for my new show. Oh wait!!! Or maybe I should just ask people to try to pull it apart...
Cmon...
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 5, 2020 04:43AM)
Everyone will be revisiting the match box version now and dusting it back off from the magic drawer . You can make it lock if you want to as brass is a very easy metal to work with Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 04:50AM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
Everyone will be revisiting the match box version now and dusting it back off from the magic drawer . You can make it lock if you want to as brass is a very easy metal to work with Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

Everyone?

I would not be so sure.

:)
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 5, 2020 05:14AM)
What a great time to be alive. ❤️

[img]https://i.imgur.com/oXhfdXX.jpg[/img]
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 5, 2020 06:30AM)
Everyone who hasnít bought metal phone and has the match box version . The ones who have bought metal phone will be desperately trying to justify it themselves imo Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 07:03AM)
Lovely :)
Message: Posted by: Ramon M (Mar 5, 2020 08:01AM)
Very nice object.
Will get strong reactions when you present the effect so that you aim to strengthen the surprise.
People will be wondering about the penetration, and then be surprised when it is in fact a metal object.
They might even admire the object, a phone made of metal. How cool is that. It's therefor as well a conversation piece and can add to a classy image. (of course.. depends on the presentation..)
But: please stop saying that it is a problem of presentation if something is seen more as a puzzle.
Some effects are more easily to be seen as puzzles than others. So this can be a consideration when relating to an effect. (and yes, presentation again matters, but that is not the issue here)
Also, stop saying that people are wrong about the product when selling a product. A video with reactions (also genuine reactions) doesn't justify this.
When I'm a customer in a shop and I don't like something I don't have to hear that all the other customers like the product so I must be wrong.
Message: Posted by: Xcath1 (Mar 5, 2020 08:10AM)
My 2 cents is that with something that has been so transparently presented by the manufacturer it is totally down to personal taste whether this appeals to you or not. Of course if it does not work as claimed that is a different story but I have not seen that mentioned. This is not to my taste or wallet at this point but I would not criticize the creator/manufacturer for making the product available.
Message: Posted by: Maxy (Mar 5, 2020 09:20AM)
[img]https://i.imgur.com/mSiJWBX.png[/img]
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 09:39AM)
For David Penn Metal Phone was one of the best Blackpool Purchases he did.

David even posted a real time performance for laymen in my facebook group and the reactions were really good :)

Here is his review:

[youtube]RfZPVCWf7ek[/youtube]
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 5, 2020 02:42PM)
I take 20s to reset mine 😂 is it bad?
All you need to reset is included in the package, the key is small and take very little space. (An hex key)

If you donít want to reset using the key, thatís fine, thereís a way to instant reset but the phone isnít
LOCKED as with the key reset.

Personally, I performed this effect many times and spectators just take the phone and have a quick look and feel the phone. They donít try to PULL anything apart or whatsoever so the Instant Reset use works for me..
Message: Posted by: CMR (Mar 5, 2020 02:59PM)
Thanks for posting the picture. The gimmick looks really good!
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 5, 2020 03:07PM)
My pleasure! Glad you liked it ☺️
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (Mar 5, 2020 03:09PM)
I donít have the Metal Phone and I confess that I have not read every post on this topic. But to me, the effect is impressive. Iím not sure why the fact that at the end of the performance, the phone turns out to be a metal plate in the form of a phone instead of an actual phone, matters. Isnít the critical detail here that at the end of the presentation the audience realizes that a card has just penetrated a solid, impenetrable object? I would be mystified simply by the impossibility of pushing a solid object through a plate of steel, regardless of the shape. As for looking up effects on the internet to discover how they are achieved, isnít that a possibility with almost every trick out there? Congratulations on your new effect Mr. Miranda and when finances allow and production at your end makes Metal Phone a possibility, I expect I will be ordering.
Eric.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 03:43PM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, erichoudini wrote:
I donít have the Metal Phone and I confess that I have not read every post on this topic. But to me, the effect is impressive. Iím not sure why the fact that at the end of the performance, the phone turns out to be a metal plate in the form of a phone instead of an actual phone, matters. Isnít the critical detail here that at the end of the presentation the audience realizes that a card has just penetrated a solid, impenetrable object? I would be mystified simply by the impossibility of pushing a solid object through a plate of steel, regardless of the shape. As for looking up effects on the internet to discover how they are achieved, isnít that a possibility with almost every trick out there? Congratulations on your new effect Mr. Miranda and when finances allow and production at your end makes Metal Phone a possibility, I expect I will be ordering.
Eric. [/quote]

Thank you for the kind words Eric
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 5, 2020 04:03PM)
Joao I do love your products very much in general and your workmanship is always fabulous and top class .
I have personally handled this product and regardless of what I feel about this as a magic effect , no one will be disappointed with how well itís made .
Itís precision perfect so if potential buyers can justify the routine to themselves then they will love the craftsmanship for sure Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (Mar 5, 2020 05:51PM)
And they wouldn't think a real phone would have to be gimmicked in some way too in order for a solid card to pass through it?
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 5, 2020 06:48PM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, erichoudini wrote:
And they wouldn't think a real phone would have to be gimmicked in some way too in order for a solid card to pass through it? [/quote]

Let them see, let them try :)

ďWhat you eyes see, your mind believe ď said Calen ☺️
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 5, 2020 06:53PM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, erichoudini wrote:
And they wouldn't think a real phone would have to be gimmicked in some way too in order for a solid card to pass through it? [/quote]

Absolutely.

I mentioned that before.

Nothing beats a solid and heavy block of stainless steel.

If it was a phone they would assume and think itís a fake phone... the screen must slide.. whatever

But a block is a block, doesnít matter if it is a metal phone or any metal shaped object.

Everyone knows that steel is impenetrable does not matter what.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 6, 2020 01:26AM)
With that said why bother with a phone at all then and just not have a block and a box it just fits inside like the other 2 versions ? I agree a block is a block so there is no need to pretend itís something else ? Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 6, 2020 02:16AM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
Joao I do love your products very much in general and your workmanship is always fabulous and top class .
I have personally handled this product and regardless of what I feel about this as a magic effect , no one will be disappointed with how well itís made .
Itís precision perfect so if potential buyers can justify the routine to themselves then they will love the craftsmanship for sure Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

Thank you
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 6, 2020 03:38AM)
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
With that said why bother with a phone at all then and just not have a block and a box it just fits inside like the other 2 versions ? I agree a block is a block so there is no need to pretend itís something else ? Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

You have the element of surprise, a modern magical object, 21st century and something that is interesting. A phone in steel... itís beautiful.

The object itself is beautifully made and have a satisfying feel. And itís
IMPOSSIBLE
Message: Posted by: ash2arani (Mar 6, 2020 04:30AM)
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
With that said why bother with a phone at all then and just not have a block and a box it just fits inside like the other 2 versions ? I agree a block is a block so there is no need to pretend itís something else ? Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

I was hoping (and mentioned this earlier in this thread) to have the same locking mechanism built into a more traditional block (timeless, and the same exact surprise if not more impossible). Given how limited the manufacturing process is, I doubt that will happen though.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 6, 2020 05:02AM)
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, ash2arani wrote:
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
With that said why bother with a phone at all then and just not have a block and a box it just fits inside like the other 2 versions ? I agree a block is a block so there is no need to pretend itís something else ? Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

I was hoping (and mentioned this earlier in this thread) to have the same locking mechanism built into a more traditional block (timeless, and the same exact surprise if not more impossible). Given how limited the manufacturing process is, I doubt that will happen though. [/quote]

The locking mechanism is a thing of beauty. 1
Click. Locked forever.

In fact, you can see David Penn locking it and in performance it flight. In my case, I donít lock it instantly after the penetration. I lock it at the very end of the effect. When I reveal the phone is a block of metal steel. So I can focus in my performance and lock when needed.

Btw, passing a blade as Ryan tricks is a very good idea btw.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 6, 2020 03:00PM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, erichoudini wrote:
And they wouldn't think a real phone would have to be gimmicked in some way too in order for a solid card to pass through it? [/quote]

Absolutely.

I mentioned that before.

Nothing beats a solid and heavy block of stainless steel.

If it was a phone they would assume and think itís a fake phone... the screen must slide.. whatever

But a block is a block, doesnít matter if it is a metal phone or any metal shaped object.

Everyone knows that steel is impenetrable does not matter what. [/quote]

If it was a real phone it would likely be a iPhone. People know what an iPhone looks, feels, and operates like. They will not go thinking there's a trap door in the phone if they were able to inspect the phone. The metal block shaped like a phone has far more suspicion and leads to the obvious thoughts of "there must be a hidden trap door or something, I bet this block of metal has a secret" than a phone would have.

A block is a block if all it looks like is a block. The metal phone is not a block. It's a piece of metal shaped into a iPhone in a very exact and relatively detailed manner. Everybody knows steel is impenetrable but the metal phone clearly does not look like a block of metal. The beats to this effect is oh look, there's a phone... but wait... it's not a phone... it's something shaped like a phone and it's metal... that's cool but this object must have a secret. The beats of IR and the matchbox trick is must be a empty box... or it's passing through a slit in the cards or through the spaces between the matchsticks... omg, it's a block of metal!

There's more heat and more questions about the object for metal phone than there would be for IR and/or the matchbox trick. Yes, inevitably many if not most people will stumble upon the idea "this must be a trick" but for IR and the matchbox trick, that is delayed. For the metal phone, curiosity is immediately focused on the object because of how odd the object inherently is.

Have you seen a block of metal shaped like a iPhone in such a relatively detailed manner? Have you? I have not until I saw this release. Most if not virtually everybody else you would show this to would have. Now a block of metal like IR and the matchbox trick, that is familiar. It looks like what it looks like, a block of metal. You don't have immediate heat on a plain block of metal because it's just a plain block of metal. This is not a plain block of metal.

[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, Ceierry wrote:
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
With that said why bother with a phone at all then and just not have a block and a box it just fits inside like the other 2 versions ? I agree a block is a block so there is no need to pretend itís something else ? Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

You have the element of surprise, a modern magical object, 21st century and something that is interesting. A phone in steel... itís beautiful.

The object itself is beautifully made and have a satisfying feel. And itís
IMPOSSIBLE [/quote]

It's this surprise element that makes this a weaker climax than IR and the matchbox though. A surprise should reinforce a effect, not weaken it.

If you were passing a card through the case, people would wonder if the case is simply just empty. If you were to show that there was a phone in it (that they can examine afterwards), that would be the magic moment. It's solid passing through solid. Why then would what is in the case be a piece of metal shaped into a phone? You've basically funneled them down to the only possible solution, that metal phone must have something to do with it. IR and matchbox penetration, the block of metal is in it because you're demonstrating solid passing through solid. It could have been a cement block. It could have been a block of marble. Does not matter because whatever is in the box just has to be solid and fill the space of the box in place of objects which one would assume one could pass whatever through it (for which, if you think about it, the matchbox penetration > IR > metal phone, reason being if it was a deck of cards instead of the block of metal, it would have been as impressive if not even more impressive since you are not left with a odd object, the matchbox penetration IMO is strongest because what else would be found in a box of matches other than matches? it makes more sense, it's more impossible, you're not left with as odd an object).
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 6, 2020 03:14PM)
^
Patter:
"You've heard of cord cutters, right? People who cancel TV / cable and stream things strictly online instead?

Well, I've cut the chord on my phone too. Literally.

See how your credit card goes right through it? Yup. I just went ahead and cut thru the darn thing. Crazy right?

Know what's even crazier? I didn't even want an iPhone or droid or whatever those things are called. Going low tech with just this pound of steel instead. I know, it's nuts"

(cue astonishment and wonder followed by thunderous applause.)

Point being...I had your same reaction too when I first saw Metal Phone. But you can get pretty creative on how you present it is all. Using the phone shape of the metal as an advantage not a disadvantage. Now I'm just bummed it took me too long to realize it and missed the April batch as a result.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Mar 6, 2020 03:33PM)
I guess I agree with both sides of this debate to a certain extent.

A metal phone is a very odd thing and because it appears to be so precisely machined it may be that much of a stretch to think that there could be an opening machined into it even though you cannot see it.

On the other hand that may be thinking like a magician and I will take Joao and others at their word that this gets great reactions.

As someone who appreciates the beauty of a finely machined precision gimmick (don't ask how much I've added to Todd Lassen's bank account) I would certainly love to own this prop.
But TBH, I'm one of those that just prefer the solid of chunk of metal that IR and the matchbox gimmick provide and since I own both of those, I will just stick with those for now.
But I would certainly love to own this metal phone if it were not so expensive. But I can certainly understand why it costs what it does so I'm not saying it is overpriced at all.

Everybody needs to simply buy or not buy based on your own personal preference and quit trying to convince the other side that your preference is the "right" way.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 6, 2020 03:43PM)
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, videoman wrote:
I guess I agree with both sides of this debate to a certain extent.

A metal phone is a very odd thing and because it appears to be so precisely machined it may be that much of a stretch to think that there could be an opening machined into it even though you cannot see it.

On the other hand that may be thinking like a magician and I will take Joao and others at their word that this gets great reactions.

As someone who appreciates the beauty of a finely machined precision gimmick (don't ask how much I've added to Todd Lassen's bank account) I would certainly love to own this prop.
But TBH, I'm one of those that just prefer the solid of chunk of metal that IR and the matchbox gimmick provide and since I own both of those, I will just stick with those for now.
But I would certainly love to own this metal phone if it were not so expensive. But I can certainly understand why it costs what it does so I'm not saying it is overpriced at all.

Everybody needs to simply buy or not buy based on your own personal preference and quit trying to convince the other side that your preference is the "right" way. [/quote]

I'm pretty much with you there. The philosophical question here which is to me just a fascinating one, what problems does the metal phone solve apart from "Hey, it would be impossible to do with a real phone right now so... let's just use this instead?" Imo it really doesn't and instead introduces some theoretical weaknesses when compared to alternatives like the matchbox penetration. Just my opinion on it though. Fun food for though. People can buy whatever they want to buy of course and I do see the appeal of owning one just because it looks so cool (I love the intercessor, one of the reasons is because the gimmick itself looks kind of cool especially with how it has the logo/art etched into it, I'm not sure if the current versions of intercessor are like this, mine is from almost two decades back. LoL).
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 6, 2020 04:16PM)
It reminds me of a punch to the ear you see in MMA and boxing. From the outside, the guy that got punched looks brain damaged, and in some instances out cold... And you might wonder, ďhow did he get knocked out with such a weak punch?Ē when in reality itís just that their equilibrium and balance is gone, they are fully conscious, but their world is spinning.

As long as the metal reveal comes as a surprise, the spectators get this equilibrium moment. They are totally able to come to the same logical conclusions that have been pointed out in this thread, but probably wonít because the reveal has pushed them off balance.

Personally I think the criticisms are fair, and logical. But, the ear shots of magic are jarring moments. Hearing that loud ďclinkĒ sound as the metal drops to the table, is so jarring and will catch everyone off guard... metaphorically speaking they will be ďchicken leggingĒ until well after youíve left them.

Thatís my diplomatic way of saying everyone is right, but it still works!
Message: Posted by: mikenewman (Mar 7, 2020 07:35AM)
[quote]On Mar 5, 2020, baal wrote:
I love it how Jo„o canít take any criticism. Also funny how no one see a terrible presentation on the trailer- ďTry to pull it apart , it doesnít workĒ, why would you even say that? Itís like doing a card trick with marked deck and saying - try to find marked cards. Doesnít make any sense . I think this have potential, but itís one of those tricks that itís not needed. Itís like producing wallets for left handed people. Please change my mind as I liked it when I first seen the trailer, but I watched it when I was tired. [/quote]

You do realize that you are not required to follow the presentation ideas/patter that are on the trailers, right?
Just checking....
Message: Posted by: Magic KL (Mar 7, 2020 10:49AM)
If we pre-order now, we need to wait until July?? Long wait, but I think it's worth it.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 9, 2020 09:59AM)
[quote]On Mar 7, 2020, Magic KL wrote:
If we pre-order now, we need to wait until July?? Long wait, but I think it's worth it. [/quote]

You MUST be quick... 50% of July batch is already gone!
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Mar 9, 2020 11:52AM)
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, videoman wrote:
I guess I agree with both sides of this debate to a certain extent.

A metal phone is a very odd thing and because it appears to be so precisely machined it may be that much of a stretch to think that there could be an opening machined into it even though you cannot see it.

On the other hand that may be thinking like a magician and I will take Joao and others at their word that this gets great reactions.

As someone who appreciates the beauty of a finely machined precision gimmick (don't ask how much I've added to Todd Lassen's bank account) I would certainly love to own this prop.
But TBH, I'm one of those that just prefer the solid of chunk of metal that IR and the matchbox gimmick provide and since I own both of those, I will just stick with those for now.
But I would certainly love to own this metal phone if it were not so expensive. But I can certainly understand why it costs what it does so I'm not saying it is overpriced at all.

Everybody needs to simply buy or not buy based on your own personal preference and quit trying to convince the other side that your preference is the "right" way. [/quote]

I'm pretty much with you there. The philosophical question here which is to me just a fascinating one, what problems does the metal phone solve apart from "Hey, it would be impossible to do with a real phone right now so... let's just use this instead?" Imo it really doesn't and instead introduces some theoretical weaknesses when compared to alternatives like the matchbox penetration. Just my opinion on it though. Fun food for though. People can buy whatever they want to buy of course and I do see the appeal of owning one just because it looks so cool (I love the intercessor, one of the reasons is because the gimmick itself looks kind of cool especially with how it has the logo/art etched into it, I'm not sure if the current versions of intercessor are like this, mine is from almost two decades back. LoL). [/quote]

Extremely good thinking here. Spot on. There is a beauty in simplicity. The best burgers are this way. Salt & pepper best seasonings. This holds especially true in magic. The reaction should not be the only gauge of a product - because what we never see or hear are the conversations in the car ride home after the gig. The (as my friend Ross Johnson says) "stinky taste in the mouth that something was fishy, but couldn't quite put finger on it."

Anyone bragging about reactions ***only*** as a barometer or gauge - doesn't really understand magic.
That is not the only gauge. That is the Youtube kiddie gauge. It means nothing. A simple plain block would have been far superior.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 9, 2020 12:35PM)
[quote]On Mar 9, 2020, saysold1 wrote:
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Mar 6, 2020, videoman wrote:
I guess I agree with both sides of this debate to a certain extent.

A metal phone is a very odd thing and because it appears to be so precisely machined it may be that much of a stretch to think that there could be an opening machined into it even though you cannot see it.

On the other hand that may be thinking like a magician and I will take Joao and others at their word that this gets great reactions.

As someone who appreciates the beauty of a finely machined precision gimmick (don't ask how much I've added to Todd Lassen's bank account) I would certainly love to own this prop.
But TBH, I'm one of those that just prefer the solid of chunk of metal that IR and the matchbox gimmick provide and since I own both of those, I will just stick with those for now.
But I would certainly love to own this metal phone if it were not so expensive. But I can certainly understand why it costs what it does so I'm not saying it is overpriced at all.

Everybody needs to simply buy or not buy based on your own personal preference and quit trying to convince the other side that your preference is the "right" way. [/quote]

I'm pretty much with you there. The philosophical question here which is to me just a fascinating one, what problems does the metal phone solve apart from "Hey, it would be impossible to do with a real phone right now so... let's just use this instead?" Imo it really doesn't and instead introduces some theoretical weaknesses when compared to alternatives like the matchbox penetration. Just my opinion on it though. Fun food for though. People can buy whatever they want to buy of course and I do see the appeal of owning one just because it looks so cool (I love the intercessor, one of the reasons is because the gimmick itself looks kind of cool especially with how it has the logo/art etched into it, I'm not sure if the current versions of intercessor are like this, mine is from almost two decades back. LoL). [/quote]

Extremely good thinking here. Spot on. There is a beauty in simplicity. The best burgers are this way. Salt & pepper best seasonings. This holds especially true in magic. The reaction should not be the only gauge of a product - because what we never see or hear are the conversations in the car ride home after the gig. The (as my friend Ross Johnson says) "stinky taste in the mouth that something was fishy, but couldn't quite put finger on it."

Anyone bragging about reactions ***only*** as a barometer or gauge - doesn't really understand magic.
That is not the only gauge. That is the Youtube kiddie gauge. It means nothing. A simple plain block would have been far superior. [/quote]

I got much better rťactions with Metal Phone than Matchbox penetration.

Youíll understand the true power of this effect when you get your hands on a Metal Phone.

IMHO
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Mar 9, 2020 06:26PM)
I donít have mine in hand yet but I cannot understand the disconnect with how really cool this can be. The matchbox is good, the IR IMO Even better and Iíve used it a lot over the years. The phone seems to me so current and relevant that how can it not be great. IPhones are everywhere and heck numerous effects have come out using your own or a spectators phone. I donít care about the demo (. don't copy - make it your own ). Ring a bell? How about say, an okito box routine and hey.. that box wasnít solid, or a chop cup routine with the cup being solid at the end, Cool right. How about they have no idea your phone is a prop. Maybe we even make them think itís an ordinary Phone, I think we do this sort of thing all the time , right. Then at the end or later in your set you talk about Illusions , Copperfiield walking thru a Wall, whatever fits you , and then , hey look Iíll show you something really cool with my phone here, I canít see how your spectators are not amazed. Can not wait to to get mine. Thanks Joao and Calen.
As always JMHO

NM
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 10, 2020 09:28AM)
[quote]On Mar 9, 2020, magicnorm wrote:
I donít have mine in hand yet but I cannot understand the disconnect with how really cool this can be. The matchbox is good, the IR IMO Even better and Iíve used it a lot over the years. The phone seems to me so current and relevant that how can it not be great. IPhones are everywhere and heck numerous effects have come out using your own or a spectators phone. I donít care about the demo (. don't copy - make it your own ). Ring a bell? How about say, an okito box routine and hey.. that box wasnít solid, or a chop cup routine with the cup being solid at the end, Cool right. How about they have no idea your phone is a prop. Maybe we even make them think itís an ordinary Phone, I think we do this sort of thing all the time , right. Then at the end or later in your set you talk about Illusions , Copperfiield walking thru a Wall, whatever fits you , and then , hey look Iíll show you something really cool with my phone here, I canít see how your spectators are not amazed. Can not wait to to get mine. Thanks Joao and Calen.
As always JMHO

NM [/quote]

If it was a real phone, it would be far more impressive. The reason this is a weird iPhone shaped metal dummy phone is here is because they haven't figured out how to make it work with a real working phone.
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 10, 2020 09:53AM)
[quote]On Mar 10, 2020, MR Effecto wrote:
I think mifftup might be a little jealous because he canít afford this??????? [/quote]

Probably right Mr. Effecto....My initial thoughts on a real phone vs. metal phone was that it might be more impressive with a real phone. But who am I kidding, when a chunk of metal comes plopping out of the case and gets handed to the audience for full examination, they are going to be just as impressed due to the simplicity of the object- a metal chunk! I think lay people would be more inclined to think that there had to be something gimmicked with the plastic phone versus an examinable chunk of metal! Just my thoughts....
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Mar 10, 2020 09:57AM)
100% right RNK
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 10, 2020 11:24AM)
What if you add a little sizzle to the steak?

The magician reacts to his phone ringing in his pocket (Sounds Amazing). He pulls it out and mistakenly turns on the light for a second (Optix). Don't want to talk to them, swipe'em away. Hey did I ever show you the disappearing cellphone trick? Put your business card through the case showing the phone has disappeared. Don't believe me, hold out your hand, put/drop case in their hand or just drop the metal phone on the table. Bam!

Food for thought...

I only thought of this because I own both the props mentioned.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 10, 2020 11:51AM)
100% correct RNK
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 10, 2020 01:38PM)
[quote]On Mar 10, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
What if you add a little sizzle to the steak?

The magician reacts to his phone ringing in his pocket (Sounds Amazing). He pulls it out and mistakenly turns on the light for a second (Optix). Don't want to talk to them, swipe'em away. Hey did I ever show you the disappearing cellphone trick? Put your business card through the case showing the phone has disappeared. Don't believe me, hold out your hand, put/drop case in their hand or just drop the metal phone on the table. Bam!

Food for thought...

I only thought of this because I own both the props mentioned. [/quote]

I'm waiting on Andy from the Jerx to share his idea for how best to use metal phone. As it stands, the way people are thus far proposing to use the prop, it has not felt like they were very strong presentations for this. I think much of it has to do with the logic of it not making sense when trying to use it as a surrogate for something like IR or matchbox penetration. I've thought about this and have come to a similar train of thought as your suggestion, make it a transformation effect rather than a solid passing through solid effect. The problem that does not seem to have been solved thus far is what is the purpose of the penetration. It's weak if the focus is on the penetration due to how odd the object is. Now, if a real phone is seen to transform into a metal phone, that can be very magical but how then do we incorporate the penetration in a way that flows rather than feel like a haphazard addition to the transformation. Now, if the idea is to do the penetration first, why then does the phone transform to metal? If it's not that it transforms to metal and the metal is just to prove that the penetration was impossible, it would have been equally as impressive (if not MORE impressive and impossible) if it was a real functioning phone because a phone in and of itself is a solid object that people inherently know you can't pass a card or what not through, thus why are you left with this weird object?

The answer again is that the metal phone exists because you can't do this with a real phone and nobody has figured it out so this is kind of a stopgap, it's just unfortunate that this stopgap has a lot of illogical motivation for the things that happens to it or why it exists. Ask yourselves this, why does this metal phone exist? Is there any other reason that this thing logically exists except for the fact that they wanted to do a penetration effect with a real phone but couldn't figure out the solution so went with this instead (this is ABSOLUTELY the case since Joao in this thread answered with a "ok, create this using a real phone then" (I paraphrased) for which demonstrates that he himself knew that was the problem that they were trying to solve and the metal phone was their solution to that problem). I'm sure the initial reaction is on the surface great because it's a surprising moment, but a surprising moment does not mean it's good, it's just a surprise. If someone snuck up behind you and screamed, you would jump. Now, you jumping at that surprise, is that entertaining to you? Does it really draw any emotion or thought from you? No, you're literally just reacting on instinct. It's not magical, it's not scary, it's pure instinctual reaction. Is that what people wish to achieve with their magic? From all the years of learning effects and learning magic theory, it would appear to me that a moment of astonishment is not based on trying to get a instinctual reaction but instead to gift the audience with a lasting magical experience that they can enjoy in the moment and think back on.

Let me give a final example, jump scares. Jump scares are actually hard to do. When done wrong it just gets instinctual reactions without substance. It's not particularly enjoyable and many a times if there is no substance behind them, it's still not a good movie. Even in a haunted house, there's a reason that good haunted houses also happen to have great set design to them, it creates a memorable experience. Watch the movie Drag Me to Hell. That is a masterclass in how to effectively use jump scares. Sam Raimi clearly toys with the audience and will prolong the moment so that when the scare comes it is genuinely surprising and followed by a gag of some sort to create that release in tension. There's a great flow to Drag Me to Hell, it's intentional and a lot of thought had been placed into it to create that great film viewing experience.

I don't think it's impossible to find a presentation to utilize the metal phone well. The item itself looks gorgeous. The locking mechanism appears to be well thought out and hidden. I'm personally waiting for some better ideas that utilizes it which may eventually come or perhaps it never will. Who knows, I don't, just waiting to see what others do with this thing but thus far, it's only been people mentioning how the reactions were great but so has my experience with the reactions from the classic matchbox penetration except one has logic and a better payoff whilst the other basically leads the audience to the only obvious conclusion that the metal phone itself has secret functionality to it (which it does, obviously).
Message: Posted by: Nechto (Mar 10, 2020 04:55PM)
It was my understanding when watching the demo that this got such great reactions not because of a shock, but because the spectator's reality melted right before their very eyes.That is powerful, to think you are seeing one thing and then suddenly it be something different and to have no idea how it happened, how can that not be mystifying? Is it puzzling? Yes! But if you don't think magic is puzzling to a layperson then I don't know, the definition of someone puzzling over something is to 'think hard about something because one cannot understand it. Now before anyone says 'magic shouldn't be a puzzle' being a puzzle and being puzzling are different things. Don't underestimate the average layperson, they aren't dumb, they ask questions and think about how you did it all the time. That is what lay people do, they think about how you did it and when they are suitably perplexed and they can't fathom any way it happened THEN it feels like magic. Very few tricks 'feel' like magic as you see them, heck even beautiful levitations have spectators wondering where the strings are or what is attached to the floating object to make it do that.

This is akin to the Omni Deck which is quite obviously not a 'real thing'. But, if a spectator BELIEVES they have a deck in their hands then their reality completely dissolves when they see it is not a deck of cards any more (if you perform it as a piece of magic and not just a joke, i.e. - this trick is so simple you'll see right through it). I know a lot of people don't like Omni Deck because they don't agree it is strong but it is undeniable that when performed well it is an amazing piece of magic to many people. I think personality type has as much to do with reactions as performance sometimes. Some people simply refuse to go there and entertain the feeling of magic even if they have no idea how you did what you did.

Of course Metal Phone is not a 'thing' but that doesn't make it bad. I honestly think this thread is plagued with a lot of over-thinking, comparing it to previous products that no lay person even has a clue about. I also don't think I would say to a spectator 'it doesn't even come apart, try' (or whatever Calen actually said) but that is exactly what the spectators will think happened somehow and to be able to confidently disprove this is great and actually incredibly strong. They will either think it came apart or it wasn't flat in the case when you did the trick (this is what my Dad thought when he watched the trailer, and he has a fair amount of knowledge when it comes to magic secrets) so why not cancel these thoughts out?

My main concern with this is the incredible lack of creative naming here. It is called EXACTLY what a spectator would call it. I honestly don't understand this, this saddens me and also devalues the product quite a lot for me. I can fully understand the benefits for a company to be able to show what it is that a purchaser would be getting (I honestly get that when it comes to top dollar products) but these things could be on private link or behind password protected pages on websites, not just in the open on YouTube and on every magic shop online. That really does suck, there should be more hoops for a layperson to jump through before gaining access to this information.

Joao, is there no creative way you could go about getting this information to your customers without just putting it out there in the open? I would love to hear YOUR thoughts on this, you have literally stuck it out there for any layperson with half a brain and a want to Google search a magic trick. Why do this when you have invested so much time and effort into this? You can definitely find other ways to get this information out to potential customers, if you can invent this you can do that. There are enough private FB pages in the magic community, there are mailing lists, private YouTube videos, I mean come on there are a few options off the top of my head. You could easily make this information accessible to the magic community without putting it in the open for the public so why not do that? And I get that Metal Phone is a clear name for this but really, the magic community lost their s*** when the Turner watch had Turner printed on it's face, I thought then that was arguable and maybe people were over reacting but in this case I am sorry, the name is too obvious and the information is too easily accessible. Blocked Cell or Cell Block maybe, heck even Block, Steel or simply just calling it Metal would have been better in my eyes. Calen's name alone would have brought this into the eyes of the magic community and garnered interest, that alone would have caused it to spread like wildfire through the community, I mean who doesn't want to see what is next to come from him?

I would honestly love to hear your thoughts on this Joao...

All the best and thank you, I do genuinely love this I am just saddened that the creativity stopped at the product's creation and didn't carry through into the marketing a bit more.

Ben
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 10, 2020 05:51PM)
I absolutely hate the omni deck I actually think itís one of the most overrated effects / utilities in Magic Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Mar 10, 2020 10:10PM)
Ben , just a question. Have you had many situations where your spectators have googled your effects and supplied you with ď. Hey man I know what you did dudeĒ. No offense intended at all, so any easily triggered egos , hold on. Iím asking because Iíve seen this logic presented in this thread as well as others, and I ask only because I have not encountered this in all the time Iíve been doing this magic thing. I think when you say ď I am just saddened that the creativity stopped at the product's creation and didn't carry through into the marketing a bit more. ď Itís like an off handed slam, forget the demo, forget the name. You as well as others in all the minutia admit you like the effect. Done. So why the continued pursuit at picking this apart about the demo or naming of the item serves any useful purpose. Again not trying to offend, just confused.

NM
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 11, 2020 01:09AM)
Two weeks ago my girlfriends brother and wife confessed to loving TV magic shows, and that theyíd try to google every trick they saw because they were desperate to find out how it all worked. Clearly they werenít good at searching, or had been watching shows with tricks that couldnít be easily defined... because they told me that google didnít reveal anything.

Iíve only had one person admit to me they googled a trick I did, and it was a close friend who admitted it two weeks after (I was testing the waters by performing it to him first). He was so baffled by it that he thought googling it would stop him from thinking about it... and again he didnít find anything on the trick I did. Now thatís because the trick couldnít be defined by a simple google search, but I digress...

I know people google methods, I just donít know how many. The only people who have EVER admitted it to me were essentially family or very close friends (3 people to be exact), who will of course be much more open with you about this sort of stuff, and they will see you more than once so might share their thoughts on previous tricks later down the line.

In situations with random people or at paid gigs Iíve never had anyone confess to googling tricks... Nor has anyone said that they knew how any of my effects worked (based on previous google searches theyíve done)... but thatís because every effect I do is purposefully hard to define as a search term.

Does it matter? I think it only matters if it can be easily googled. And this can. Itís a really dumb name for the trick IMO. Maybe it wonít affect your performances now... but if someone performs this on a major TV show like AGT? Well then you will run into problems.

I still wouldnít want layman finding it out the method even if I never saw them again, personally. Getting a reaction and preserving the mystery are just a important as one another...
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 11, 2020 04:36AM)
Well said, tomd. I agree.
Message: Posted by: Nechto (Mar 11, 2020 09:28AM)
Iíll openly admit that it is not that common to have people directly tell me to my face that they are going to Google the secret to what I do but it does happen, also for every person who says they will there are probably 10 who would but donít tell me.

I think though that we should value the secret to what we do more than just putting it out there for all to see in such a blatant way. And yes sometimes it can be hard to Google a trick or the method but why should we make it sooooo easy? Why waste that hard work in development and investment just to put it out there. Tomd made a great point, as soon as someone performs this on AGT or BGT (which will happen) the secret will be out there for everyone, the newspapers over here in the UK have a field day exposing magic secrets to performances. I think if you have enough respect for the idea to create it and do such a great job that you should have respect for that secret too, at the end of the day magic is nothing once you know the secret. So why not put all this info behind a password that only magicians would know? I canít think of a reason why not to.

I know not everyone will agree and that is fine, Iím not looking to argue or to and fro over this, these are just my thoughts. I would still love to hear Joaoís thoughts on the marketing though.

Have a great day everyone,

Ben
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 11, 2020 10:23AM)
[quote]On Mar 10, 2020, Nechto wrote:
It was my understanding when watching the demo that this got such great reactions not because of a shock, but because the spectator's reality melted right before their very eyes.That is powerful, to think you are seeing one thing and then suddenly it be something different and to have no idea how it happened, how can that not be mystifying? Is it puzzling? Yes! But if you don't think magic is puzzling to a layperson then I don't know, the definition of someone puzzling over something is to 'think hard about something because one cannot understand it. Now before anyone says 'magic shouldn't be a puzzle' being a puzzle and being puzzling are different things. Don't underestimate the average layperson, they aren't dumb, they ask questions and think about how you did it all the time. That is what lay people do, they think about how you did it and when they are suitably perplexed and they can't fathom any way it happened THEN it feels like magic. Very few tricks 'feel' like magic as you see them, heck even beautiful levitations have spectators wondering where the strings are or what is attached to the floating object to make it do that.

This is akin to the Omni Deck which is quite obviously not a 'real thing'. But, if a spectator BELIEVES they have a deck in their hands then their reality completely dissolves when they see it is not a deck of cards any more (if you perform it as a piece of magic and not just a joke, i.e. - this trick is so simple you'll see right through it). I know a lot of people don't like Omni Deck because they don't agree it is strong but it is undeniable that when performed well it is an amazing piece of magic to many people. I think personality type has as much to do with reactions as performance sometimes. Some people simply refuse to go there and entertain the feeling of magic even if they have no idea how you did what you did.

Of course Metal Phone is not a 'thing' but that doesn't make it bad. I honestly think this thread is plagued with a lot of over-thinking, comparing it to previous products that no lay person even has a clue about. I also don't think I would say to a spectator 'it doesn't even come apart, try' (or whatever Calen actually said) but that is exactly what the spectators will think happened somehow and to be able to confidently disprove this is great and actually incredibly strong. They will either think it came apart or it wasn't flat in the case when you did the trick (this is what my Dad thought when he watched the trailer, and he has a fair amount of knowledge when it comes to magic secrets) so why not cancel these thoughts out?

My main concern with this is the incredible lack of creative naming here. It is called EXACTLY what a spectator would call it. I honestly don't understand this, this saddens me and also devalues the product quite a lot for me. I can fully understand the benefits for a company to be able to show what it is that a purchaser would be getting (I honestly get that when it comes to top dollar products) but these things could be on private link or behind password protected pages on websites, not just in the open on YouTube and on every magic shop online. That really does suck, there should be more hoops for a layperson to jump through before gaining access to this information.

Joao, is there no creative way you could go about getting this information to your customers without just putting it out there in the open? I would love to hear YOUR thoughts on this, you have literally stuck it out there for any layperson with half a brain and a want to Google search a magic trick. Why do this when you have invested so much time and effort into this? You can definitely find other ways to get this information out to potential customers, if you can invent this you can do that. There are enough private FB pages in the magic community, there are mailing lists, private YouTube videos, I mean come on there are a few options off the top of my head. You could easily make this information accessible to the magic community without putting it in the open for the public so why not do that? And I get that Metal Phone is a clear name for this but really, the magic community lost their s*** when the Turner watch had Turner printed on it's face, I thought then that was arguable and maybe people were over reacting but in this case I am sorry, the name is too obvious and the information is too easily accessible. Blocked Cell or Cell Block maybe, heck even Block, Steel or simply just calling it Metal would have been better in my eyes. Calen's name alone would have brought this into the eyes of the magic community and garnered interest, that alone would have caused it to spread like wildfire through the community, I mean who doesn't want to see what is next to come from him?

I would honestly love to hear your thoughts on this Joao...

All the best and thank you, I do genuinely love this I am just saddened that the creativity stopped at the product's creation and didn't carry through into the marketing a bit more.

Ben [/quote]

Omni deck doesn't have a penetration. That's a straight transformation of one object to another. The narrative there is clear. Metal phone is really a take on the matchbox penetration except you are now leading the audience down the obvious path to a solution, that the metal phone must be gimmicked somehow to allow for the penetration. I'm still waiting on ideas for presenting this where the penetration is not diminished and that the object itself does not lead the audience to the obvious solution. I don't dislike metal phone, I just haven't seen a use case presented yet that justifies having or using one outside of this is really cool just to own.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 11, 2020 12:15PM)
^ I think you've made it pretty clear this is not for you. No problem.

It's okay that you think this way. I get it. It's like if the big reveal in IR was a steel block made to resemble a pack of cards instead of just a block of steel. It would be weird, I agree....and a bit suspect. Metal Phone is different than its predecessors in that sense, yes.

On the other hand, Metal Phone is also pretty spectacular looking. And a more modern version of the classic...with a bit of a twist. So if that's not your cup...you don't want any twists...you prefer just the original way, where you produce just a block of steel...great! You have plenty of methods/options available to do so.

But nobody owes anyone any explanations or ideas or presentations, etc as to why this is good. That's to each their own. Nobody needs to change anyones mind. Either you appreciate it for what it is. Or, you may dislike it for what it isn't. Fine.

I for one, appreciate that Joao/Calen gave this classic effect a new twist. How boring would it be if all they did was update IR and Matchbox 1 : 1... but just with a phone? As artists, they have to push and give it a new creative spin, otherwise, what's the point?

As a result, some will love it, others will hate it. As they say in marketing, you can market to love or hate. It's apathy you have to watch out for.

Clearly, wether you love or hate Metal Phone, people have cared enough to keep buzzing on this thread about it (for over 12 pages so far). Which has only helped make this release the big success it is.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Mar 11, 2020 02:06PM)
Well said PendletonThe3rd. Although I'm in the camp that prefers the old styles of this effect I can certainly appreciate the beauty of the metal phone and I am happy it was released and that we now have the option to buy it or not. Never ceases to amaze me how certain new products can prompt these never ending debates of Here's why I like it vs Here is the problem with it. At first it is fun and interesting to hear both sides but it soon grows tiresome as it continues ad nauseum.
Plus the thing that doesn't get mentioned enough is that both the matchbox and IR are extremely difficult to obtain these days. I don't believe either of them are currently available for purchase anywhere other than second hand.

Finally, in regards to naming this product by describing exactly what it is, I really wish creators/manufacturers could create a set of guidelines in the naming of new products now that we live in the age of internet searches. I agree that only a small percentage will actually bother to google an effect but that number will no doubt grow. But what is wrong with at least trying to put up a hurdle or two and not make it so easy for them. Before a product is released much more thought should be given these days as to what to name it. I would love it if it were to become standard practice that no new magic releases had anything related to what it is in it's name, such as Mental Dice or Pen thru Dollar Bill, etc.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 11, 2020 02:48PM)
There is no reason for a solid block of metal to replace a bunch of matches. There is no reason for a deck of cards to be replaced by a solid block of metal. I'm thinking that any reason you can come up with to justify that block of metal being inside a matchbox or card case instead of matches or cards, can likely be used to justify a block of metal replacing a phone.

It is all in the way you present it.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 11, 2020 02:56PM)
You are absolutely right there is no reason for any of this. The point is that in the previous versions the structure made sense from a dramatic point of view. I quote Andy: "Going from ďThis card penetrated my phoneĒ to ďJust kidding, it penetrated a strange metal block,Ē is not even a lateral move. Itís a step backwards. Spectators are familiar with phones. Theyíre not familiar with strange metal blocks. So the easy answer for them is just, ďIt must be something funny about this metal block.Ē Bingo."
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Mar 11, 2020 03:19PM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
There is no reason for a solid block of metal to replace a bunch of matches. There is no reason for a deck of cards to be replaced by a solid block of metal. I'm thinking that any reason you can come up with to justify that block of metal being inside a matchbox or card case instead of matches or cards, can likely be used to justify a block of metal replacing a phone.

It is all in the way you present it. [/quote]

It was never a transformation with the matchbox penetration. LoL. When you poked the needle through the box, people assume the box is empty or just filled with matches, both obvious answers to how and why the needle can go through the box (plus the box is made of paper). The reveal that there was a block of metal in the box the whole time is the wow moment.

A phone however is already a SOLID OBJECT. WHAT is the reasoning behind it not being a phone but a block of metal fashioned into the shape of a phone? That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 11, 2020 03:33PM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
There is no reason for a solid block of metal to replace a bunch of matches. There is no reason for a deck of cards to be replaced by a solid block of metal. I'm thinking that any reason you can come up with to justify that block of metal being inside a matchbox or card case instead of matches or cards, can likely be used to justify a block of metal replacing a phone.

It is all in the way you present it. [/quote]

It was never a transformation with the matchbox penetration. LoL. When you poked the needle through the box, people assume the box is empty or just filled with matches, both obvious answers to how and why the needle can go through the box (plus the box is made of paper). The reveal that there was a block of metal in the box the whole time is the
wow moment.


A phone however is already a SOLID OBJECT. WHAT is the reasoning behind it not being a phone but a block of metal fashioned into the shape of a phone? That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow. [/quote]



This I 100% agree with itís so right and I truly donít understand why very few on here seem to get the point 🤷‍♂️ Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Mar 11, 2020 03:37PM)
This will kill them. Nobody will even care where did the phone go.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 11, 2020 04:11PM)
Nope. Not the reactions I'm hearing.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 11, 2020 04:12PM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, videoman wrote:
Well said PendletonThe3rd. Although I'm in the camp that prefers the old styles of this effect I can certainly appreciate the beauty of the metal phone and I am happy it was released and that we now have the option to buy it or not. Never ceases to amaze me how certain new products can prompt these never ending debates of Here's why I like it vs Here is the problem with it. At first it is fun and interesting to hear both sides but it soon grows tiresome as it continues ad nauseum.
Plus the thing that doesn't get mentioned enough is that both the matchbox and IR are extremely difficult to obtain these days. I don't believe either of them are currently available for purchase anywhere other than second hand.

Finally, in regards to naming this product by describing exactly what it is, I really wish creators/manufacturers could create a set of guidelines in the naming of new products now that we live in the age of internet searches. I agree that only a small percentage will actually bother to google an effect but that number will no doubt grow. But what is wrong with at least trying to put up a hurdle or two and not make it so easy for them. Before a product is released much more thought should be given these days as to what to name it. I would love it if it were to become standard practice that no new magic releases had anything related to what it is in it's name, such as Mental Dice or Pen thru Dollar Bill, etc. [/quote]

Thanks Videoman...I l like hearing all the different POVs as well. But now, indeed, it's people making the same point over and over and over again.

And they are valid! I get it. Their stance has already been registered, though, so no need to keep going. Not to mention that the opposing views and points are just as valid too. Why keep arguing?

Wherever you stand on The Great Metal Phone Debate, it's all just theory until you own it and try it out for yourself. And if you don't care to own it because of it's perceived weaknesses, then fine. But it's all just hot air otherwise.

I intend to purchase it and see for myself. And I would love to hear more from those who have it already and have put it to practice. Not just us knuckleheads who don't really know what we're talking about since we haven't ever tried it out in the real world.
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Mar 11, 2020 04:12PM)
You have this and been performing it?
Message: Posted by: MagicalEducator (Mar 11, 2020 04:38PM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
Nope. Not the reactions I'm hearing. [/quote]

If the reactions are not what you expect do you blame the prop? I should think that we all recognize and agree that the prop is just a tool. It is the craft person that takes the tool and makes something magical. In order for that to happen the effect/prop needs to speak to you. If Metal Phone doesn't do this for you then no explanation is necessary. The prop speaks to me and so I've ordered it and am looking forward to working with it to make it something magical. Calen and Joao have done their part and now its time for me to do mine.

jeff
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 11, 2020 05:17PM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:

Thanks Videoman...I l like hearing all the different POVs as well. But now, indeed, it's people making the same point over and over and over again.

And they are valid! I get it. Their stance has already been registered, though, so no need to keep going. Not to mention that the opposing views and points are just as valid too. Why keep arguing?
[/quote]

Agree
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 11, 2020 05:59PM)
First let me say this, I have no skin in this game. I don't own metal phone and would likely never plunk down $250 to own it. My interest in this is purely theoretical. That being said...

In Industrial Revolutions case it's this card just penetrated my deck of cards to just kidding it penetrated a metal block. Spectators are familiar with cards but not with strange metal blocks so the easy answer is there must be something funny about this metal block.

Or in the matchboxes case it's this pin just penetrated my box of wooden matches to just kidding it penetrated a metal block. Spectators are familiar with wooden matches but not with strange metal blocks so the easy answer is there must be something funny about this metal block.

What you said about one can be said about them all. In all honesty, the idea of matches, cards or phones turning into metal blocks that can be magically penetrated doesn't make a lot of sense to me in general. It is probably why I don't own any of the above-mentioned versions. None of them make any sense, at least to me anyway but Metal Phone is no worse. I think Metal Phone makes as much sense as any of them.

But hey, there are plenty O' tricks that I wouldn't touch but other people slay with so...

[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
You are absolutely right there is no reason for any of this. The point is that in the previous versions the structure made sense from a dramatic point of view. I quote Andy: "Going from ďThis card penetrated my phoneĒ to ďJust kidding, it penetrated a strange metal block,Ē is not even a lateral move. Itís a step backwards. Spectators are familiar with phones. Theyíre not familiar with strange metal blocks. So the easy answer for them is just, ďIt must be something funny about this metal block.Ē Bingo." [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 11, 2020 06:12PM)
Metal Phone is not required to be a transformation. One could simply intimate that the phone is in the case, the same as one does with the matches or the deck of cards. None of the items is actually ever shown. Each one can be played in exactly the same way.

Cards and matches are already solid objects too and in any non-magic "normal" situation, they would not be penetrated with the objects that are going through them. So what is the reasoning behind the deck or the matches not being cards or matches but a block of metal in the exact size and shape of the matchbox or the card box? "That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow."

Metal phone is perhaps better (a more modern item) but I don't see any reason it is worse than IR or the matchbox version.

[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
There is no reason for a solid block of metal to replace a bunch of matches. There is no reason for a deck of cards to be replaced by a solid block of metal. I'm thinking that any reason you can come up with to justify that block of metal being inside a matchbox or card case instead of matches or cards, can likely be used to justify a block of metal replacing a phone.

It is all in the way you present it. [/quote]

It was never a transformation with the matchbox penetration. LoL. When you poked the needle through the box, people assume the box is empty or just filled with matches, both obvious answers to how and why the needle can go through the box (plus the box is made of paper). The reveal that there was a block of metal in the box the whole time is the wow moment.

A phone however is already a SOLID OBJECT. WHAT is the reasoning behind it not being a phone but a block of metal fashioned into the shape of a phone? That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: videoman (Mar 11, 2020 07:34PM)
As has been stated previously, with the matches it is obvious that a pin or another wooden match could indeed penetrate the box of matches as long as the matchbox was empty or there weren't too many matches inside which is the spectators assumption because you haven't shown them the inside of the box yet, and likewise a coin or knife could penetrate the card box if the box was simply empty (spectators assumption.)

For the climax you show that they are in fact not empty and not only are they not empty but a heavy impenetrable chunk of metal lands on the specs hand which is both surprising and mystifying. People know exactly what a block of metal is immediately. It is something which everyone is familiar with. So instead of following their assumption and the boxes being empty, they are not only proved to be full but full of a heavy and impenetrable block of solid metal.

Now it has been debated in the past whether the effect should be that the metal block was actually penetrated OR that perhaps the box really was empty and the block of metal magically appeared. But that's a debate for another day.

There are a couple of reasons why the phone is different from the other two effects IMO.

First, when performing the "penetration" it is obvious that the silicone phone case is not empty, and in the same way that most everyone instinctively knows that a block of metal is heavy and cannot fold up, people are also aware how flimsy these rubber cases are when they are empty. So it's very obvious the case contains something inside of it in order for it to maintain it's shape and rigidity, and logic would of course dictate that it must be a phone. What else would it be? There is no reason whatsoever for them to suspect it is anything but a phone. So to show that it is not a phone but a precision machined piece of metal no one has ever seen before, which has obviously been designed to make them believe it is a phone. Well, that seems odd to me but I realize it may not to others.

Secondly, is that there is an unconscious assumption on the specs part that because it is just a simple metal block then you must have gotten this block from a metal supply company or hardware store, but certainly not a magic shop. There is nothing that screams "magic prop" with a simple metal block. I'm sure buying a metal block at a magic shop would seem pretty ridiculous to the average person. Therefore, less heat is on it because it is a normal, everyday object. In many cases the specs mind is trying to figure out NOT how you penetrated the block but rather how you possibly got that heavy block inside the box undetected.


But the phone is obviously not something one could get at a metal supply or hardware store. It seems possible (perhaps even likely) that you very well may have gotten this odd "phone" from a magic shop. It would not be preposterous for people to wonder...Hmmm, maybe this strange fake phone is a magic prop, would it?
Furthermore, because this strange fake phone is machined with such obvious precision I don't think it would be a huge leap for someone to suspect it could possibly open and close in an undetectable way.

Oh, and one more thing is that it has been proven over time that the block effects have not been overly exposed online. I believe one big reason for this is that it is hard to remember having heard about a tricky metal block, whereas hearing about a tricky metal phone is much more memorable. If the phone does become overly exposed people are more likely to recall seeing something or hearing about a tricky metal phone should they see the phone in person. Because again, metal blocks are everywhere and mundane, but metal phones are unusual to say the least, and people tend to remember unusual things much more readily.

Finally, let me be clear that I am not claiming that these things are what absolutely EVERY spectator will think, just that some of them may think that way. Also, these are strictly my opinions and I have no doubt that many of you will come up with wonderful presentations for the phone and it will get incredible reactions.

But Kaliix asked what the differences are between the effects of this type so I wanted to explain the differences as I see them.





[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Metal Phone is not required to be a transformation. One could simply intimate that the phone is in the case, the same as one does with the matches or the deck of cards. None of the items is actually ever shown. Each one can be played in exactly the same way.

Cards and matches are already solid objects too and in any non-magic "normal" situation, they would not be penetrated with the objects that are going through them. So what is the reasoning behind the deck or the matches not being cards or matches but a block of metal in the exact size and shape of the matchbox or the card box? "That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow."

Metal phone is perhaps better (a more modern item) but I don't see any reason it is worse than IR or the matchbox version.

[/quote]
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Mar 12, 2020 10:38AM)
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, videoman wrote:
As has been stated previously, with the matches it is obvious that a pin or another wooden match could indeed penetrate the box of matches as long as the matchbox was empty or there weren't too many matches inside which is the spectators assumption because you haven't shown them the inside of the box yet, and likewise a coin or knife could penetrate the card box if the box was simply empty (spectators assumption.)

For the climax you show that they are in fact not empty and not only are they not empty but a heavy impenetrable chunk of metal lands on the specs hand which is both surprising and mystifying. People know exactly what a block of metal is immediately. It is something which everyone is familiar with. So instead of following their assumption and the boxes being empty, they are not only proved to be full but full of a heavy and impenetrable block of solid metal.

Now it has been debated in the past whether the effect should be that the metal block was actually penetrated OR that perhaps the box really was empty and the block of metal magically appeared. But that's a debate for another day.

There are a couple of reasons why the phone is different from the other two effects IMO.

First, when performing the "penetration" it is obvious that the silicone phone case is not empty, and in the same way that most everyone instinctively knows that a block of metal is heavy and cannot fold up, people are also aware how flimsy these rubber cases are when they are empty. So it's very obvious the case contains something inside of it in order for it to maintain it's shape and rigidity, and logic would of course dictate that it must be a phone. What else would it be? There is no reason whatsoever for them to suspect it is anything but a phone. So to show that it is not a phone but a precision machined piece of metal no one has ever seen before, which has obviously been designed to make them believe it is a phone. Well, that seems odd to me but I realize it may not to others.

Secondly, is that there is an unconscious assumption on the specs part that because it is just a simple metal block then you must have gotten this block from a metal supply company or hardware store, but certainly not a magic shop. There is nothing that screams "magic prop" with a simple metal block. I'm sure buying a metal block at a magic shop would seem pretty ridiculous to the average person. Therefore, less heat is on it because it is a normal, everyday object. In many cases the specs mind is trying to figure out NOT how you penetrated the block but rather how you possibly got that heavy block inside the box undetected.


But the phone is obviously not something one could get at a metal supply or hardware store. It seems possible (perhaps even likely) that you very well may have gotten this odd "phone" from a magic shop. It would not be preposterous for people to wonder...Hmmm, maybe this strange fake phone is a magic prop, would it?
Furthermore, because this strange fake phone is machined with such obvious precision I don't think it would be a huge leap for someone to suspect it could possibly open and close in an undetectable way.

Oh, and one more thing is that it has been proven over time that the block effects have not been overly exposed online. I believe one big reason for this is that it is hard to remember having heard about a tricky metal block, whereas hearing about a tricky metal phone is much more memorable. If the phone does become overly exposed people are more likely to recall seeing something or hearing about a tricky metal phone should they see the phone in person. Because again, metal blocks are everywhere and mundane, but metal phones are unusual to say the least, and people tend to remember unusual things much more readily.

Finally, let me be clear that I am not claiming that these things are what absolutely EVERY spectator will think, just that some of them may think that way. Also, these are strictly my opinions and I have no doubt that many of you will come up with wonderful presentations for the phone and it will get incredible reactions.

But Kaliix asked what the differences are between the effects of this type so I wanted to explain the differences as I see them.





[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Metal Phone is not required to be a transformation. One could simply intimate that the phone is in the case, the same as one does with the matches or the deck of cards. None of the items is actually ever shown. Each one can be played in exactly the same way.

Cards and matches are already solid objects too and in any non-magic "normal" situation, they would not be penetrated with the objects that are going through them. So what is the reasoning behind the deck or the matches not being cards or matches but a block of metal in the exact size and shape of the matchbox or the card box? "That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow."

Metal phone is perhaps better (a more modern item) but I don't see any reason it is worse than IR or the matchbox version.

[/quote] [/quote]

Outstanding videoman. Thank you. I could not have explainEd this better myself.

As always extremely cogent, and intelligent.

A YouTube product like this occurs because whomever created it does not truly understand the psychology and thinking of how Magic actually works.

Great magic comes not from thinking like an engineer, but thinking like a performer. There is a huge difference.

Itís guaranteed that attention to the effect will be called to it in exactly the wrong ways.

In the development of the product, Iím honestly surprised that Calen didnít veto the engineerís thinking of the manufacturer? Instead of some fancy-schmancy overly engineered block, just a simple rectangular block wouldíve been far superior.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Mar 12, 2020 11:30AM)
[quote]On Mar 12, 2020, saysold1 wrote:
[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, videoman wrote:
As has been stated previously, with the matches it is obvious that a pin or another wooden match could indeed penetrate the box of matches as long as the matchbox was empty or there weren't too many matches inside which is the spectators assumption because you haven't shown them the inside of the box yet, and likewise a coin or knife could penetrate the card box if the box was simply empty (spectators assumption.)

For the climax you show that they are in fact not empty and not only are they not empty but a heavy impenetrable chunk of metal lands on the specs hand which is both surprising and mystifying. People know exactly what a block of metal is immediately. It is something which everyone is familiar with. So instead of following their assumption and the boxes being empty, they are not only proved to be full but full of a heavy and impenetrable block of solid metal.

Now it has been debated in the past whether the effect should be that the metal block was actually penetrated OR that perhaps the box really was empty and the block of metal magically appeared. But that's a debate for another day.

There are a couple of reasons why the phone is different from the other two effects IMO.

First, when performing the "penetration" it is obvious that the silicone phone case is not empty, and in the same way that most everyone instinctively knows that a block of metal is heavy and cannot fold up, people are also aware how flimsy these rubber cases are when they are empty. So it's very obvious the case contains something inside of it in order for it to maintain it's shape and rigidity, and logic would of course dictate that it must be a phone. What else would it be? There is no reason whatsoever for them to suspect it is anything but a phone. So to show that it is not a phone but a precision machined piece of metal no one has ever seen before, which has obviously been designed to make them believe it is a phone. Well, that seems odd to me but I realize it may not to others.

Secondly, is that there is an unconscious assumption on the specs part that because it is just a simple metal block then you must have gotten this block from a metal supply company or hardware store, but certainly not a magic shop. There is nothing that screams "magic prop" with a simple metal block. I'm sure buying a metal block at a magic shop would seem pretty ridiculous to the average person. Therefore, less heat is on it because it is a normal, everyday object. In many cases the specs mind is trying to figure out NOT how you penetrated the block but rather how you possibly got that heavy block inside the box undetected.


But the phone is obviously not something one could get at a metal supply or hardware store. It seems possible (perhaps even likely) that you very well may have gotten this odd "phone" from a magic shop. It would not be preposterous for people to wonder...Hmmm, maybe this strange fake phone is a magic prop, would it?
Furthermore, because this strange fake phone is machined with such obvious precision I don't think it would be a huge leap for someone to suspect it could possibly open and close in an undetectable way.

Oh, and one more thing is that it has been proven over time that the block effects have not been overly exposed online. I believe one big reason for this is that it is hard to remember having heard about a tricky metal block, whereas hearing about a tricky metal phone is much more memorable. If the phone does become overly exposed people are more likely to recall seeing something or hearing about a tricky metal phone should they see the phone in person. Because again, metal blocks are everywhere and mundane, but metal phones are unusual to say the least, and people tend to remember unusual things much more readily.

Finally, let me be clear that I am not claiming that these things are what absolutely EVERY spectator will think, just that some of them may think that way. Also, these are strictly my opinions and I have no doubt that many of you will come up with wonderful presentations for the phone and it will get incredible reactions.

But Kaliix asked what the differences are between the effects of this type so I wanted to explain the differences as I see them.





[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Metal Phone is not required to be a transformation. One could simply intimate that the phone is in the case, the same as one does with the matches or the deck of cards. None of the items is actually ever shown. Each one can be played in exactly the same way.

Cards and matches are already solid objects too and in any non-magic "normal" situation, they would not be penetrated with the objects that are going through them. So what is the reasoning behind the deck or the matches not being cards or matches but a block of metal in the exact size and shape of the matchbox or the card box? "That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow."

Metal phone is perhaps better (a more modern item) but I don't see any reason it is worse than IR or the matchbox version.

[/quote] [/quote]

Outstanding videoman. Thank you. I could not have explainEd this better myself.

As always extremely cogent, and intelligent.

A YouTube product like this occurs because whomever created it does not truly understand the psychology and thinking of how Magic actually works.

Great magic comes not from thinking like an engineer, but thinking like a performer. There is a huge difference.

Itís guaranteed that attention to the effect will be called to it in exactly the wrong ways.

In the development of the product, Iím honestly surprised that Calen didnít veto the engineerís thinking of the manufacturer? Instead of some fancy-schmancy overly engineered block, just a simple rectangular block wouldíve been far superior. [/quote]

Dear Brett Barry (Svenpad creator):

Incredible how this topic just escalated to a personal attack about my person and Calen.

For your information I have been performing magic professionally for over 20 years and most of my creations have been from my professional working repertoire.

Callen is also a professional so if I were you I would look at what you in particular did for the magic community with your ďcreationsĒ before attacking me and Calen.

Calling my creation a YouTube product only reveals who you really are.

So please donít ever mention again that my product is a ďYouTube productĒ because I spent well over one year developing and you really have no clue about what you are talking about.

You can dislike my tricks but above all in one word: RESPECT.

Thank you
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 12, 2020 12:35PM)
Agree 100% Joao. For Brett to make the statements:

"A YouTube product like this occurs because whomever created it does not truly understand the psychology and thinking of how Magic actually works.
Great magic comes not from thinking like an engineer, but thinking like a performer. There is a huge difference."

is seriously flawed. Brett created nothing, he found a company to machine/laser cut pads. There is no creativity in that, I would say strong perseverance in his search to find the right company to make something better that has already been created. So engineering was heavily involved in reinventing something that was already created many moons ago. Just look at some of Brett's responses to other people who have put out sven pads after him. They were not very nice or warranted since they only did what he did. Yes, Brett developed "Routines" using sven pads. But seriously, majority of experienced performers come up with routines all the time using "Props" which is the only thing Brett has contributed in regards to sven pads, making an "existing well-known" prop better than it was. Not very creative. But I am glad you stepped up to respond.

Your creativity far surpasses Brett's, just look at everything you have released in comparison to what he has, not even close. Heck, his statement, "Instead of some fancy-schmancy overly engineered block, just a simple rectangular block wouldíve been far superior." directly applies to his sven pads, lol! I know, many professionals love his sven pads, easy to use, look good etc. But that's only because Brett found a manufacturer to laser cut pads, not much creativity in that. As I have stated from the initial release of Brett's sven pads, FOR ME, my homemade sven-pads work all the time and never have I been busted with them. But I know others like the perfect look of the pad and that's fine. We are all different and what works for one may not work for the other. It's just sad to see that someone who is supposed to be a professional degrade a creator (that has released many creations and not reproductions) and basically call him out and say "does not truly understand the psychology and thinking of how Magic actually works." That's a pretty big dig on you, very wrong IMO.
Message: Posted by: reignofsound (Mar 12, 2020 12:41PM)
Brett you need to take your digs privately mate.
Looks very petty.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 12, 2020 12:50PM)
I disagree with some of your assumptions.

Every phone case I've owned has been rigid and would easily hold its shape without a phone in it. Same with every case I have purchased for my children's phones.

One cannot just go buy blocks of metal that perfectly fit in a card case or matchbook. In my 50 plus years on this planet, I've never seen such things offered for sale. I'm not sure how that would be a common assumption?

The piece of metal that is in the card box or matchbox is precision machined to perfectly fit. A muggle could also very easily assume the metal block was made just for the trick, as it just perfectly fits in the card box or matchbox with perfect corners and a smooth machined finish.

I think the points you made are valid but I think some of your assumptions are iffy. If the assumptions go the other way and the presentation is solid then the trick can be effective.

I still don't really like any version of this effect. I'm with you in that what the effect "is", is debatable. Is it an appearance, a penetration, a transformation or some combination of them? The trick points directly to the method. If the box never leaves your sight, then the metal block was in there from the start. If the block was in the box to start (and that is a reasonable assumption to make because the matches or cards were never shown nor the box ever shown or proved empty) and this block of metal is machined with such obvious precision that it fits perfectly, I don't think it would be a huge leap for someone to suspect it could possibly open and close in an undetectable way.

If one were to present this the way I advocated for earlier (phone ringing sound and mistaken light flash), I think just having the phone transform into metal would in and of itself be an awesome trick. Performing an additional penetration effect wouldn't seem to add much and might even detract from it.

It's been fun discussing in any event so thanks for that.


[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, videoman wrote:
As has been stated previously, with the matches it is obvious that a pin or another wooden match could indeed penetrate the box of matches as long as the matchbox was empty or there weren't too many matches inside which is the spectators assumption because you haven't shown them the inside of the box yet, and likewise a coin or knife could penetrate the card box if the box was simply empty (spectators assumption.)

For the climax you show that they are in fact not empty and not only are they not empty but a heavy impenetrable chunk of metal lands on the specs hand which is both surprising and mystifying. People know exactly what a block of metal is immediately. It is something which everyone is familiar with. So instead of following their assumption and the boxes being empty, they are not only proved to be full but full of a heavy and impenetrable block of solid metal.

Now it has been debated in the past whether the effect should be that the metal block was actually penetrated OR that perhaps the box really was empty and the block of metal magically appeared. But that's a debate for another day.

There are a couple of reasons why the phone is different from the other two effects IMO.

First, when performing the "penetration" it is obvious that the silicone phone case is not empty, and in the same way that most everyone instinctively knows that a block of metal is heavy and cannot fold up, people are also aware how flimsy these rubber cases are when they are empty. So it's very obvious the case contains something inside of it in order for it to maintain it's shape and rigidity, and logic would of course dictate that it must be a phone. What else would it be? There is no reason whatsoever for them to suspect it is anything but a phone. So to show that it is not a phone but a precision machined piece of metal no one has ever seen before, which has obviously been designed to make them believe it is a phone. Well, that seems odd to me but I realize it may not to others.

Secondly, is that there is an unconscious assumption on the specs part that because it is just a simple metal block then you must have gotten this block from a metal supply company or hardware store, but certainly not a magic shop. There is nothing that screams "magic prop" with a simple metal block. I'm sure buying a metal block at a magic shop would seem pretty ridiculous to the average person. Therefore, less heat is on it because it is a normal, everyday object. In many cases the specs mind is trying to figure out NOT how you penetrated the block but rather how you possibly got that heavy block inside the box undetected.


But the phone is obviously not something one could get at a metal supply or hardware store. It seems possible (perhaps even likely) that you very well may have gotten this odd "phone" from a magic shop. It would not be preposterous for people to wonder...Hmmm, maybe this strange fake phone is a magic prop, would it?
Furthermore, because this strange fake phone is machined with such obvious precision I don't think it would be a huge leap for someone to suspect it could possibly open and close in an undetectable way.

Oh, and one more thing is that it has been proven over time that the block effects have not been overly exposed online. I believe one big reason for this is that it is hard to remember having heard about a tricky metal block, whereas hearing about a tricky metal phone is much more memorable. If the phone does become overly exposed people are more likely to recall seeing something or hearing about a tricky metal phone should they see the phone in person. Because again, metal blocks are everywhere and mundane, but metal phones are unusual to say the least, and people tend to remember unusual things much more readily.

Finally, let me be clear that I am not claiming that these things are what absolutely EVERY spectator will think, just that some of them may think that way. Also, these are strictly my opinions and I have no doubt that many of you will come up with wonderful presentations for the phone and it will get incredible reactions.

But Kaliix asked what the differences are between the effects of this type so I wanted to explain the differences as I see them.





[quote]On Mar 11, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Metal Phone is not required to be a transformation. One could simply intimate that the phone is in the case, the same as one does with the matches or the deck of cards. None of the items is actually ever shown. Each one can be played in exactly the same way.

Cards and matches are already solid objects too and in any non-magic "normal" situation, they would not be penetrated with the objects that are going through them. So what is the reasoning behind the deck or the matches not being cards or matches but a block of metal in the exact size and shape of the matchbox or the card box? "That is what needs to be addressed otherwise it leads one down to the real solution for it, that this odd object must be gimmicked somehow."

Metal phone is perhaps better (a more modern item) but I don't see any reason it is worse than IR or the matchbox version.

[/quote] [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Ramon M (Mar 12, 2020 12:55PM)
There was a post here, I deleted it, because the other posts were deleted while I was writing.

Best.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 12, 2020 01:20PM)
While I don't agree with Brett's point of view on this, how is his comment any different than the numerous others who have, more or less, said the same thing about Metal Phone?

He just threw his hat in to the "wish it would have been plain steel" camp of The Great Metal Phone debate.

Is it just because he has released a few notable tricks of his own? I understand that there is an unspoken respect amongst creators/artist...but he is also entitled to his point of view as a creator too. Especially when he was mainly just agreeing with points that were already made by others.

Crazy how many are so quick to call Brett out but others get a pass for saying the same thing? I guess the lesson here is, if you have haven't released a trick, say whatever the heck you want. But otherwise...we'll rake you through the coals.

Makes no sense. This is a forum for discussion. We are discussing. And Brett was a member here first before he ever released anything.
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 12, 2020 01:29PM)
I think because Brett's words were a lot more harsh than others here. Brett told Joao that he "does not truly understand the psychology and thinking of how Magic actually works." That's very petty and if you feel that way, that is fine but let's have a little more class with our statements. And again, Joao actually creates new ideas whereas Brett just used engineering and found a manufacturer to make a very old idea prettier. No "CREATIVE" ability involved in that.
Message: Posted by: reignofsound (Mar 12, 2020 01:32PM)
[quote]On Mar 12, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
While I don't agree with Brett's point of view on this, how is his comment any different than the numerous others who have, more or less, said the same thing about Metal Phone?

He just threw his hat in to the "wish it would have been plain steel" camp of The Great Metal Phone debate.

Is it just because he has released a few notable tricks of his own? I understand that there is an unspoken respect amongst creators/artist...but he is also entitled to his point of view as a creator too. Especially when he was mainly just agreeing with points that were already made by others.

Crazy how many are so quick to call Brett out but others get a pass for saying the same thing? I guess the lesson here is, if you have haven't released a trick, say whatever the heck you want. But otherwise...we'll rake you through the coals.

Makes no sense. This is a forum for discussion. We are discussing. And Brett was a member here first before he ever released anything. [/quote]



The pair of them have an ongoing thing....
I read his comment to basically say Joao doesn't understand magic.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 12, 2020 02:32PM)
Ah, that explains a lot. Thanks for adding that info, reignofsound. Because I would certainly agree with RNK that discussing an effect, which is what we were doing, is entirely different from saying that the creator doesn't understand magic.... which is what Brett did.

BTW I would like to thank the others for this deep and insightful discussion and say that it's nice we can agree to disagree in such a civilised and sophisticated way.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Mar 12, 2020 03:13PM)
[quote]On Mar 12, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
Ah, that explains a lot. Thanks for adding that info, reignofsound. Because I would certainly agree with RNK that discussing an effect, which is what we were doing, is entirely different from saying that the creator doesn't understand magic.... which is what Brett did.

BTW I would like to thank the others for this deep and insightful discussion and say that it's nice we can agree to disagree in such a civilised and sophisticated way. [/quote]

But to be fair, RNK has not been a fan of Brett Barry's going back to at least when the original SvenPads were released and possibly even further back than that. I certainly don't agree with Brett 100% of the time myself but I can't recall seeing RNK agree with him in ages. Not saying any of it isn't valid or deserved, only that there is a history of piling on there that should probably be taken into account. So if you see RNK agreeing with Brett you will know that hell really has frozen over. 😀
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 12, 2020 03:37PM)
You are exactly correct videoman but in this case with the words that were written by Brett, it wouldn't matter what creator it was, my thoughts would still be the same. Those words where truly uncalled for by Brett, someone who has repeatedly written sarcastic and childish statements against those who do not agree with him or came out with other sven pads.
Message: Posted by: saysold1 (Mar 12, 2020 03:37PM)
I don't care whether people like me or not.

I always call 'em as I see 'em. No BS

I always take care of our customers - I always try to innovate and share.

Now as Narendra says, moving along :-)
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 12, 2020 04:00PM)
Eh... no. You donít turn a discussion into a personal insult and then say itís time to move along. And you certainly donít use Narendraís words for that, as he is always respectful and states his posts are ďjust my opinion pleaseĒ. As opposed to your sarcastic and condescending statements that donít show any sign of self-reflection. I was appalled by the way you treated Drew Backenstoss. Now I am appalled again.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 12, 2020 04:54PM)
For those of you that donít know what Iím referring to, read Drewís post at the bottom of this page (page 3 of the thread): https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=691379&start=40 It shows Brettís behaviour and bullying behind the scenes. Having studied psychology I have no problem stating Brettís behaviour goes way beyond ďjustĒ a big ego and has the trademarks of a narcissistic personality disorder.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 12, 2020 04:54PM)
ď Just my thoughts please ď is what Narendra actually says Gaz 😉
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 12, 2020 04:55PM)
Youíre right, Gaz! Sorry, Narendra!
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 12, 2020 06:29PM)
Anyone who agrees with Brett should do themselves a massive favour and look at the link on the unmasked magicians post. Most of you are coming from a good place, and dislike this for valid and fair reasons, but itís obvious Brett isnít coming from the same place as you guys. He has some sort of weird vendetta.

Another example (you need 50 posts to view): https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?

Thanks unmasked for being attention to that thread, I hadnít seen it before.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 12, 2020 08:00PM)
This thread isnít about Brett guys. Donít give him the attention he want.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 13, 2020 01:28AM)
Thatís another way of looking at this, Ceierry. And you have a very valid point. On the other hand: when you are aware of this you stand up against this behaviour with your wallet. Since knowing about this I have chosen to buy Svensations, the A4 Svengali Notebook by Alan Wong, etc. Excellent quality and made by a guys that behave in a way that I can appreciate.
Message: Posted by: brainman (Mar 13, 2020 02:35AM)
A friend of mine showed me this product of Jo„o Miranda. I think it is very well made. I had a very close look at it and yes - nothing to see. Nice. For close Up the reset would be a bit too long for me (In my field I am working), but as a stand up piece - perfect. My 2 cents only. Best wishes! T
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 13, 2020 03:24AM)
[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, tomd wrote:
Another example (you need 50 posts to view): https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?

Thanks unmasked for being attention to that thread, I hadnít seen it before. [/quote]

You're welcome, tomd! Could you repost the link you shared, as it seems to be incomplete?
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 13, 2020 03:56AM)
[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, tomd wrote:
Another example (you need 50 posts to view): https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?

Thanks unmasked for being attention to that thread, I hadnít seen it before. [/quote]

You're welcome, tomd! Could you repost the link you shared, as it seems to be incomplete? [/quote]
My bad mate.

Here you go: https://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewtopic.php?topic=706854&forum=82&start=0
Message: Posted by: Ramon M (Mar 13, 2020 06:18AM)
[quote]On Mar 12, 2020, saysold1 wrote:
I don't care whether people like me or not.

I always call 'em as I see 'em. No BS

I always take care of our customers - I always try to innovate and share.

Now as Narendra says, moving along :-) [/quote]

No man.
Because I wrote something before I will this time jump in and say that an one-sided ''I call 'em as I see 'em. No BS.' attitude doesn't work anywhere.
Except maybe in already totally polarised situations.
There is no middle ground in your logic and the way you think you want to have this discussion.

You should have thought about moving along earlier.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Mar 13, 2020 08:13AM)
[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
Thatís another way of looking at this, Ceierry. And you have a very valid point. On the other hand: when you are aware of this you stand up against this behaviour with your wallet. Since knowing about this I have chosen to buy Svensations, the A4 Svengali Notebook by Alan Wong, etc. Excellent quality and made by a guys that behave in a way that I can appreciate. [/quote]

Same here!
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 13, 2020 09:44AM)
Man, I kinda bummed because before the all the inflammatory language knocked this conversation off-course, we were having a nice discussion about Metal Phone, how it compares with IR and the matchbox versions, what category of effect this is and how the different presentations of this trick affect the spectator's perception of the magic?

Let's get back to that discussion...

I'm curious if removing the metal and screws designed to look like a camera lens would affect the perception of this "engineered"? Likely not due to the metal still being sized perfectly to the case, thought all versions suffer from that same perfectly sized flaw.

Any of these effects seem to suffer from the same flaw, at least to me, which is that the block of metal seems incongruent. The only reason it seems to be there is to prove that the penetration phase was supposedly impossible. The trick isn't really a transformation effect because the original item (phone/cards/matches) is never shown. It can't be an appearance because the container was never shown empty. Even the penetration effect seems a little weak to me anyways, because the spectator never actually sees what is being penetrated until the end. At that point, either the block appeared after the object was removed from the hole, or the object penetrated the metal block but either can be true which muddies things initially. I suspect most magicians play this as a penetration. But it's not really. Maybe it's just my perception, but a penetration effect usually is clear about what is being penetrated. A magician may cover said object to penetrate it (mirror, coat thru jacket, balloon, glass, card, table, etc.) but WHAT is being penetrated is most always clear, obvious and generally is shown prior to the penatration. It is not the so in MP, IR or the matchbox version. Additionally, the effect points directly to the method. IMHO, YMMV...
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 13, 2020 10:19AM)
The "Camera" supposedly is part of the secret for the locking mechanism. So can't remove it, unfortunately.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 13, 2020 10:21AM)
I agree itís been a very nice and elaborate discussion. I also feel like I said all I have to say about this. So thanks for your points of view, gentlemen. Itís been a pleasure.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 13, 2020 01:04PM)
I kinda had a feeling...

[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
The "Camera" supposedly is part of the secret for the locking mechanism. So can't remove it, unfortunately. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: videoman (Mar 13, 2020 01:12PM)
I may be wrong as I donít own this but I thought the reason for the ďcameraĒ was to take some of the heat off the set screw on the bottom edge which is actually what locks the phoneís movement. I donít think it would be too much exposure for Joao or a phone owner to clarify this.
Message: Posted by: mikenewman (Mar 14, 2020 04:25AM)
This (as with IR and matchbox) and numerous effects that do NOT look or seem normal, and make no sense....

As long as you have fun. And entertain your audience. You are good to go. Move on to the next effect.

I know for me, no one overthinks or questions me or says that the block isn't real, and no card deck/case would be metal, or those red soft ball thingys make no sense, what are they??? Or why would you put a half dollar through a table? on and on...

If they go home and think "I know Mike did something with that block for the card to go through it! I know it!!!
That's great! They're thinking of me and my performance. Who cares!


This absolutely makes ZERO sense to do. But I can't wait to get mine! And do it!!!!
I sadly have to wait until July!!!! Noooooooooooooo!!!!

My IR has been (and will continue) to be a GREAT effect that WORKS! This will too!

I also truly appreciate everyone thinking critical on this. Discussing how thy don't see how it makes sense and their thoughts. That's what the Cafť is all about.


Mike
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Mar 14, 2020 09:56AM)
[quote]On Mar 14, 2020, mikenewman wrote:
This (as with IR and matchbox) and numerous effects that do NOT look or seem normal, and make no sense....

As long as you have fun. And entertain your audience. You are good to go. Move on to the next effect.

I know for me, no one overthinks or questions me or says that the block isn't real, and no card deck/case would be metal, or those red soft ball thingys make no sense, what are they??? Or why would you put a half dollar through a table? on and on...

If they go home and think "I know Mike did something with that block for the card to go through it! I know it!!!
That's great! They're thinking of me and my performance. Who cares!


This absolutely makes ZERO sense to do. But I can't wait to get mine! And do it!!!!
I sadly have to wait until July!!!! Noooooooooooooo!!!!

My IR has been (and will continue) to be a GREAT effect that WORKS! This will too!

I also truly appreciate everyone thinking critical on this. Discussing how thy don't see how it makes sense and their thoughts. That's what the Cafť is all about.


Mike [/quote]. I second this.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 14, 2020 10:08AM)
That about sums it up for sure. Well said.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 14, 2020 01:30PM)
Exactly Mike , you should be able express your opinions positive or negative .
Otherwise there is little point in having a discussion on a product imo Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: strollingmagician (Mar 14, 2020 03:51PM)
When in April do the pre-orders go out?
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Mar 14, 2020 05:21PM)
Is it April yet 😁, Waiting patiently.

NM
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 21, 2020 03:46PM)
@Joao - How is the availability looking right now for the July batch? Last I heard it was at 50%

Also, do you expect any delays as a result of the Corona Virus?
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 09:57AM)
First, I don't know why people are surprised by Brett's behavior, he has always behaved like this. I have seen him personally attack so many creators it makes me wonder why people are so surprised when he does it to Joao? If he is not tied to the profits or the creator in some aspect, he's not polite and shows his true colors.

We should not forget that people were doing "svenpads" long before him and referring to this idea using the term "sven" and "Svenpad" but when Brett decided to do it, he trademarked the name and threatened to sue anyone who used the name to market their own product. There were E-books that talked about how to make a svenpad that were out years before Brett's products that were taken off of the market because of his threats.

We should also not forget that when John Van Der Linden created some original ideas for the svenpad, Brett wanted to produce John's products in a professionally printed svenpad that he could profit from and John Van Der Linden said no because according to him, Brett was going to overcharge and hoard all of the profits. Did Brett respect John Van Der Linden's wishes? No, he went ahead and printed them anyways. He claimed that he only printed them for people who already had purchased the download from John Van Der Linden but that does not justify him. Those were individual people who had purchased the download for their own individual use, according to copyright laws, it did not give Brett the right to profit from them. When John Van Der Linden objected further, he was removed from the Svenpad facebook group, and according to him was threatened with a 2 million dollar lawsuit from Brett's lawyer.

Morally this is wrong but again, why are we surprised? This is what happens when someone who is not creative in the least bit, nor original and who doesn't care about the art, sees magic as an opportunity to profit rather than a way to express themselves through their art. Brett said that Joao thinks more like an engineer than a magician, well it becomes glaringly obvious that he thinks more like a corporate business man than an engineer, a performer, or a magician.

Now that we have gotten that out of the way, lets stop being surprised by his behavior, ignore him, and get back to Joao's wonderful product that he has invested a lot of time into and deserves a lot of credit for creating.

_____________________________________________________________
Having said that, lets get back to the product at hand. I recently purchased it and am waiting for it to come in the mail. I went round and round in my head as to whether this was worth $350 and whether it was worth waiting 2-3 months (I know, can you believe it?!?) to receive in the mail. Joao is from Portugal, so after shipping it could be close to 4 months before I receive it in Minnesota.

What budged me on this and made me order it was not just that I was bored during this isolation period that we are all going through, but that two thoughts came to me. The first thought that crossed my mind was when I saw James "The Amazing" Randi on TED Talks. He had fooled me and the rest of the audience by coming out with eye-glass frames but with no lenses in them and using a beard trimmer as a microphone. His talk was about assumptions that we make which cause us to be deceived. He said, "You probably think that I can see you, wrong - these are empty frames, I can't see you. I know that you are there because I can hear you." He then said, "you probably think that this is a microphone... wrong again... it's a beard trimmer. It works good to trim a beard, not so good as a microphone, trust me I have tried it." James Randi was invoking a great principle and I was happy to have been fooled by him because I made many assumptions. When I saw this on the Wizard Product Review, the idea of putting a card through a phone was unappealing to me. It was the same ol nonsense that we have seen before and in fact everyone, including non-magic folk have seen before. What fooled me was when David Penn turned over the phone to reveal a block of metal. Therefore I disagree with others who have said that it would have been better to be a cell phone rather than a block of metal. This will hit much harder, the problem is that many of you are thinking like magicians, not laymen.

The second thought that came to me was that this would be a great way to open up a metal manipulation (and bending) routine. If you truly could move metal with your mind, why is it limited to wimpy forks? I have never had this problem but many magicians (or mentalists if you prefer) have said that their audience was not impressed with their metal bending BECAUSE THEY ARE WIMPY FORKS that anyone can bend. I have never had this problem so I think that it might have to do with how it is presented and how the routine is structured but I thought that this metal phone would be a great metal manipulation opener. Think about this for a second, long before you bring out the forks, spoons, nails, etc. you open with metal phone. You convince your audience that you are able to manipulate the metal to the point that a card can pass through it, then you go into bending forks, and all of that other stuff. Nobody will say "can you do it with a solid block of steal" BECAUSE YOU ALREADY DID IT and they were able to examine it. How awesome is this?

In full disclosure, I have not received mine yet but if it is as good as David Penn said that it was and presented it on the Wizard Product Review, I think that it will get fantastic reactions and it will be worth every penny. I will post and updated review after I receive it. If it doesn't live up to the expectations, then you can rest assure that I will sell it at a discounted price tag but I think that the chances of that are extremely low.

Sincerely,
The March Hare
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Mar 30, 2020 11:13AM)
^ it's $250 not $350
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 30, 2020 11:28AM)
I personally love both Brett and Joao as people and as creators .
I think itís totally wrong that people are bashing Brett or anyone on here .
Itís totally wrong at anytime in life but when you think of the real troubles in the world right now itís deplorable .
Take care to everyone and good magic to all Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 11:40AM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, PendletonThe3rd wrote:
^ it's $250 not $350 [/quote]

I forgot what I paid for it since I bought the accessories for it too.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 11:49AM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
I personally love both Brett and Joao as people and as creators .
I think itís totally wrong that people are bashing Brett or anyone on here .
Itís totally wrong at anytime in life but when you think of the real troubles in the world right now itís deplorable .
Take care to everyone and good magic to all Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

It's not "bashing" him whatsoever, it is describing what behavior is being observed. It's not deplorable to say it, whether it is a pandemic or not, what is deplorable is trademarking a classic principle and then threatening to sue creator who uses the term "sven" in their advertising. What is deplorable is profiting from John Van Der Linden's work, not respecting his creative control over his products, banning him from the facebook group, and threatening him with a lawyer. If you don't like people calling him out on his behavior, then as his friend advise him to change his attitude and his behavior, and respect others as human beings.

Perhaps even better, ask him to issue an apology to all of the people that he has personally attacked like Joao Miranda, and all of the people that he has burned a bridge with like John Van Der Linden. I'll do you one better, I will take back every thing that I have ever said about him, if he makes an honest effort to dialogue with the people that he has trampled on and insulted and apologize for his behavior.

Did I also mention that he threatened the creator of Svenlopes too? Yes, he did. And anyone who confronted him on his behavior, he simply blocked. He cares more about his supposed "trademark" of a classic principle, than he does about the art and about people. It's obvious by the way he conducts himself. What if I came up with an anagram and I called it "anapeak" and anyone who used the term "ana" after that I threatened with a lawsuit? I will tell you, it would be immoral and it would be a hinderance to our art.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 30, 2020 12:57PM)
I think itís utterly deplorable and thatís the whole problem with social media .
Who cares about Facebook I for one would never be on it and I have not lost out one single bit as a result .
You act as if Facebook is life or death and thatís deplorable when life and death is being faced by 100ís of thousands of people in the world right now .
You want to get your priorities right my friend nearly all magic principles are not new and if you donít know that you want to start studying the history of magic a bit more .
There is a hierarchy of bashing on here and itís totally wrong .
Itís a form of bullying that none of you are ever prepared to do face to face ( surprise surprise ) .
Best wishes Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 01:10PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
I think itís utterly deplorable and thatís the whole problem with social media .
Who cares about Facebook I for one would never be on it and I have not lost out one single bit as a result .
You act as if Facebook is life or death and thatís deplorable when life and death is being faced by 100ís of thousands of people in the world right now .
You want to get your priorities right my friend nearly all magic principles are not new and if you donít know that you want to start studying the history of magic a bit more .
There is a hierarchy of bashing on here and itís totally wrong .
Itís a form of bullying that none of you are ever prepared to do face to face ( surprise surprise ) .
Best wishes Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

I never invoked just facebook, but any form of communication is relevant and how you treat people says a lot about your character. You seem to care a lot about what people have to say about him on magic Cafť, but you completely turn a blind eye to his behavior on facebook, both are digital platforms and how he conducts himself matters on both of them.

Furthermore I said almost nothing about facebook, other than him banning John Van Der Linden and anyone else who he has burned a bridge with. It's relevant because that is a platform for communicating and has to do with his actions. However most of my problem with him has to do with him trademarking a classic principle and threatening to sue people who use any variation of the term associated with the sevengali principle. It is life and death when you threaten people with your lawyer and try to prevent their individual publications from being released and sold. It is life and death when you do not respect other artists and seek to profit from their creations.

When it comes to describing his behavior, it's not a form of bullying, you are completely wrong. When people have been burned by him and they simply describe their experiences and the experiences of others, that is not bullying or bashing by definition. It is simply describing his behavior. What you have done is give him a pass for all of his behavior and blamed the victims, who have had to put up with his behavior simply because they have described his actions in unflattering terms.

Lastly I would have no problem being face to face with him but it shouldn't matter whether we are face to face, on facebook, or having a discussion about it on the magic Cafť. When Brett bashed and insulted Joao, I didn't see you telling him, "I bet you wouldn't be willing to say that face to face", no you were silent on the problem, which demonstrates that you are predispositioned to give Brett a pass and not all of the people who he has insulted and threatened.

This idea that because it is a pandemic, we need to just white wash everything that this man has done is ridiculous and unintellectual.
Message: Posted by: The Unmasked Magician (Mar 30, 2020 01:14PM)
I have to agree with The March Hare, Gaz. Just read the thread on how Brett treated Drew Backenstoss. No man with good intentions would do that IMO.
Message: Posted by: RNK (Mar 30, 2020 01:24PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, The Unmasked Magician wrote:
I have to agree with The March Hare, Gaz. Just read the thread on how Brett treated Drew Backenstoss. No man with good intentions would do that IMO. [/quote]

Well I'm glad it's just not me so videoman can fully understand the ignorance from this person.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 30, 2020 01:26PM)
I have read the thread you refer in its entirety and I donít condone it but whatís wrong is private messages being plastered over a public forum .
If you have something said in private then itís private and please have the balls Drew to face the person .
I have never in 24 years been confronted by anyone at Blackpool only other than to shake my hand and be humble and nice .
This is in despite of what they have said in an open forum about me here , we are friends with a common love of our art deep down .
In regards to Facebook the mad March hare said Brett then removed John from his Facebook group , so what ! My heart bleeds for him .
Best wishes Gaz 🙂
Ps I donít like s.it stirrers but you probably gathered that
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Mar 30, 2020 01:36PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

What budged me on this and made me order it was not just that I was bored during this isolation period that we are all going through, but that two thoughts came to me. The first thought that crossed my mind was when I saw James "The Amazing" Randi on TED Talks. He had fooled me and the rest of the audience by coming out with eye-glass frames but with no lenses in them and using a beard trimmer as a microphone. His talk was about assumptions that we make which cause us to be deceived. He said, "You probably think that I can see you, wrong - these are empty frames, I can't see you. I know that you are there because I can hear you." He then said, "you probably think that this is a microphone... wrong again... it's a beard trimmer. It works good to trim a beard, not so good as a microphone, trust me I have tried it." James Randi was invoking a great principle and I was happy to have been fooled by him because I made many assumptions. When I saw this on the Wizard Product Review, the idea of putting a card through a phone was unappealing to me. It was the same ol nonsense that we have seen before and in fact everyone, including non-magic folk have seen before. What fooled me was when David Penn turned over the phone to reveal a block of metal. Therefore I disagree with others who have said that it would have been better to be a cell phone rather than a block of metal. This will hit much harder, the problem is that many of you are thinking like magicians, not laymen. [/quote]

Your Randi anecdote is nothing like this trick. His purpose was to make you think something was ordinary when it wasn't. With this trick you already have them thinking you're doing something extraordinary (penetrating your normal, real working cell phone) and then reveal you did something somewhat less extraordinary (penetrate a random block of metal). It would be similar to doing a sword penetration on stage and then revealing you didn't actually penetrate your assistant but you pushed the sword through a solid metal mannequin. That wouldn't be an upgrade.

And what does this mean: "the idea of putting a card through a phone was unappealing to me. It was the same ol nonsense that we have seen before and in fact everyone, including non-magic folk have seen before."

Where has ANYONE seen that before? I think most of us on this thread would love to do that trick rather than penetrating a strange block of metal. Please direct us to where this has been done.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 01:40PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
I have read the thread you refer in its entirety and I donít condone it but whatís wrong is private messages being plastered over a public forum .
If you have something said in private then itís private and please have the balls Drew to face the person .
I have never in 24 years been confronted by anyone at Blackpool only other than to shake my hand and be humble and nice .
This is in despite of what they have said in an open forum about me here , we are friends with a common love of our art deep down .
In regards to Facebook the mad March hare said Brett then removed John from his Facebook group , so what ! My heart bleeds for him .
Best wishes Gaz 🙂
Ps I donít like s.it stirrers but you probably gathered that [/quote]

Yes he removed him from the group so that he could shamelessly sell John's products and profit from them, without his permission. It was dishonest and the intent was to shut down any opposing views, particularly from the owner of the intellectual property. For anyone not sure about the situation, he was selling custom made sevpads of John Van Der Linden's ink blot test without compensating John whatsoever.

It's not just about some facebook conversation, it's about actual harm that was caused to people. Yet when someone merely uses the term "Sven" in their marketing, such as svenlopes, Brett threatens them and the distributor with a lawsuit hoping to get their products pulled from the shelves.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 01:44PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

What budged me on this and made me order it was not just that I was bored during this isolation period that we are all going through, but that two thoughts came to me. The first thought that crossed my mind was when I saw James "The Amazing" Randi on TED Talks. He had fooled me and the rest of the audience by coming out with eye-glass frames but with no lenses in them and using a beard trimmer as a microphone. His talk was about assumptions that we make which cause us to be deceived. He said, "You probably think that I can see you, wrong - these are empty frames, I can't see you. I know that you are there because I can hear you." He then said, "you probably think that this is a microphone... wrong again... it's a beard trimmer. It works good to trim a beard, not so good as a microphone, trust me I have tried it." James Randi was invoking a great principle and I was happy to have been fooled by him because I made many assumptions. When I saw this on the Wizard Product Review, the idea of putting a card through a phone was unappealing to me. It was the same ol nonsense that we have seen before and in fact everyone, including non-magic folk have seen before. What fooled me was when David Penn turned over the phone to reveal a block of metal. Therefore I disagree with others who have said that it would have been better to be a cell phone rather than a block of metal. This will hit much harder, the problem is that many of you are thinking like magicians, not laymen. [/quote]

Your Randi anecdote is nothing like this trick. His purpose was to make you think something was ordinary when it wasn't. With this trick you already have them thinking you're doing something extraordinary (penetrating your normal, real working cell phone) and then reveal you did something somewhat less extraordinary (penetrate a random block of metal). It would be similar to doing a sword penetration on stage and then revealing you didn't actually penetrate your assistant but you pushed the sword through a solid metal mannequin. That wouldn't be an upgrade.

And what does this mean: "the idea of putting a card through a phone was unappealing to me. It was the same ol nonsense that we have seen before and in fact everyone, including non-magic folk have seen before."

Where has ANYONE seen that before? I think most of us on this thread would love to do that trick rather than penetrating a strange block of metal. Please direct us to where this has been done. [/quote]

Well you are right, with Randi's presentation, he was making people believe that everything was "ordinary", but one could argue that with this trick, Joao was making people believe that it was an "ordinary" cell phone, only to later expose that it was no phone at all, rather it was a solid block of metal. The point that I was making is that people are under the impression that the item is one thing, only to have it turn into another.

I would be willing to bet that Joao's effect would be much more impressive than if it were an actual cell phone. However you are free to disagree of course.

Lastly I don't agree with your mannequin comparison: One implies an element of danger and is banking on it, but the other is not.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 02:05PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
I have read the thread you refer in its entirety and I donít condone it...[/quote] and what follows is an absolute - unequivocal justification for what he did and putting the blame on the victim. In every situation where he is the obvious aggressor, you have come back and said that he was really the one being bullied and targeted. No... he's been the one targeting others. If someone is assaulted, you don't say, "oh well maybe they should have been more muscular" or "well they lost the fight, so they shouldn't speak out because that isn't fair to the bully", no... no no no no no. There is no logic to this thinking.
Message: Posted by: Mac_Stone (Mar 30, 2020 02:34PM)
Can we stop talking about Brett? This thread is supposed to be about Metal Phone.
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 30, 2020 03:01PM)
Exactly both he and Joao are beautiful human beings and Mad March Hare has no right to bring it all up again . He knows nothing about Bretts help and contribution to magic and personal messages have no place ever in an open forum . Thatís the most cowardly approach I have ever seen so Drew was bang out of order publishing them . That deflated any issues he had with Brett to minus a million imo , why he is he telling all and sundry ? Like I say you canít get lower than that imo . Back on topic please Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 03:29PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Gaz Lawrence wrote:
Exactly both he and Joao are beautiful human beings and Mad March Hare has no right to bring it all up again . He knows nothing about Bretts help and contribution to magic and personal messages have no place ever in an open forum . Thatís the most cowardly approach I have ever seen so Drew was bang out of order publishing them . That deflated any issues he had with Brett to minus a million imo , why he is he telling all and sundry ? Like I say you canít get lower than that imo . Back on topic please Gaz 🙂 [/quote]

That's hilarious... you should be his publicist.. you spun everything beautifully... you even convinced me that the aggressor is the victim.
Message: Posted by: Mac_Stone (Mar 30, 2020 03:33PM)
No, seriously, let's stop.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Mar 30, 2020 04:07PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

I would be willing to bet that Joao's effect would be much more impressive than if it were an actual cell phone. However you are free to disagree of course.

Lastly I don't agree with your mannequin comparison: One implies an element of danger and is banking on it, but the other is not. [/quote]

No one thinks there's real danger in most stage penetration illusions. But that's an argument for another thread.

I don't understand why you think it would be more impressive with a metal block. I'm not trying to challenge you, I'm just interested in what your rationale is. Your own working cell phone is something that is TRULY impenetrable in ANY circumstance, not just in a magic trick. You can't drill through it, you can't melt something through it, you can't switch it and you can't put a secret sliding hole in it. And it's a common object people are familiar with.

Can you think of any other effect that is improved by replacing one normal object with something people haven't seen before that was apparently manufactured solely for use in a magic trick?

I don't think this is a bad trick, I think it's fine. We don't have the option of doing this with a real phone unfortunately. (I know you said every layperson has already seen this done with a phone, but I don't know what you're talking about.)
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 04:32PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

I would be willing to bet that Joao's effect would be much more impressive than if it were an actual cell phone. However you are free to disagree of course.

Lastly I don't agree with your mannequin comparison: One implies an element of danger and is banking on it, but the other is not. [/quote]

No one thinks there's real danger in most stage penetration illusions. But that's an argument for another thread.

I don't understand why you think it would be more impressive with a metal block. I'm not trying to challenge you, I'm just interested in what your rationale is. Your own working cell phone is something that is TRULY impenetrable in ANY circumstance, not just in a magic trick. You can't drill through it, you can't melt something through it, you can't switch it and you can't put a secret sliding hole in it. And it's a common object people are familiar with.

Can you think of any other effect that is improved by replacing one normal object with something people haven't seen before that was apparently manufactured solely for use in a magic trick?

I don't think this is a bad trick, I think it's fine. We don't have the option of doing this with a real phone unfortunately. (I know you said every layperson has already seen this done with a phone, but I don't know what you're talking about.) [/quote]

No worries Joe, we can discuss it. As I said before, when I first saw David Penn do it, I thought that it was going to be a card through cell phone illusion and that just seemed cliche. I mean we have seen card through table, card through window, card through... fill in the blank. We have also seen classic "saw the woman in half" applied to business cards, credit cards, etc. and I thought to myself "oh go figure, credit card through cell phone." I think that magicians have a difficult time getting away from the classics and truly venturing into new territory.

When a solid block of metal came out, my first thoughts were, "wow, I didn't expect that..." and then I thought that he would say that the case and the block of metal could not be examined but when it turned out that they could be examined, I was like "how?!?!" and it gave me that feeling from when I was first fooled many years ago before I became a magician.

You're right that a cell phone is technically inpenetrable but a cell phone is predictable and I suspect that the audience would look at it more skeptically. Think about when Uri Geller did the commercial where he "bent" an iphone. People know that cell phone technology is always improving so they look at it less impressive and almost would just assume that it was another feature. I think that with the block of metal, it appears if there can be no gimmicks, after all it's two screws that pose as a camera, and some metal.

My thinking could be completely wrong about this but as I said, I was willing to put my money where my mouth is (through purchasing it) and I suspect that I am right about it. If I am wrong, then I will gladly sell this product. Hell, maybe I will consider giving it away but I don't think that I am.

You asked the question, "Can you think of any other effect that is improved by replacing one normal object with something people haven't seen before that was apparently manufactured solely for use in a magic trick?" I think that you are looking at this wrong. Talk to anyone who does metal working, a random piece of metal with two screws in it doesn't require much manufacturing. In fact most metal shops have something that fits the bill just sitting around waiting to be used for a project.

The real question should be, "Can you think of any other effect where the audience expects to find a cliche item used and what they are given is a completely different item?" The answer is yes. Think Cups and Balls, when a smaller ball is magically switched into a larger ball. Or when a lemon routine switches lemons for oranges to catch their audience offguard. This is a more equal comparison.
Message: Posted by: tomd (Mar 30, 2020 04:44PM)
Thatís how I also felt watching it for the first time, the metal block was a positive surprise. Good thoughts
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (Mar 30, 2020 04:53PM)
March_Hare,

I guess we won't come to a consensus on this because I genuinely don't understand a word of what you're saying.

You wrote, "I thought that it was going to be a card through cell phone illusion and that just seemed cliche. I mean we have seen card through table, card through window, card through... fill in the blank. We have also seen classic "saw the woman in half" applied to business cards, credit cards, etc. and I thought to myself "oh go figure, credit card through cell phone." I think that magicians have a difficult time getting away from the classics and truly venturing into new territory."

So you say that card through cell phone would be cliche, and you go on to list a bunch of "card through" effects to show why it's a cliche. But this is STILL an effect where a card goes through something. It just goes through a random metal block instead of something that people would recognize. I don't quite understand how "card through cell phone" is cliche, but "card through metal block" is better. If you think that's better you should change all your props to things people wouldn't recognize.

The comparison to cups and balls doesn't make sense. In cups and balls a small ball changes into some other object. In this routine nothing changes. You never see the phone. Transformations and penetrations aren't comparable.

"Or when a lemon routine switches lemons for oranges to catch their audience offguard."

I have no idea what that is referencing. Changing a lemon for an orange sounds like the worst trick in all of magic.

I don't really need to have a back and forth about this. I can't make my point any more than it's been made. I hope everyone is very happy with their purchase!
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Mar 30, 2020 05:03PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
March_Hare,

I guess we won't come to a consensus on this because I genuinely don't understand a word of what you're saying.

You wrote, "I thought that it was going to be a card through cell phone illusion and that just seemed cliche. I mean we have seen card through table, card through window, card through... fill in the blank. We have also seen classic "saw the woman in half" applied to business cards, credit cards, etc. and I thought to myself "oh go figure, credit card through cell phone." I think that magicians have a difficult time getting away from the classics and truly venturing into new territory."

So you say that card through cell phone would be cliche, and you go on to list a bunch of "card through" effects to show why it's a cliche. But this is STILL an effect where a card goes through something. It just goes through a random metal block instead of something that people would recognize. I don't quite understand how "card through cell phone" is cliche, but "card through metal block" is better. If you think that's better you should change all your props to things people wouldn't recognize.

The comparison to cups and balls doesn't make sense. In cups and balls a small ball changes into some other object. In this routine nothing changes. You never see the phone. Transformations and penetrations aren't comparable.

"Or when a lemon routine switches lemons for oranges to catch their audience offguard."

I have no idea what that is referencing. Changing a lemon for an orange sounds like the worst trick in all of magic.

I don't really need to have a back and forth about this. I can't make my point any more than it's been made. I hope everyone is very happy with their purchase! [/quote]


Totally agree with this Joe , in reality who they are they trying to justify it to ?
Us or themselves ?
I think itís very clearly the latter Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 05:22PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
March_Hare,

I guess we won't come to a consensus on this because I genuinely don't understand a word of what you're saying.

You wrote, "I thought that it was going to be a card through cell phone illusion and that just seemed cliche. I mean we have seen card through table, card through window, card through... fill in the blank. We have also seen classic "saw the woman in half" applied to business cards, credit cards, etc. and I thought to myself "oh go figure, credit card through cell phone." I think that magicians have a difficult time getting away from the classics and truly venturing into new territory."

So you say that card through cell phone would be cliche, and you go on to list a bunch of "card through" effects to show why it's a cliche. But this is STILL an effect where a card goes through something. It just goes through a random metal block instead of something that people would recognize. I don't quite understand how "card through cell phone" is cliche, but "card through metal block" is better. If you think that's better you should change all your props to things people wouldn't recognize.

The comparison to cups and balls doesn't make sense. In cups and balls a small ball changes into some other object. In this routine nothing changes. You never see the phone. Transformations and penetrations aren't comparable.

"Or when a lemon routine switches lemons for oranges to catch their audience offguard."

I have no idea what that is referencing. Changing a lemon for an orange sounds like the worst trick in all of magic.

I don't really need to have a back and forth about this. I can't make my point any more than it's been made. I hope everyone is very happy with their purchase! [/quote]

In this effect, the fact that it is a metal block is a twist that happens and goes against their assumptions that it is a cellular phone. You might think that it doesn't "change into something" because they never examined it and confirmed that it was a cell phone, but that doesn't mean that it doesn't happen. I think that you are being too critical and not seeing this through the eyes of a laymen. You are thinking like a magician and not a laymen.

As I said many times, the laymen and everyone else assumes that it is a cell phone and then it is revealed to be a block of metal. If you don't understand my thinking and the thinking of everyone else who experienced what I did, then so be it.

In terms of your comments about a "back and fourth", you are not going to twist my arm into agreeing with you, nor insult my intelligence on this particular trick just so I agree with you. I stated my opinion and you can agree or disagree. You were the one who asked to have a dialogue about it and I think that I have been more than charitable towards you. We obviously disagree and I have no problem with that.

If you don't like the effect then don't purchase it and if you disagree with my thinking, then so be it. I absolutely love this effect and that's why I purchased it and why I have written positively about it.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 05:24PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, tomd wrote:
Thatís how I also felt watching it for the first time, the metal block was a positive surprise. Good thoughts [/quote]

Absolutely... and an examinable one at that. After watching the Wizard Product Review, I still thought that it was an optical illusion or that there was something with the phone case. It wasn't until I read the Cafť that I realized it was something much more sophisticated.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Mar 30, 2020 06:36PM)
So I'm curious March_Hare, considering what I wrote below, what category of effect do you see this as? More importantly, what presentation would you use to overcome or make sense of the incongruent appearance/transformation of a block of metal that is shaped like a phone?

[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Any of these effects seem to suffer from the same flaw, at least to me, which is that the block of metal seems incongruent. The only reason it seems to be there is to prove that the penetration phase was supposedly impossible. The trick isn't really a transformation effect because the original item (phone/cards/matches) is never shown. It can't be an appearance because the container was never shown empty. Even the penetration effect seems a little weak to me anyways, because the spectator never actually sees what is being penetrated until the end. At that point, either the block appeared after the object was removed from the hole, or the object penetrated the metal block but either can be true which muddies things initially. I suspect most magicians play this as a penetration. But it's not really. Maybe it's just my perception, but a penetration effect usually is clear about what is being penetrated. A magician may cover said object to penetrate it (mirror, coat thru jacket, balloon, glass, card, table, etc.) but WHAT is being penetrated is most always clear, obvious and generally is shown prior to the penetration. It is not the so in MP, IR or the matchbox version. Additionally, the effect points directly to the method. IMHO, YMMV... [/quote]
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Mar 30, 2020 08:07PM)
[quote]On Mar 30, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
So I'm curious March_Hare, considering what I wrote below, what category of effect do you see this as? More importantly, what presentation would you use to overcome or make sense of the incongruent appearance/transformation of a block of metal that is shaped like a phone?

[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Any of these effects seem to suffer from the same flaw, at least to me, which is that the block of metal seems incongruent. The only reason it seems to be there is to prove that the penetration phase was supposedly impossible. The trick isn't really a transformation effect because the original item (phone/cards/matches) is never shown. It can't be an appearance because the container was never shown empty. Even the penetration effect seems a little weak to me anyways, because the spectator never actually sees what is being penetrated until the end. At that point, either the block appeared after the object was removed from the hole, or the object penetrated the metal block but either can be true which muddies things initially. I suspect most magicians play this as a penetration. But it's not really. Maybe it's just my perception, but a penetration effect usually is clear about what is being penetrated. A magician may cover said object to penetrate it (mirror, coat thru jacket, balloon, glass, card, table, etc.) but WHAT is being penetrated is most always clear, obvious and generally is shown prior to the penetration. It is not the so in MP, IR or the matchbox version. Additionally, the effect points directly to the method. IMHO, YMMV... [/quote] [/quote]

Good question Kaliix, I think that it all depends on how you decide to present it. What I like about it is that you can present it however you want. Does the cellular phone transpose with a steel block or was it a steel block the entire time? The way that I planned on presenting it is like this:

I bought the additional accessories that allow you to show the screen area and the back of it rather freely (about the same amount other gimmicks). I plan on going to gigs or whenever with this thing out and while not drawing a ton of attention to it, making it seem like it is "my phone" so that people become conditioned to the idea that it is my phone. Then when I decide to do it, people will assume that they saw everything that there is to see. I have done this with props many of times and it has always worked out well. As a magician, I usually do not try and define what I do too much because I want to allow them to make of it what they will. If they want to believe that it transposed, then fine, but if they want to believe that it always was a solid steel block, I'm fine with that too.

I realize that often there is an incongruity with effects but that magicians have a bigger problem with it than laymen do. Take Andy Nyman's "WarLock" effect. People will ask, is it mind reading or is it a prediction. I do make an honest attempt at being congruent with my act but sometimes we have to just step away and let it be what it is to the participants. After all it is about them, not our ego. When I was studying for my undergraduate in psychology I decided to interview a hypnotist. I wanted to genuinely know if his participants could not see him when he supposedly convinced them that he was "invisible". His response always stuck with me. He said, "some of them told me after the show that they genuinely could not see me. Others said that I looked transparent and others said that they knew that I was not invisible but that they couldn't bring themselves to not just go along with it."

When I first learned metal bending I shyed away from it because I didn't find it astonishing at all. I also thought that if I was a mind-reader, then mental bending was incongruent with my character. However one day I was put on the spot by three nurses that I work with and an occupational therapist. I was told "show us something" and someone blurted out, "I heard that you can bend spoons like Uri Geller" (who she heard from another co-worker that I had performed it for previously). She went to the kitchen to get a spoon and I felt put on the spot. I went into the first phase of Banachek's routine that he teaches on his Penguin Lecture. All of these people were severely skeptical but it flew past all of them. All of them were going around saying "he never touched it, but somehow he was able to bend it in her hands." I wanted to be taken seriously as a mind reader, not as a mental bender, but their reactions were undeniable. Their reactions were so powerful that I never went into other phases of the metal bending routine because I felt like there was no point and that there was no way that I could top what I had just done. This is when I started not caring so much about what my powers were and took Richard Osterlind's advice, "it's just one of the things that I do."

Bottomline is that if you are looking to me to be able to give you all of the answers that you are looking for, I will fall miserably short. As I said before, I have not received the effect yet. When I do receive it, if it doesn't get me the reactions that I want, then I will either tweak my performance and make sure that I, as the performer, am not the problem but if it still is not that great, I will sell it. You can best believe that I will write an updated review whether I like it or not and that I will be honest about my thoughts as I have with other reviews that I have written here at the Cafť.
Message: Posted by: Jack Lu (Apr 2, 2020 12:41AM)
My agent told me that the April batch is delayed due to Coronavirus. Is that true?
Message: Posted by: Armando Cheung (Apr 2, 2020 05:50AM)
[quote]On Apr 2, 2020, Jack Lu wrote:
My agent told me that the April batch is delayed due to Coronavirus. Is that true? [/quote]

I think mine is sent as I received a mail from DHL for the delivery
Message: Posted by: Gaz Lawrence (Apr 2, 2020 06:38AM)
Anyone waiting for this will certainly not be disappointed with the engineering quality of it .
Itís beautifully made like all Joaoís products and works flawlessly ( I held one and tried it out at Blackpool ) .
Best health and magic to all Gaz 🙂
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (Apr 2, 2020 01:07PM)
I seen on Facebook that batch, s weíre getting ready to ship out soon. But I havenít received any notification yet.
Message: Posted by: Jack Lu (Apr 3, 2020 04:41AM)
[quote]On Apr 2, 2020, Armando Cheung wrote:
[quote]On Apr 2, 2020, Jack Lu wrote:
My agent told me that the April batch is delayed due to Coronavirus. Is that true? [/quote]

I think mine is sent as I received a mail from DHL for the delivery [/quote]

I confirmed with Joao. He said it's not delayed. Must be something with my agent. Thanks.
Message: Posted by: Armando Cheung (Apr 3, 2020 05:57AM)
I just received my metal phone today.
The quality is amazing and the setup is very easy.( could be done with in 30 sec)
It is impossible to be split.
For your purchase consideration, I would mention when you do the move, there will be ďclickĒ sound. In a quiet environment, it probably will be heard. Even though Joao in the video explains two ways to cover it, the handling will be a bit different and may not fit your style. You need to find your handling if you want to do it in quiet environment.
Overall, I love it.
Message: Posted by: CMR (Apr 3, 2020 06:59PM)
Is it still only available from Joao Miranda? I don't see it on Penguin's website.
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (Apr 3, 2020 07:18PM)
I will be ordering mine as soon as my tax return hits, lol!
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (Apr 3, 2020 08:18PM)
[quote]On Apr 3, 2020, CMR wrote:
Is it still only available from Joao Miranda? I don't see it on Penguin's website. [/quote]

Only through Joao's website
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Apr 17, 2020 09:19AM)
Nice review from Ekaterina. Trick of the year?

[YouTube]aR2Obyy4mHA[/YouTube]
Message: Posted by: dman11 (Apr 17, 2020 12:38PM)
Nice review, made me want one a bit more.....but, for me - I wont pay that price, just a bit too much. Especially since it needs refill stickers that wont be available anymore in 6 months....Maybe if it were a magnetic "sticker" , that would help
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Apr 17, 2020 12:50PM)
David Penn (and now myself) don't even use the stickers. :) It's fun to perform, although obviously that hasn't been as much lately.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 17, 2020 12:59PM)
I sometimes have nightmares about getting spectators like Ekaterina's husband. 😀

LOL, just teasing, pretty typical magician's spouse.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (Apr 17, 2020 01:13PM)
[quote]On Apr 17, 2020, videoman wrote:
I sometimes have nightmares about getting spectators like Ekaterina's husband. 😀

LOL, just teasing, pretty typical magician's spouse. [/quote]

My wife is rarely impressed with me. Or my magic. But the worst is she's polite about it which makes it worse.

But she's hot so I give her a pass.
Message: Posted by: PendletonThe3rd (Apr 17, 2020 01:15PM)
I passed up an opportunity to get one the other day. While I really want this, it did seem a little silly to buy it now while in quarantine. Might as well wait.

Still...could of, would of, should of!
Message: Posted by: emyers99 (Apr 17, 2020 03:29PM)
Got mine a few weeks ago. Incredibly well made and heavy. So glad itís made of stainless and wonít rust. The locking mechanism is incredible and Iím still not sure how it works. Have performed it five times and it gets good reactions. Itís just too quick to be a show piece. That and the inability to quickly reset are the only downsides.
Message: Posted by: Tyler Lunsford (Apr 17, 2020 04:57PM)
Hey everyone!

Here is my review of Metal Phone, feel free to check it out if you would like to! :)

[youtube]x0VcYqat4iI[/youtube]
https://youtu.be/x0VcYqat4iI

Hope it helps!
Tyler
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Apr 18, 2020 06:32AM)
[quote]On Apr 17, 2020, Tyler Lunsford wrote:
Hey everyone!

Here is my review of Metal Phone, feel free to check it out if you would like to! :)

[youtube]x0VcYqat4iI[/youtube]
https://youtu.be/x0VcYqat4iI

Hope it helps!
Tyler [/quote]

Thanks for the review.

Less than 15 units are now available for the July Batch.
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Apr 18, 2020 07:12AM)
Joao are the April batches still being sent?

NM
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Apr 18, 2020 07:59AM)
[quote]On Apr 18, 2020, magicnorm wrote:
Joao are the April batches still being sent?

NM [/quote]

Yes. All will be shipped until Friday. There are about 50 left to ship.
Message: Posted by: Magic KL (Apr 18, 2020 11:08AM)
[quote]On Apr 17, 2020, Tyler Lunsford wrote:
Hey everyone!

Here is my review of Metal Phone, feel free to check it out if you would like to! :)

[youtube]x0VcYqat4iI[/youtube]
https://youtu.be/x0VcYqat4iI

Hope it helps!
Tyler [/quote]

Thank you for the review, Tyler! Appreciate your time and effort in making these videos.
Message: Posted by: Tyler Lunsford (Apr 18, 2020 02:58PM)
[quote]On Apr 18, 2020, Magic KL wrote:
[quote]On Apr 17, 2020, Tyler Lunsford wrote:
Hey everyone!

Here is my review of Metal Phone, feel free to check it out if you would like to! :)

[youtube]x0VcYqat4iI[/youtube]
https://youtu.be/x0VcYqat4iI

Hope it helps!
Tyler [/quote]

Thank you for the review, Tyler! Appreciate your time and effort in making these videos. [/quote]

Thank you for the kind words, I always enjoy being able to help the magic community where I can. Glad you enjoy the reviews! :)

Tyler
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 18, 2020 08:26PM)
Ekaterina mentioned this as possible trick of the year. I have to disagree. I don't mean to sound like a hater because I'm not but sorry, I just can't see that. Gimmick of the year maybe. I think magicians just can't see this as it really is becuse they are so overwhelmed and enamoured by the beauty of the gimmick. And it is a beauty no doubt. An absolute stunner!!! Tyler just keeps going back to how beautiful the gimmick is, (BTW, do youtube reviewers get paid by the number of words per minute?) but that doesn't make it an incredible effect. You have to be able to separate the gorgeous gimmick from the effect just as a spectator would.

The effect itself is not TOTY material IMO. Take away this masterful gimmick and it's a so so effect. It's not even a new effect. It's a new gimmick for a rather old effect. The only thing new it brings to the table is that it can be completely examinable (with the price being a more tedious reset). But I always felt like Industrial Revolution was completely examinable. But to be honest, that isn't such a great effect either. Neither of them are bad effects, they're just not great effects. But IR won trick of the year because everyone fell in love with that gimmick too.

I'll be curious how many people are still performing this a year or two from now when running the smooth curves of the stainless steel through their hands no longer brings them to near orgasm. And the reality of the size and weight of it in their pocket along with mostly mediocre reactions means it stays at home in the drawer more and more.

Without a doubt that I want to run that gorgeous hunk of metal through my hands too. It takes all the willpower I can muster to hold off on buying it just to own such a beautiful and sexy prop. But I know from IR that the newness wears off over time and barring an ocassional exception it never quite gets the reactions you thought it would.

Maybe we need to start a new category for gimmick of the year?
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Apr 19, 2020 01:21AM)
[quote]On Apr 17, 2020, emyers99 wrote:
Got mine a few weeks ago. Incredibly well made and heavy. So glad itís made of stainless and wonít rust. The locking mechanism is incredible and Iím still not sure how it works. Have performed it five times and it gets good reactions. Itís just too quick to be a show piece. That and the inability to quickly reset are the only downsides. [/quote]

You will see that with practice the reset time will be much faster.

Now I can reset it in less than 20 seconds which is ok.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (Apr 19, 2020 04:23AM)
Only 8 phones are left from the July Batch.

We donít know when more will be produced as we have more projects to make.

You can order here: http://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=130
Message: Posted by: coops (Apr 19, 2020 03:02PM)
What is the size of the metal phone please?
Message: Posted by: Tyler Lunsford (Apr 20, 2020 12:41AM)
[quote]On Apr 19, 2020, coops wrote:
What is the size of the metal phone please? [/quote]

Iíd say itís most similar to an iPhone X in size 🙂
Message: Posted by: coops (Apr 20, 2020 05:55AM)
Thanks Tyler
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 20, 2020 02:31PM)
[quote]On Mar 13, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
Man, I kinda bummed because before the all the inflammatory language knocked this conversation off-course, we were having a nice discussion about Metal Phone, how it compares with IR and the matchbox versions, what category of effect this is and how the different presentations of this trick affect the spectator's perception of the magic?

Let's get back to that discussion...

I'm curious if removing the metal and screws designed to look like a camera lens would affect the perception of this "engineered"? Likely not due to the metal still being sized perfectly to the case, thought all versions suffer from that same perfectly sized flaw.

Any of these effects seem to suffer from the same flaw, at least to me, which is that the block of metal seems incongruent. The only reason it seems to be there is to prove that the penetration phase was supposedly impossible. The trick isn't really a transformation effect because the original item (phone/cards/matches) is never shown. It can't be an appearance because the container was never shown empty. Even the penetration effect seems a little weak to me anyways, because the spectator never actually sees what is being penetrated until the end. At that point, either the block appeared after the object was removed from the hole, or the object penetrated the metal block but either can be true which muddies things initially. I suspect most magicians play this as a penetration. But it's not really. Maybe it's just my perception, but a penetration effect usually is clear about what is being penetrated. A magician may cover said object to penetrate it (mirror, coat thru jacket, balloon, glass, card, table, etc.) but WHAT is being penetrated is most always clear, obvious and generally is shown prior to the penatration. It is not the so in MP, IR or the matchbox version. Additionally, the effect points directly to the method. IMHO, YMMV... [/quote]

Actually, I think you have made a great point. If this was designed simply as a metal block WITHOUT the camera bump, this might actually make it less of an odd object. Like the entirety of the oddness of the object to me is mainly due to it having that camera bump. Like if you wanted to sell the idea that it's just a simple metal block, why would the metal block have a faux camera bump with rivets in it? It wouldn't be anywhere near as odd if it was just shaped to the outline/shape of the case. The bump adds to the oddness of the object by quite a bit imo.

Here's an idea. What if this thing used a FOLIO style phone case with a cover? Remove the the camera bump. Do the penetration from the front cover (thus the camera hole never gets seen). The premise and presentation would be the same as IR and the classic matchbox penetration. Problems with the current Metal Phone would be solved (though I'm guessing one of the reasons the metal phone uses the camera bump with rivets is that the rivet screws is the locking mechanism activation).

This is possibly my biggest personal issue with Metal Phone, the engineering appears to be great but the focus was entirely on the engineering rather than the effect itself. The engineering in this case also seems to weaken the base effect and unfortunately I don't think using the argument of "well, you can negate the negatives with presentation!" is a good argument since at that point you're kind of trying to fit a square peg in a round hole.
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 20, 2020 02:47PM)
I think the screws in the camera bump are there to take the heat off the bottom screws which I believe are the actual locking screws. So it may not be as deceptive if the camera were removed.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 20, 2020 02:50PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, videoman wrote:
I think the screws in the camera bump are there to take the heat off the bottom screws which I believe are the actual locking screws. So it may not be as deceptive if the camera were removed. [/quote]

Think about that... taking heat off the bottom screws... if this was as simple as "it's just a piece of metal that isn't suspicious at all!" why then would there be need to take heat off of screws? Perhaps it's suspicious for a simple block of metal to have screws at all to begin with? There's just so many things here which imo makes the spectator/audience want to fiddle with the object because they are drawn to it subconsciously/consciously due to specific characteristics of it. Even if they would never be able to figure out how to unlock the thing, it doesn't mean they are fooled simply because they can't figure out how to get the hidden opening to open. :: shrugs ::
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 20, 2020 03:05PM)
I agree. That is why I prefer the trade off of IR. It's as examinable as it needs to be without looking engineered, just a hunk of steel. Even though in Kaliix's opinion, because it fits in the card box it must appear engineered to spectators, I haven't found that to be the case at all. It's perfectly plausible that you could find a block of steel that would fit in a card box, or easily have one cut. Specs don't think about it that deeply because there is no reason to. But the screws may draw some attention. It's obvious that someone went to considerable effort to make a phone shaped out of metal.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 20, 2020 03:14PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, videoman wrote:
I agree. That is why I prefer the trade off of IR. It's as examinable as it needs to be without looking engineered, just a hunk of steel. Even though in Kaliix's opinion, because it fits in the card box it must appear engineered to spectators, I haven't found that to be the case at all. It's perfectly plausible that you could find a block of steel that would fit in a card box, or easily have one cut. Specs don't think about it that deeply because there is no reason to. But the screws may draw some attention. It's obvious that someone went to considerable effort to make a phone shaped out of metal. [/quote]

I think that's what is sometimes getting ignored by inventors and creators of magic props. Yes, we love toys and how aesthetically pleasing they look and feel, however there's also what ultimately benefits the effect to consider. If we talk about coins, exotic coins are believable as being non-gaffed due to people having a understanding that coins are not only currency but we also have things like commemorative coins, novelty coins, souvenir coins, etc. Cards are easy to sell when people are able to handle the cards as paper cards are paper cards. Regular every day objects needs to be believable as every day objects by them being a match for the real thing and being examinable or if you can employ an incredibly deceptive switch. Then you have things like IR, matchbox penetration, and now metal phone for which there really is no point for the object to be very sleek and attractive since what you are really trying to sell here is that this is a plain ole hunk of metal.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 20, 2020 03:58PM)
If I did the trick, the metal screws that look like the camera would not be a concern.

A good plot or story will make suspicions like that irrelevant. Here is my attempt inspired by Ekaterina:

I would do Metal phone like this. Reach into my inside jacket pocket to activate a phone sound from my phone while pulling out the metal phone in front of it. Pretend to turn on the camera light (Optix) then say oh, sorry, I wanted to show this new security feature on my smartphone. If you find yourself in a bad situation like you're being robbed and forced to give up your credit card, wallet and phone (meanwhile ditching Optix and retrieving a credit card). Take out your credit card and tell them to this is the one linked to your phone. (Now in a slightly hushed tone like your about to spill the secret) While you're doing that, just casually slide the card through the security slit on the back of the case. This will not only deactivate your card but it will brick your phone, making it useless to the thief (magician drops Metal phone onto the table on the word thief).

Everything now has logic and reason. The phone now appears real with sound and light convincers. The slit now has a purpose, as does the item you are sliding through, because everyone appreciates the annoyance of credit card fraud and would empathize. The phone turning to into metal now has a bonafide reason, to make the phone inoperable and outsmart the thief. Miracle... IMHO, YMMV
Message: Posted by: AndrewI (Apr 20, 2020 05:31PM)
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would.
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (Apr 20, 2020 06:37PM)
I don't see the reason for selling the fact that it's a phone. It's coming out of your pocket and it's a phone case so I think that is enough to project a picture in a spectators mind that it's a phone.

When David Penn performed it on his review show he just put his thumb over the part that is supposed to be the camera. I think that is a nice idea if anyone is worried about it.

Just my $.02.

Disclosure: I ordered mine last week so I don't have it in hand yet, this is just an opinion after seeing some demos and thinking about the routine.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 21, 2020 09:43AM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, AndrewI wrote:
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would. [/quote]

So based on your experience there, it seems this would be interchangeable with effects like IR and the matchbox penetration. So the question circles back on, what does this bring to the table that are positives to the effect that the others don't. So we are back to does this make more sense than IR or matchbox penetration or does it not? Clearly it does not due to the inherent characteristics of the metal phone and not in a positive way. What does this then boil down to? Do the purchaser have a specific need for something with the metal phone's characteristic or is this really just a matter of wanting something shiny with a cool sounding and working mechanism but wanting that does not make the trick a better trick, which comes back to the question of why put out something which does not do a better job as what already exists and at that, one can argue this one has drawbacks which the existing versions do not.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 21, 2020 09:56AM)
You sell the fact that it's a phone because you never actually show the phone. Most penetration tricks clearly show what is being penetrated but not these versions (Matchbox, IR, MP). The phone/deck/matches can't be displayed because they are not in fact present. So instead of just casually referring to the phone/deck/matches, why not prove it's there by something other than sight. The sound is easy and I have Optix so why not let them hear the beep and see the light to cement the fact that what they are seeing is a phone.

In my mind, the more convinced the spectators are that the phone is real and present, the more they are going to be baffled by the block of metal. By using the slit as a credit card deactivator, it has a purpose that is not just to show that the card can penetrate but to deactivate the card and brick the phone. Now when the metal phone is produced, the trick becomes a transformation instead of penetration effect. The question now becomes, how did that phone turn into a piece of metal by sliding a credit card through? The clearly machined piece of metal now has reason to be shaped like a phone because the "security feature" turned the phone into metal. It SHOULD be shaped exactly like the phone. The emphasis is less on how the card went through the metal block to more of how did the phone change to metal. The framing of the trick suggests that the phone was real (b/c of the added emphasis at the beginning) and only changed to metal by activating the security feature, sliding the card through. Framed that way, the magician is not implying that the metal was penetrated. The "story" is that the phone TRANSFORMS into metal AFTER the card is slide through. A subtle change that takes the focus off the penetration and puts it on a transformation. Backtracking now is harder because the spectator is "convinced" that the phone was real at the start.
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 21, 2020 10:03AM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
You sell the fact that it's a phone because you never actually show the phone. Most penetration tricks clearly show what is being penetrated but not these versions (Matchbox, IR, MP). The phone/deck/matches can't be displayed because they are not in fact present. So instead of just casually referring to the phone/deck/matches, why not prove it's there by something other than sight. The sound is easy and I have Optix so why not let them hear the beep and see the light to cement the fact that what they are seeing is a phone.

In my mind, the more convinced the spectators are that the phone is real and present, the more they are going to be baffled by the block of metal. By using the slit as a credit card deactivator, it has a purpose that is not just to show that the card can penetrate but to deactivate the card and brick the phone. Now when the metal phone is produced, the trick becomes a transformation instead of penetration effect. The question now becomes, how did that phone turn into a piece of metal by sliding a credit card through? The clearly machined piece of metal now has reason to be shaped like a phone because the "security feature" turned the phone into metal. It SHOULD be shaped exactly like the phone. The emphasis is less on how the card went through the metal block to more of how did the phone change to metal. The framing of the trick suggests that the phone was real (b/c of the added emphasis at the beginning) and only changed to metal by activating the security feature, sliding the card through. Framed that way, the magician is not implying that the metal was penetrated. The "story" is that the phone TRANSFORMS into metal AFTER the card is slide through. A subtle change that takes the focus off the penetration and puts it on a transformation. Backtracking now is harder because the spectator is "convinced" that the phone was real at the start. [/quote]

The deck and matchbox version work in part by the spectators thinking the box is inherently empty or with matches it's easy to assume that the needle is going in between matchsticks and for the deck box, cards are paper so it's not a reach to assume you poked holes in the cards (it's paper). The phone version would work well if the phone case was assumed empty and then it was just a hunk of metal in it. The metal phone however is not a simple block of metal which would lead one to much more easily and more quickly assume that the metal phone has a secret to it. Thus the metal phone encounters a dilemma, it's not a simple block of metal nor can you really sell it as a transformation because 1) you have to transform a regular phone to the metal phone and sell the idea and 2) an actual phone is already a solid so to demonstrate a mysterious penetration, why would you have to do it with a metal phone?

Now, your idea is pretty good with Optix but that is literally bending backwards to make the metal phone be of use. How does this solve the problems for most people whom don't have Optix or if they simply don't want to do your routine. This is the dilemma. Even your "security feature" idea STILL draws the attention to the object as being the key to the effect working. You are literally leading the spectator and audience to the obvious solution. Just because they don't know how it works does not mean you've given them a magical experience, what is actually being presented to them now is a puzzle. Maybe that's your goal, to present your audiences with a puzzle but I have a hunch that most people don't want to leave the audience with a puzzle but a moment of astonishment.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 21, 2020 10:07AM)
I disagree. My routine suggestion makes much more sense. It gives reason to the metal phone looking like an actual phone because the real phone just transformed into metal. My routine has convincers at the beginning, both sound and light, to convince the spectator that the phone is real. There is no purpose to showing that one can penetrate a matchbox or deck of cards, only to show a block of metal after. My routine gives the whole idea a purpose that I've never found with the card or matchbox version. There is no reason a random block of metal is in a card case except to show that the penetration was impossible. This puts all the emphasis on the block of metal which is where a magician would prefer it not to be. A transformation makes the appearance of the metal phone have a purpose while also making sense.

[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, AndrewI wrote:
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would. [/quote]

So based on your experience there, it seems this would be interchangeable with effects like IR and the matchbox penetration. So the question circles back on, what does this bring to the table that are positives to the effect that the others don't. So we are back to does this make more sense than IR or matchbox penetration or does it not? Clearly it does not due to the inherent characteristics of the metal phone and not in a positive way. What does this then boil down to? Do the purchaser have a specific need for something with the metal phone's characteristic or is this really just a matter of wanting something shiny with a cool sounding and working mechanism but wanting that does not make the trick a better trick, which comes back to the question of why put out something which does not do a better job as what already exists and at that, one can argue this one has drawbacks which the existing versions do not. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: kissdadookie (Apr 21, 2020 10:10AM)
[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
I disagree. My routine suggestion makes much more sense. It gives reason to the metal phone looking like an actual phone because the real phone just transformed into metal. My routine has convincers at the beginning, both sound and light, to convince the spectator that the phone is real. There is no purpose to showing that one can penetrate a matchbox or deck of cards, only to show a block of metal after. My routine gives the whole idea a purpose that I've never found with the card or matchbox version. There is no reason a random block of metal is in a card case except to show that the penetration was impossible. This puts all the emphasis on the block of metal which is where a magician would prefer it not to be. A transformation makes the appearance of the metal phone have a purpose while also making sense.

[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, AndrewI wrote:
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would. [/quote]

So based on your experience there, it seems this would be interchangeable with effects like IR and the matchbox penetration. So the question circles back on, what does this bring to the table that are positives to the effect that the others don't. So we are back to does this make more sense than IR or matchbox penetration or does it not? Clearly it does not due to the inherent characteristics of the metal phone and not in a positive way. What does this then boil down to? Do the purchaser have a specific need for something with the metal phone's characteristic or is this really just a matter of wanting something shiny with a cool sounding and working mechanism but wanting that does not make the trick a better trick, which comes back to the question of why put out something which does not do a better job as what already exists and at that, one can argue this one has drawbacks which the existing versions do not. [/quote] [/quote]


Your security feature idea leads the audience down the obvious path, that the object has a secret and it's just a matter of them not knowing the secret workings of the object. Solving the metal phone issues are similar to app magic problems. The key is to not lead the audience down to the obvious solution, that the object (or device and app when it comes to app magic) is the solution. It's why even with sleight of hand, extraneous movement kills the magic because that leads them down to it being just a physical skill rather than magical.

Also, yes, the emphasis with the matchbox and IR is that it's the block of metal making it impossible... the block of metal also appears perfectly innocent since it's just a block of metal (it appears like nothing other than a block of metal, not a piece of metal shaped into something that shouldn't be made entirely of a solid block of metal, etc.).

I mean, by your own logic, app magic do not need to be disguised to look innocent and like native device features or native built in apps. because we can simply just give a wacky story to it and it will magically not draw undue attention to it.

"Reactions" are also a very poor measure of if a effect is magical or not. A fire wallet gets amazing reactions. You don't even need to perform anything after that, but it's not really magical.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 21, 2020 10:35AM)
My security feature leads them down the path of the phone being special not the block of metal. The phone transforms into a block of metal. The penetration is secondary to the transformation. When a specator hears the phone beep and briefly sees the camera light, the will be ABSOLUTELY convinced that the phone is physically present. The story explains how the phone changes into a metal phone by activating the security feature. You can emphasize that by saying, "sliding the credit card through deactivates it and bricks the phone. It just turns into a useless piece of metal."

With the spectator convinced by the sound and light, the TRANSFORMATION is the effect, not the penetration. Spectators will be baffled by the phone turning to metal when they would swear that the phone was there and real. I mean I saw the phone light and heard it ding. The metal phone is now perfectly innocent, as it was just a phone a minute ago and now still looks like a phone but it changed into metal by passing the card through the slit and activating the security feature.

There is no reason for a block of metal to be in a deck of cards. Why push a card through? Just to show you can. There is no reason for cards to turn into a perfectly sized block of metal? If you just penetrated the card case and show a block of metal, the first question is how did the card penetrate the metal. Your routine emphasizes a penetration effect. That points directly to the block of metal being involved, which you say is perfectly innocent but why is the metal block there? Only to show the penetration is impossible, which points right to the method.

[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
I disagree. My routine suggestion makes much more sense. It gives reason to the metal phone looking like an actual phone because the real phone just transformed into metal. My routine has convincers at the beginning, both sound and light, to convince the spectator that the phone is real. There is no purpose to showing that one can penetrate a matchbox or deck of cards, only to show a block of metal after. My routine gives the whole idea a purpose that I've never found with the card or matchbox version. There is no reason a random block of metal is in a card case except to show that the penetration was impossible. This puts all the emphasis on the block of metal which is where a magician would prefer it not to be. A transformation makes the appearance of the metal phone have a purpose while also making sense.

[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, AndrewI wrote:
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would. [/quote]

So based on your experience there, it seems this would be interchangeable with effects like IR and the matchbox penetration. So the question circles back on, what does this bring to the table that are positives to the effect that the others don't. So we are back to does this make more sense than IR or matchbox penetration or does it not? Clearly it does not due to the inherent characteristics of the metal phone and not in a positive way. What does this then boil down to? Do the purchaser have a specific need for something with the metal phone's characteristic or is this really just a matter of wanting something shiny with a cool sounding and working mechanism but wanting that does not make the trick a better trick, which comes back to the question of why put out something which does not do a better job as what already exists and at that, one can argue this one has drawbacks which the existing versions do not. [/quote] [/quote]


Your security feature idea leads the audience down the obvious path, that the object has a secret and it's just a matter of them not knowing the secret workings of the object. Solving the metal phone issues are similar to app magic problems. The key is to not lead the audience down to the obvious solution, that the object (or device and app when it comes to app magic) is the solution. It's why even with sleight of hand, extraneous movement kills the magic because that leads them down to it being just a physical skill rather than magical.

Also, yes, the emphasis with the matchbox and IR is that it's the block of metal making it impossible... the block of metal also appears perfectly innocent since it's just a block of metal (it appears like nothing other than a block of metal, not a piece of metal shaped into something that shouldn't be made entirely of a solid block of metal, etc.).

I mean, by your own logic, app magic do not need to be disguised to look innocent and like native device features or native built in apps. because we can simply just give a wacky story to it and it will magically not draw undue attention to it.

"Reactions" are also a very poor measure of if a effect is magical or not. A fire wallet gets amazing reactions. You don't even need to perform anything after that, but it's not really magical. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: AndrewI (Apr 21, 2020 02:50PM)
[quote]On Apr 22, 2020, kissdadookie wrote:
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, AndrewI wrote:
Wow what a brilliant routine Kallix!
I think, as many have said before, that people are way over-thinking this. Iím never out to convince people that real magic exists - I give my audiences more credit than that. I want to provide them with those moments of surprise and astonishment where their immediate understanding of a situation is turned on its head. That also seems to be what audiences enjoy from me. This effect, and the other metal block ones, offer that in spades. Whether it makes logical sense when thoroughly analysed afterwards is completely irrelevant. If they go on thinking about it and try to ďsolveĒ it, that is up to them, and doesnít bother me in the slightest. I would hope they have enough interest and enquiry to do that, in all honesty. I certainly would. [/quote]

So based on your experience there, it seems this would be interchangeable with effects like IR and the matchbox penetration. So the question circles back on, what does this bring to the table that are positives to the effect that the others don't. So we are back to does this make more sense than IR or matchbox penetration or does it not? Clearly it does not due to the inherent characteristics of the metal phone and not in a positive way. What does this then boil down to? Do the purchaser have a specific need for something with the metal phone's characteristic or is this really just a matter of wanting something shiny with a cool sounding and working mechanism but wanting that does not make the trick a better trick, which comes back to the question of why put out something which does not do a better job as what already exists and at that, one can argue this one has drawbacks which the existing versions do not. [/quote]
As far as Iím aware, IR is not currently available to purchase. This is. That seems like a fairly major advantage to this effect.
But my post was not about this effect being superior to previous ones (it never says that). Itís about it not being inferior, and about it having great audience reactions, regardless of the hand-wringing paralysis-by-analysis which goes on in these threads.
Message: Posted by: no2ss (Apr 21, 2020 06:10PM)
[quote]On Apr 20, 2020, Kaliix wrote:
If I did the trick, the metal screws that look like the camera would not be a concern.

A good plot or story will make suspicions like that irrelevant. Here is my attempt inspired by Ekaterina:

I would do Metal phone like this. Reach into my inside jacket pocket to activate a phone sound from my phone while pulling out the metal phone in front of it. Pretend to turn on the camera light (Optix) then say oh, sorry, I wanted to show this new security feature on my smartphone. If you find yourself in a bad situation like you're being robbed and forced to give up your credit card, wallet and phone (meanwhile ditching Optix and retrieving a credit card). Take out your credit card and tell them to this is the one linked to your phone. (Now in a slightly hushed tone like your about to spill the secret) While you're doing that, just casually slide the card through the security slit on the back of the case. This will not only deactivate your card but it will brick your phone, making it useless to the thief (magician drops Metal phone onto the table on the word thief).

Everything now has logic and reason. The phone now appears real with sound and light convincers. The slit now has a purpose, as does the item you are sliding through, because everyone appreciates the annoyance of credit card fraud and would empathize. The phone turning to into metal now has a bonafide reason, to make the phone inoperable and outsmart the thief. Miracle... IMHO, YMMV [/quote]

As far as I'm concerned, this routining is the best I've heard/seen for metal phone so far. It takes the problem others complained about ("why a metal phone?") and turns it into an advantage, and even gives a "reason" for the slit to exist. I feel like I want to send all my so-so effects to Kaliix for scripting from now on... :P
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 21, 2020 07:28PM)
It's a clever idea kaliix, I'll be very interested to hear how it plays. Shoot a video when you get it and can perform again. Maybe version 2 can have all the bells & whistles included with the metal phone.
Honestly though, I think specs are mostly going to be fascinated by how you got it to light up.

But I do think the effect would be 10 times better if you could somehow show it as an actual phone first instead of just the sound and the light to imply it. Which are both very odd ways to convey it's a phone that you would never do in real life. Joao could probably devise a fake screen so you could at least flash it briefly. Oh wait doesn't he already sell a decal fake? Maybe a more realistic version of that which can be easily ditched rather than openly peeled off. I betcha something could be done. Joao and his team are all genius.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 22, 2020 09:02AM)
If Optix is any indication of how far showing a smartphone's light can go in convincing an audience that THEIR phone is in the magician's hands, I think adding anything more might be gilding the lily so to speak. It makes me even question if a sound convincer is really necessary? If Optix reactions are any indication of how the audience reacts, it doesn't point to them being fascinated by explaining the light. Spectators are more interested in how the phone got back in their hands. Similarly, I would anticipate spectators being more interested in how that *** phone turned to metal or possibly how the card passed through the phone. The light will be a distant memory serving only convince them the phone they saw was real.

I would think that if a magician really cares about showing the phone as real first, a much simpler solution would be to perform a different phone effect as an opener (Inject, Wikitest, Messenger, etc.) and then go into Metal Phone.

I don't have and as yet have not purchased Metal Phone. Truth be told, I had no interest in purchasing Metal phone, as in my mind, it suffers from the same drawbacks as the other versions. It was only after seeing Ekaterina's review video of Metal Phone where she used her credit card to penetrate the phone that my brain started to piece together the routine idea. I tried to use the "It's not a bug, it's a feature" principle to solve the problems I saw in the structure and presentation of the routine. Surprisingly, I like my routine idea, and now I'm considering jumping on one of the last Metal Phones available. Crap!


[quote]On Apr 21, 2020, videoman wrote:
It's a clever idea kaliix, I'll be very interested to hear how it plays. Shoot a video when you get it and can perform again. Maybe version 2 can have all the bells and whistles included with the metal phone.
Honestly though, I think specs are mostly going to be fascinated by how you got it to light up.

But I do think the effect would be 10 times better if you could somehow show it as an actual phone first instead of just the sound and the light to imply it. Which are both very odd ways to convey it's a phone that you would never do in real life. Joao could probably devise a fake screen so you could at least flash it briefly. Oh wait doesn't he already sell a decal fake? Maybe a more realistic version of that which can be easily ditched rather than openly peeled off. I betcha something could be done. Joao and his team are all genius. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: no2ss (Apr 22, 2020 05:05PM)
Yeah, I think if you did another effect with your phone first, and then wanted to show the "security" feature of the phone, reach into a jacket pocket with the phone in hand to get the credit card and switch your real phone to the metal phone, then perform as Kaliix suggested and no one will notice. They'll remember the phone being legit and won't realize you switched (I mean, unless you have a bright yellow phone case or something).
Message: Posted by: videoman (Apr 22, 2020 06:43PM)
That's a good idea no2ss. Any of these effects, be it the matchbox, IR, or even this, are pretty mediocre when you just show an object pass thru and then reveal there is a metal block (phone) inside. So I do think it would really increase the reaction significantly if they truly believed the card was actually going thru a real phone. And by utilizing a switch There wouldn't be any need to complicate things further with sound FX or flashlights. Combining that with Ekaterina's idea of using the credit card to disable it and kaliix's idea of bricking the phone, now it's beginning to resemble a routine that makes sense.

Unfortunately I will still have to pass on it for now. If I could afford to send Joao some money right now it would be for his gorgeous new pocket watch. That item is truly a thing of beauty!
Message: Posted by: MeetMagicMike (Apr 22, 2020 11:17PM)
Kaliix, Put me down as one who thinks your routine is great thinking. The sound feature is a really nice touch. It's that kind of thing that makes people remember something that that's even more impossible than what you do.
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (Apr 23, 2020 09:00AM)
Ordered my Metal Phone from Jo„o yesterday, the July batch. I personally am not concerned about the presentation of this effect in terms of whether or not the audience believes I ever produced a cell phone or not. To me, the effect is simply the impossibility of having put a card through a solid object, an object which the spectator can fully examine at the end. As Magic is all illusion: no one can actually fly, make themselves disappear, levitate, etc., passing a solid through a solid in front of someone is magical enough for me and I believe, for most audiences. Is it a trick? Absolutely. But guess what, all magic is a trick, an illusion. Thanks for this great effect Jo„o. I look forward to amazing people with it.
Eric.
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 23, 2020 09:01AM)
I agree an offbeat switch after an opening phone effect would likely work well. I only thought to use Optix because I had it, I wanted the effect to be standalone and I didn't want to switch phones. I thought the effect would be more powerful if after briefly seeing the light, the phone stayed in full view until the point where it transforms. In this context, using Optix is far less complicated than in the Optix routine. You are holding a full-sized phone (not just a piece), there is no heat because the trick hasn't started and there is no need to hide and ditch the gimmick, it just gets put away while getting the credit card when the focus is on the phone. The somewhat touchy Optix lightswitch is now a feature rather than a bug as the light should just flash briefly rather than stay on.

For the record, Ekaterina used a credit card but the idea of that card being deactivated going through the slit and the phone transforming into metal as a security feature because of the card going through is mine.

All the talking and thinking about this routine convinced me to jump on one of the last Metal Phones available and I'm now looking forward to a shipping announcement in July.

[quote]On Apr 22, 2020, videoman wrote:
That's a good idea no2ss. Any of these effects, be it the matchbox, IR, or even this, are pretty mediocre when you just show an object pass thru and then reveal there is a metal block (phone) inside. So I do think it would really increase the reaction significantly if they truly believed the card was actually going thru a real phone. And by utilizing a switch There wouldn't be any need to complicate things further with sound FX or flashlights. Combining that with Ekaterina's idea of using the credit card to disable it and kaliix's idea of bricking the phone, now it's beginning to resemble a routine that makes sense.

Unfortunately I will still have to pass on it for now. If I could afford to send Joao some money right now it would be for his gorgeous new pocket watch. That item is truly a thing of beauty! [/quote]
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 23, 2020 12:17PM)
If you are not concerned about the presentation, then you are likely just demonstrating a puzzle, not performing a magic effect.

Impossibility has a price. Every effect has limitations. The "penetrate a box that contains a metal block" effects limitation is that you cannot show "what" you are penetrating until after it is done. That is at odds with the fact that every penetration effect I can think of is CLEAR about what is being penetrated. To use an analogy, walking through the great wall is NOT a showpiece if your "cover" is there from the start. It is a weak effect and is avoided for a reason.

Meanwhile, whatever was "supposed" to be in the box (that you cannot show from the start) was not actually penetrated. Instead, a random block of metal is there. The point of having anything inside the box is to prove the penetration was impossible. Having a block of metal there is a non sequitur. Cards should be in a card box or matches in a matchbox. Gimmicking cards or matches is nigh impossible. The metal block wins due it being possible to gimmick while seeming impossible to penetrate.

However, the solution does not address the question of why a metal block instead of cards or matches? If it is so impossible to penetrate, how come the metal block was not shown BEFORE the penetration happened, as is done in every other penetration effect. The slit in the card box is similarly unexplained and is there simply to allow the penetration to occur.

Further, the incongruence of the metal block may surprise or confuse a spectator as it is unexpected. But that is not brain-bending wonder/amazement. It is the same reaction that one gives to a puzzle. Quickly take the ring off a two-horseshoe tavern puzzle and spectators will be surprised and impressed but that is not magic, as the solution is obvious if unknown. That is exactly how this "penetration" effect plays to me, obvious if unknown. If your spectators are sitting there trying to put the card or coin through the metal block, they know exactly what happened just not how because they know you did not show the metal block to start with like you should have, even if they don't say it.

If you are doing magic, you need a good routine to overcome the limitations of any effect. In my opinion, the underlying structure of the "penetrate a box that contains a metal block" will remain fatally flawed despite the best routine. I am not oblivious to the fact that many magicians continue to get good reactions with IR or the matchbook version. I have no issue nor am I concerned with that.

For me, solving what I consider the fatal flaw meant changing the fundamental effect from penetration to transformation. All the questions are now neatly answered, have a purpose, and make sense.

IMHO, YMMV but I enjoy a good discussion.

[quote]On Apr 23, 2020, erichoudini wrote:
Ordered my Metal Phone from Jo„o yesterday, the July batch. I personally am not concerned about the presentation of this effect in terms of whether or not the audience believes I ever produced a cell phone or not. To me, the effect is simply the impossibility of having put a card through a solid object, an object which the spectator can fully examine at the end. As Magic is all illusion: no one can actually fly, make themselves disappear, levitate, etc., passing a solid through a solid in front of someone is magical enough for me and I believe, for most audiences. Is it a trick? Absolutely. But guess what, all magic is a trick, an illusion. Thanks for this great effect Jo„o. I look forward to amazing people with it.
Eric. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (Apr 23, 2020 01:31PM)
Not to dismiss or denigrate any of the creative presentation suggestions contributors have offered here, I think that if Joao and his team wanted the effect to be changing a cell phone to a steel plate, thatís probably what they would have created. Conversion is not the purpose or main thrust of the effect. To me, it is a penetration effect that could have used any shape as the solid object and still be magical. Just my personal opinion.
Message: Posted by: Ceierry (Apr 23, 2020 03:04PM)
Or just perform the effect..
Message: Posted by: magicnorm (Apr 23, 2020 10:22PM)
Ditto ditto ditto, just recieved mine, just have to say first impression , awesome. Cannot wait to work with this and try it out on an audience.

NM
Message: Posted by: Kaliix (Apr 24, 2020 11:16AM)
Agreed. Joao's product is fantastic. I'm sorry if I've been a little zealous in repeated posting lately. I got excited because I've wanted to fix the flaw in that effect for so long and I rarely get inspired with creativity like that.

This what happens when you are quarantined for 6 weeks and spend too much time at home online. Carry on...

[quote]On Apr 23, 2020, Ceierry wrote:
Or just perform the effect.. [/quote]
Message: Posted by: CMR (Apr 24, 2020 11:25AM)
Joao's products are often expensive, but they are well worth it. Even the cheaper ones are great too like Prison Deck.
Message: Posted by: Infographicmagicreviews (May 7, 2020 08:38AM)
Anyone willing to let go second hand? Please PM me
Message: Posted by: KSan (May 10, 2020 03:27PM)
Hi guys!

I am still thinking about this effect to buy. It's quite expensive like everyone knows, but also nice, modern and surprising from spectator's view. It has prons and cons. Like every effect.

Anyone who bought in in Blackpool can share thouhts about it after few months of using ? Performed more than 50, 100 times for real people. Is it still working properly ?
The mechanism is working well ?
Message: Posted by: Andy W (May 12, 2020 06:31PM)
I need to use it urgently for a gig. Does anyone know where I can get it right away? the official site wait time is like 4 month
Message: Posted by: videoman (May 12, 2020 07:23PM)
[quote]On May 12, 2020, Andy W wrote:
I need to use it urgently for a gig. Does anyone know where I can get it right away? the official site wait time is like 4 month [/quote]

I do, but obviously it's going to cost you. How important to you is it? :)
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (May 12, 2020 07:26PM)
[quote]On May 12, 2020, Andy W wrote:
I need to use it urgently for a gig. Does anyone know where I can get it right away? the official site wait time is like 4 month [/quote]


I don't think anyone will be selling this to soon. If I was you I would start thinking of something else to perform. Industrial Revelation is the same in "effect' and I have seen a couple of those being sold at the moment. I wouldn't worry about it not locking because I'm sure you will be performing this virtually, correct?
Message: Posted by: MR Effecto (May 13, 2020 06:51AM)
Pm you Andy
Message: Posted by: todsky (May 13, 2020 12:22PM)
Gorgeous looking steel magic toy! Like toothpick through matchbox, but modernized.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (May 15, 2020 10:35AM)
I'm wondering if Joao sends out an email when it has officially shipped? I ordered on March 19th but I haven't heard anything since. I wrote Joao an email a couple of weeks ago but I haven't heard anything from him. I thought that there was an April batch and a July batch. I realize that the Covid 19 could make shipping slower so perhaps that is the problem. I just like to receive a "heads up" email when it is on the way or some communication from Joao but I haven't received that yet.

March Hare
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (May 15, 2020 11:07AM)
[quote]On May 15, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:
I'm wondering if Joao sends out an email when it has officially shipped? I ordered on March 19th but I haven't heard anything since. I wrote Joao an email a couple of weeks ago but I haven't heard anything from him. I thought that there was an April batch and a July batch. I realize that the Covid 19 could make shipping slower so perhaps that is the problem. I just like to receive a "heads up" email when it is on the way or some communication from Joao but I haven't received that yet.

March Hare [/quote]

We havenít received any email (at least with the name you have in the Cafť).

Send to info@joaomiranda.com please
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (May 15, 2020 02:57PM)
I went to your website and filled out the contact form. Nonetheless I will email you with the above address.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (May 15, 2020 03:03PM)
I just noticed when looking through my pay pal account that I am part of the July batch so I guess that answers my question.

March hare
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (May 15, 2020 04:29PM)
All Metal Phones ordered so far will be shipped next week :)
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (May 15, 2020 08:07PM)
Very excited about this news! Can't wait to get it in my hands! Thx for the update.
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (May 15, 2020 10:17PM)
Hi Jo„o. I assume you mean that the April ordered Metal Phones are going out next week? I purchased one of the July batch and hope that production is online as I look forward to performing your great effect. In the meantime, stay well in these troubling times.
Eric.
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (May 15, 2020 10:20PM)
Unless I'm mistaken, he posted in the Facebook group that every phone ordered (regardless of batch) is ready to ship. If that's true, you're going to be smiling much sooner than you thought. It's fantastic, just did it tonight, went over well.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (May 16, 2020 02:11AM)
[quote]On May 15, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
Unless I'm mistaken, he posted in the Facebook group that every phone ordered (regardless of batch) is ready to ship. If that's true, you're going to be smiling much sooner than you thought. It's fantastic, just did it tonight, went over well. [/quote]

That is Correct Nathan.

All orders will be shipped until Wednesday AND we currently have around 6 units in stock for immediate shipping.
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (May 16, 2020 06:01AM)
That is great news. Thanks for the update Nathan and Jo„o.
Eric
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (May 20, 2020 09:34PM)
So I thought that these would be shipped at the end of the week and that I wouldn't get it for a while because it was shipping from Portugal or something. I thought, "yes another few weeks..." but then when I came home after tea-time, I found this sitting at my doorstep. Joao was WAYYYYYYY ahead of time with this as far as I am concerned. When I opened it I was very apprehensive because I was afraid that it would be some cheap metal gimmick that was hallow inside and didn't weigh that much. I also thought that to "active it", you would need to hide a tool of some kind in your hand and turn a screw to activate it. I hate palming, what with hares having small hands and all, but given how beautiful the trick looked on The Wizard Product Review, I thought that it might be worth it.

Here is what I found:

A gimmick inside that felt like solid steel in weight and texture. I am still super surprised at how much the thing weighs. It is seriously heavy and does all of the work for you on convincing people that it is real steal.

Additionally, to my surprise the tool included is used days or hours (depending on when you will perform it) before you even use the phone and is not used at all to activate the gimmick during your performance. The solid block of steel is self-working... you could activate this with your foot if you needed to, which for a March Hare sometimes has to happen. The quality is seriously second to none.

This is hands down the best magic gimmick or utility device that I have ever purchased in my entire life. It's very rare that you purchase something, especially in this price range and are not disappointed. I can't wait to show this to Alice and The White Rabbit. I hope that Joao makes this limited edition and stops selling it to anyone. I am going to open my metal bending routine with this and it will be awesome.

I give this 10/10, or 100%... and it should be nominated as trick of the year.
Message: Posted by: Joe Roberts (May 22, 2020 02:16PM)
[quote]On May 20, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

Additionally, to my surprise the tool included is used days or hours (depending on when you will perform it) before you even use the phone and is not used at all to activate the gimmick during your performance.
[/quote]

I don't believe this is the case. In the instructions Joao states you should store the gimmick in an open (not ready to perform) position. So this isn't something you could have ready to go at all times, which is too bad.
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (May 22, 2020 02:47PM)
[quote]On May 22, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On May 20, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

Additionally, to my surprise the tool included is used days or hours (depending on when you will perform it) before you even use the phone and is not used at all to activate the gimmick during your performance.
[/quote]

I don't believe this is the case. In the instructions Joao states you should store the gimmick in an open (not ready to perform) position. So this isn't something you could have ready to go at all times, which is too bad. [/quote]

Itís just so that the springs inside are not in force if you donít perform for a full month or two.

You can leave it in the performance position for days, just not forever.
Message: Posted by: erichoudini (May 22, 2020 05:31PM)
I received my Metal Phone today and am very pleased with the effect and the Instructions. I performed it for my wife, who is a critical and experienced Magic audience and her reaction was ďthatís a really good trick!Ē High praise from her as she is not easily impressed or deceived. I am impressed by the great communication I had with Jo„o and the amazing speed with which my Metal Phone got from Portugal to Canada. Congratulations on your wonderful creation Jo„o and I wish you all the best in this troubling time. Be well.
Eric.
Message: Posted by: The_March_Hare (May 22, 2020 06:54PM)
[quote]On May 22, 2020, Joao Miranda wrote:
[quote]On May 22, 2020, Joe Roberts wrote:
[quote]On May 20, 2020, The_March_Hare wrote:

Additionally, to my surprise the tool included is used days or hours (depending on when you will perform it) before you even use the phone and is not used at all to activate the gimmick during your performance.
[/quote]

I don't believe this is the case. In the instructions Joao states you should store the gimmick in an open (not ready to perform) position. So this isn't something you could have ready to go at all times, which is too bad. [/quote]

Itís just so that the springs inside are not in force if you donít perform for a full month or two.

You can leave it in the performance position for days, just not forever. [/quote]

Yes, I was more trying to say that there is no tool palmed or anything that is needed to activate it during performance. You're right, for the sake of making it last, it should not be set and left for a month.
Message: Posted by: jack_shields (May 23, 2020 03:52PM)
If anybody is interested in selling this please do let me know :-) haha

How long does shipping take in the current situation Joao?

Has anybody used this in the real-world and how have you found it?
Message: Posted by: Joao Miranda (May 23, 2020 04:11PM)
[quote]On May 23, 2020, jack_shields wrote:
If anybody is interested in selling this please do let me know :-) haha

How long does shipping take in the current situation Joao?

Has anybody used this in the real-world and how have you found it? [/quote]

We had some in stock a few days ago but they sold in a matter of hours.

We will have more in about 3 weeks (20 units only).


Shipping by DHL is one day to Europe and four days to America.

Itís pretty fast if you choose DHL when checking out:

http://www.joaomiranda.com/store/index.php?route=product/product&product_id=130
Message: Posted by: loudini1972 (May 23, 2020 07:51PM)
Just received mine yesterday in the US and all I can say is that I am blown away by the quality of this piece and it totally justifies the cost. This is the best purchase I have made in a long time and definitely a contender for trick of year 2020. Well done Joao!
Message: Posted by: jack_shields (May 24, 2020 04:09PM)
TAKE MY MONEY!
Message: Posted by: jack_shields (May 24, 2020 04:14PM)
Just bought, looking forward to receiving it ASAP! :-)
Message: Posted by: Nathan Alexander (May 30, 2020 04:55PM)
Great performance. Fun use of the phone.

[YouTube]qt-tjFFHTfg[/YouTube]
Message: Posted by: Doric (May 30, 2020 04:56PM)
Nooooooooo!

I wish these magicians would stop using shop bought tricks for their auditions. How long until this is exposed in the public domain, ruining it for those of us who invested in it? Not long is my guess.
Message: Posted by: Michael Clifton (May 30, 2020 05:09PM)
Agreed...frustrating...only recompense is heís not
10 years old this time, as was with last Jo„o product...
BGT should be renamed JGT this year!
Message: Posted by: no2ss (May 30, 2020 08:01PM)
[quote]On May 30, 2020, Nathan Alexander wrote:
Great performance. Fun use of the phone.

[YouTube]qt-tjFFHTfg[/YouTube] [/quote]

Thing is, with that performance... the card through the phone part wasn't even really needed, and happened so fast it didn't much matter to the rest of the routine.
Message: Posted by: cardbiker (May 30, 2020 08:46PM)
34 year old bloke with his cap on backwards! Loll
Message: Posted by: Mark_Chandaue (May 31, 2020 01:53AM)
Unfortunately at 3:37 in the gimmick is exposed. Hard to see on YouTube on a phone but it stood out a country mile on TV last night.

Mark
Message: Posted by: Doric (May 31, 2020 04:44AM)
I despair. I really do.