|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 | ||||||||||
Dick Christian Inner circle Northern Virginia (Metro DC) 2619 Posts 
|
Quote:
On 2009-10-10 03:41, pegasus wrote: Pegasus, While I certainly understand what you are talking about, I fear that you are trapped into considering the issue only from the performer's perspective and thereby perceiving that there is a potential problem simply because you are aware of the fact that the choice of page numbers is restricted. Assuming that you would only perform the test once -- for a single member of the audience in the case of a stage presentation -- or for one member of each many small groups comprised of different individuals in the case of a "walk-around" engagement -- the fact that the method by which the page number is determined BY THE OBSERVER(s) makes it appear genuinely random and more wide-ranging than it is and effectively disguises the fact that it is really quite limited; i.e., while YOU know that the options are restricted, the audience does not. This obviously means that you should not be performing the effect more than once for the same person or audience; however, that consideration is hardly restricted to "Diction" but, with rare exception, is equally applicable to ANY book test as well as most effects in either magic or mentalism. Of course that makes this and most other effects (whether magic or mentalism) of little value to those whose performances are limited to family and friends (while that may be unfortunate for the performer it keeps the dealers in business).
Dick Christian
|
|||||||||
|
NYCJoePitt Special user 559 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2009-10-10 11:43, madkiki wrote: I thought you expressed yourself very well and appreciated what you had to say. I also like that the fact that DICTION is so "easy" to perform and allows you to focus in on the presentation and everything other than the method. It's just plain fun. |
|||||||||
|
RicHeka Inner circle 3999 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2009-10-10 13:13, Dick Christian wrote: Totally agree.I would also like to add that the illusion of impossibility can be enhanced [if you wish] by creating another range f***e that gives the impression of many more possible pages on the 'front end of the presentation'.Hint:Time of day. There are 43,200 possibilities for a time of day.[I do however,like the multi guest finger method very much].Big fun! Rich |
|||||||||
|
Caliban Special user 727 Posts
|
I rather agree with Pegasus on the page number restriction. Dick is quite correct in saying that many mental effects don't stand up to repeated viewings by the same people. My concern about the number restriction here is that it's fully visible within the procedure to someone who has only seen it once.
The same technique has been used by others who are experts in the field. Max Maven used it in his magazine test, Karrell Fox used it in "The Two Fisted Book Test" (My Latest Book)- so it certainly works. My concern would be that, though it might get a strong reaction at the time, if the audience actually think about how it could have been done afterwards - it doesn't take much thought to realise that they only had a choice of "X" possible pages that could have been memorised. The evidence of that is on display as part of the effect. |
|||||||||
Keith Mitchell Special user 799 Posts
|
I only perform for one person at a time, so I feel that this works best done only one time. Repeating this only ruins the element of surprise.
|
|||||||||
|
tpax Elite user Columbia, Maryland 443 Posts
|
I just finished reading "Diction" and think it's very clever. I don't see any problem with the numbers. After all, we are creating an illusion in someone's mind and I plan on creating the illusion that any page and any word on the page could have been selected. The method is so easy it really allows you to open up and experiment with your presentation.
|
|||||||||
|
Dick Christian Inner circle Northern Virginia (Metro DC) 2619 Posts
|
As long as you don't present an effect -- ANY effect, not just "Diction" -- as a puzzle or a challenge, most people are unlikely to spend much time or effort trying to figure them out -- IF THEY ARE PRESENTED PROPERLY, which refers not only to the method/technique involved but EFFECTIVE AUDIENCE MANAGEMENT as well. We magicians/mentalists get far more exercised about our "secrets" than laymen do, so we get far more incensed about "exposure" than we should.
Having said that, I will admit that those who perform primarily for friends, family, co-workers or the folks at the local magic club are doing so in situations and environments in which they are far more vulnerable to being challenged than are those of us who are experienced enough that we perform only for pay and only for strangers (i.e., "real people"). And I suspect from over a year of reading and responding to the posts that there are far more subscribers to the Café in the former category than the latter. That is not meant as a criticism, simply a fact.
Dick Christian
|
|||||||||
|
Caliban Special user 727 Posts
|
I also perform only on a professional basis and agree with most of that.
It's certainly true that those who perform for people who know them personally are far more likely to be challenged, and also that audiences are more likely to treat effects as puzzles if they are presented as such. But it's also true that a significant section of the public will always wonder about possible methods no matter how well an effect is presented. That's certainly true of the laypeople I've heard talking about the Derren Brown/David Copperfield/Mac King/Lance Burton shows they've seen live - and these are absolute top rank professionals who can't be accused of presenting puzzles. The fact is, if an effect makes an impact, then lay people will discuss it and think about it later. That's why Tamariz/Close etc write about cancelling out possible methods and the need to create conviction. Granted, most people won't spend hours trying to work things out - but they will, at least, wonder about it for a while before they give up and accept it as just being a great piece of theatre. This is why I'm not a fan of effects where part of the method is openly on display as part of the procedure. I agree that most people don't spend much effort on trying to work things out. My point is that they don't need to. It doesn't take much effort if all they have to do is consider the most basic details of what happened. |
|||||||||
|
Nathan Kranzo V.I.P. 2955 Posts
|
Wow guys this thread blew up and I have not been around.
Some great thoughts Madkiki. Thanks sooo much for taking the time to post. Obviously there will always be varying opinions on different methods of choice. Its great that we have a choice. IF we don't like one choice we can choose another. My concern is that while this particular choice is being debated its being exposed. Hope this shifts the conversation a little. : ) I've seen it used by other pros and kill with it. I don't think it needs defending. Max Maven, Ray Hyman, Barrie Richardson, Karrell Fox (who performed it thousands of times at Trade Shows, corporate events etc.) and others would agree it's fantastic. But it may not be your cup of tea. One man's trash.... In my experience the selection process isn't but a small moment in a larger presentation. The selection process, if any, should fade away. The book even, in most presentations, should fade away. All that should remain is the word/thoughts and the revelation/process the performer creates that is dramatic, entertaining, and mystifying. Diction has done that for myself and many others. I hope you guys continue to kill with it. All the best, Kranzo
check out MINDZILLA VOL. 2!!! Brand New Effects. Instant Downloads. Watch Demo Videos. Click below!!!
KranzoMagic.com |
|||||||||
|
Nathan Kranzo V.I.P. 2955 Posts
|
Amen Kranzo. Amen.
check out MINDZILLA VOL. 2!!! Brand New Effects. Instant Downloads. Watch Demo Videos. Click below!!!
KranzoMagic.com |
|||||||||
|
deanbarlow Loyal user 264 Posts
|
Hi guys,
Could this book test be used for table hopping (ie. at a wedding)? In other words could it be repaeted at different table with a different outcome each time? Thanks. |
|||||||||
|
George Hunter Inner circle 2017 Posts
|
Dean:
Diction is real good for walk around performance. You would not want to perform it for EVERY table but if, for walk around, you (say) have three sets of three effects that you alternate, Diction would be real good in one of those sets, and could be used for an opener, a middle effect, OR a closer. Unusual in its flexibility. George |
|||||||||
|
deanbarlow Loyal user 264 Posts
|
Thanks George, very useful.
|
|||||||||
Davdo Regular user New York 157 Posts
|
I'm a little late to this one, but I'm just getting back into this stuff after a decade away. I've been on the hunt for powerful effects that will not take an out-of-practice enthusiast like me very long to learn. Diction really fits the bill and provides the tools to adapt the method to other books.
Very happy to have picked this up and so far, it kills! ~Dave |
|||||||||
Jack Poulin Regular user Canada 186 Posts
|
I live in Québec city and the first language here, is french. Will it be possible to adapt it to another language dictionary ?
Jack |
|||||||||
|
Davdo Regular user New York 157 Posts
|
Hi Jack. I would say with a little time and effort the method can be adapted to any book or magazine, no matter the language. With the stock product, some work has been done for you based around the included dictionary, and that's part of what you're paying for. All told, though, it also acts as a great guide to help you adapt to other books.
Good luck! ~Dave |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Kranzo's "Diction" (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 | ||||||||||
Posted: Oct 10, 2009 05:13 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.03 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
|
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < 
|