|
|
Go to page 1~2 [Next] | ||||||||||
drkptrs1975 Elite user North Eastern PA 452 Posts |
Here is a poll, a survey, what do you like to do better,
A) Use Sleight of Hand, B) Use Gimmic items C) Use both, where the no one in the Audience can tell. D) Other I like choice C. What do you all like, just curious. I might teach some courses on how to magical yourself, I might use results in lectures. |
|||||||||
geemack Loyal user Greg McNeil Peoria,Illinois 296 Posts |
D) Other
I use real magic when I can. Any of the other options are fake. For example, I don't make an arbitrary distinction between hiding a coin behind a hand or behind a shell. Either way it's hidden behind something and it didn't really disappear. Answers A, B, and C are the same answer, unless we're assuming in answer A or B that the audience can tell. And if the audience can tell, then any method is just as bad as another. Yep, real magic only for me. Greg |
|||||||||
flimnar Special user Salt Lake 577 Posts |
I have to confess I get more enjoyment when I can use sleight of hand. I don't mean to infer that I never use gimmicks or that they don't have their place. But at an emotional level, I find I take a little extra pride in sleight of hand.
Flimnar
"This one goes to eleven..." Nigel Tufnel
|
|||||||||
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts |
I lean toward A.
I hate handing a spectator a gimmicked item. Every once in a while they figure it out. If something is gimmicked I like to have direct control of its workings. For example: paddle move (good) VS. finger chopper (not so good). I've been conditioning my new coworkers with pure slights over the past few months. They've freely examined my coin box, coins, cards, ring, and rubber-bands. Today I showed them something involving a gimmick. I had worked out a switch for the end, but for a short time the gimmicked item hangs from a short string held by the spectator. I was worried about that point in the trick. They were blown away. To my surprise they didn't even want to inspect the props after the effect. I feel the slights gave me credibility. At this point I'm working on something with a Svengali deck. One of the same coworkers brought his drugstore one in and I want to show him what I can do with a "normal" deck (and no, I'm not going to do the "all cards are the same" riffle). Regarding slights: There is something incredibly satisfying to picking up an unprepared item and immediately doing something magical.
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
redheadjuggler Regular user 125 Posts |
Here the thing for me. In the ideal world I would go for C (combo of slieght and gimmick). In the real world I go with A (only slieghts). Why? because I have a real job (teacher) and I have to carry other things in my pockets beside extra gimmicked things. So I generally carry my deck and sponge balls and that's all. There is plenty to do with just a deck of cards.
Now, if I'm setting up and doing a full performance (table hopping, stage or otherwise) I will for sure load my set with different (more powerful) magic. As a rule I tend to stick to the slieght over gimmicks regardless of the situation. Juggler |
|||||||||
Mr. Muggle Special user 999 Posts |
"C" and I usually find a way to make a switch for the gimmick before anything makes it's way out of my control. I use various gimmicks just enough to add that something extra to my show that I proably couldn't with out their use.
"Now you're looking for the secret... but you won't find it because you're not really looking. You don't really want to know the secret... You want to be fooled." - The Prestige (2006)
|
|||||||||
Jaz Inner circle NJ, U.S. 6111 Posts |
C
|
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts |
If I can accomplish something by means of sleight of hand and it looks as good and clean as the gimmicked method, I go for A.
If the method requires a gimmick, I use it. Properly done, the audience should not know that any sleight or gimmick was used. As an aside, I think handing out props is a bad idea. Allowing examination of props slows your act down. If you learn how to demonstrated that something is unprepared, that is much better. Ungimmicked by implication is much better than slowing an act down. And I would NEVER, EVER, EVER, EVER hand out a paddle, unless it was one that was the same on both sides. Why give the muggles any more information than they need?
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
I'm going to chose the opposite of my good friend Bill.
C. If the gimmick makes the effect as clean or cleaner than the method using SOH, I chose the gimmick. In this way I can relax and enjoy the effect with the audience and spend more effort on the presentation. Tony |
|||||||||
paisa23 Inner circle 7293 Posts |
I would also have to say option C. I mean I could never do Anniversary Waltz without a Gimmick.
June 22 2012 9:02 AM baby Usnavi was born!
http://twitter.com/paisa233 http://www.facebook.com/people/Wilder-J-Rua/505202382 http://www.myspace.com/wildrua |
|||||||||
drkptrs1975 Elite user North Eastern PA 452 Posts |
Good point. Make sure the Audience can't tell, either way it is good.
|
|||||||||
Kfmagic New user 100 Posts |
I would definitly go with A. I don't like having the opportunity to allow my spectators to figure out I am using a gimmick. Now I know we should handle gimmicks like they aren't, and not draw special attetion to them, but some circumstances you cant' help, like a spectator dropping a gimmick and by that, revealing its secret. So I figure, mine as well work harder with sleight of hand so there is no way, by the spectators handling or just looking, to figure out the effect. that's just my two cents
|
|||||||||
stormchaser Regular user Calgary, AB 200 Posts |
(A) and (C) for me.
For those who believe, no explanation is necessary. For those who do not, none will suffice.
A magician is an actor playing the part of a magician. Don't run when no-one's chasing you. |
|||||||||
Josh the Superfluous Inner circle The man of 1881 Posts |
To Bill's asides,
There are some tricks with "locking" gimmicks, that are meant to be handed to the spectator durring or after the trick. Those are the ones I don't like and don't do. I don't hand out paddles, I just like how I control the gimmick. As opposed to a button you press and hope something magical happens. Normaly I'd agree with avoiding audience inspection. Nowadays I rarely even show the faces of my deck when I take it out. But, the effect I was refering to was an escape type. I feel having the spectators inspect the hardware is better than me demonstrating in that situation. Also this was a onesy trick at work, so no routine was slowed. As an aside to my aside: I showed my coworkers a couple more tricks today. Afterwords I left my props on the table. One of them said "I'm not even going to look at them, Josh's stuff is always solid (ungimmicked)". everyone agreed, nothing was inspected, Svengali here I come.
What do you want in a site? "Honesty, integrity and decency." -Mike Doogan
"I hate it, I hate my ironic lovechild. I didn't even have anything to do with it" Josh #2 |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-12 16:19, TonyEye wrote: That's not the opposite of what I said. Please re-read what I wrote.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-13 16:36, Josh the Superfluous wrote: That's good management. One of the most subtle ways of "allowing someone to inspect the props" is doing so by implication. Escapes are one of the few areas in which inspection of the props to at least some degree is necessary. The same is true of blindfolds. But in both of these, the amount of time taken up must be closely watched. Now your audiences are completely different from mine. If you are performing for your coworkers, then you are not performing "in a venue." When you are performing in a formal setting, you absolutely must "do time." And that's when any prop inspection must be thoroughly controlled. There are moments of handling that the spectator will take to be inspection. For example, if you place a coin into their hands, then they may think they are inspecting it. The same is true of a deck of cards. And if the prop you use is something you take off your desk, or perhaps, off theirs, then you have the "ordinary item" that is being used in a trick. Get one or more of John Cornelius' Bendable Pens and put it into a coworker's supply of pens. Let it stay there a few days. Then borrow it, do the trick and leave it with him. Replace it with a regular one sometime later.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Mobius303 Inner circle Lakewood, Ohio 1309 Posts |
C
It never hurts to have a locking gimmick. and most gimmicks can be gotten out of play with slight of hand. Mobius |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts |
And if you aren't missing any fingers, they can be gotten out of the way with sleight of hand, as well.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
Tony Iacoviello Eternal Order 13151 Posts |
Quote:
On 2006-01-12 16:19, TonyEye wrote: Quote:
On 2006-01-12 16:12, Bill Palmer wrote: Sorry Bill, I re-read the post and it still seems we have different views. But I know we both agree on the presentation. Tony |
|||||||||
Bill Palmer Eternal Order Only Jonathan Townsend has more than 24314 Posts |
It's not really the opposite. You say that if the gimmick looks as clean as or cleaner than the sleight of hand, you use the gimmick.
I just lean a little more towards sleight of hand, if the results are equivalent. The reason is quite logical. Most gimmicks are good for one thing only. If you use sleight of hand, you have multifunctional props. I NEVER perform Scotch and Soda with the original gaff. Why? My ungaffed version looks like the gaffed version. Now here's the interesting part. If you are using a gimmick and the results look as clean as the sleight of hand method, is it actually as clean? Don't you have a gimmick somewhere you need to dispose of somehow? I know this isn't always the case, but most of the time it is. And there is another part to this. Most arguments in favor of the use of gimmicks are based on the idea that the gimmick makes a trick easier. This isn't always the case. A well practiced sleight is sometimes easier to use than a gimmick. There are exceptions, of course. A classic is the Downs vanish and production that Vernon burned him on. He required the gaff to make it look the way it should. I'll go with that.
"The Swatter"
Founder of CODBAMMC My Chickasaw name is "Throws Money at Cups." www.cupsandballsmuseum.com |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ever so sleightly » » SLeight of hand or Gimmic. (Poll) (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < |