|
|
Go to page 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next] | ||||||||||
daver Elite user Jupiter, FL 436 Posts |
So in this DVD-centric generation of magic, I'm seeing all too often trailers for DVDs that do not accurately represent the effect you're buying. I'll not cite any specific examples (but you are all free to do so ;-) but snippets of performance of an effect without showing the full effect seems to be becoming the norm.
Case in point where there are key parts of a routine that are not shown on the trailer which would minimize the impact of the effect and perhaps not make you want to buy it. I'm not talking about false advertising here, but not being totally up front about what it is you're buying; leaving just enough out to make you think it is more than it is, only to be disappointed when you see it's not what you thought it was (please note, I'm not talking about being disappointed in a method, but more of a key piece of the routine that minimizes it's impact being withheld from the demo - kinda like being shown a cool ultra-low cost car video, with someone driving it, but not shown you have to climb in through the window because the way they saved on cost was to not have a door hinge). I also do not expect that they should so much on the trailer that methods are obvious and then no need to buy the DVD, but there should be a balance between hiding key elements of presentation and exposure, so a purchaser gets a better idea of what they're buying. Is this deceptive advertising? Or just smart business? Comments?
Dave
What's the difference between a magician and a deck of cards? A deck of cards has FOUR suits... |
|||||||||
The Mac Inner circle 1982 Posts |
Some effects lend themselves to being reverse engineered by rewinding and watching again and again then so it's in the manufacturer's best interest to edit the demo and show just the "money shot". It's not easy to misdirect the camera with the same misdirection that will work with a real spectator.
Then there are times and effects like 'Connection' by Peter Harrison(I think) where the advert ommitted a very big piece of the trick. I'm sure that if he stated the first part the advert alone would be enough to reverse engineer the effect. So where's the rationale? In the end it's best to wait for reviews and make informed purchases. Mac. |
|||||||||
acmp Elite user Nottinghamshire 466 Posts |
Would you class Sankey's 'Smashed' video with this? I've just looked at it, the method is fairly obvious but you get the feeling that some bits of the effect are not included in the video. Take for example the initialed coin penetration bit.
Have a look at http://www.sankeymagic.com/detail.aspx?ID=48152 for the video. And before anyone points at me, I'm not having a go at Jay or the trick, just testing the waters on the theory of the thread.
acmp<><
"Well if I had one wish in this god forsaken world, kids It'd be that your mistakes would be your own" |
|||||||||
Andy the cardician Inner circle A street named after my dad 3362 Posts |
Well, it was predictable that magic marketing will become more professional - more hyping more promises. This is the world we are living in.
Cards never lie
|
|||||||||
61magic Special user Sacramento California 775 Posts |
Really this isn't much different than the "Magic" performed by David Blaine with all the edits, cuts, and setup reactions.
If selling magic to video viewers is done the Blaine way why not sell to consumers the same way? Something to think about.
Professor J. P. Fawkes
|
|||||||||
Andy the cardician Inner circle A street named after my dad 3362 Posts |
The media world we live in.
Cards never lie
|
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
If you’ve been learning magic for any length of time, most marketed effects can be reverse engineered.
I supposed the argument for edited videos is that they recreate the experience from a spectator’s perspective. Remember before videos became the norm, a lot of us relied on written descriptions of the effect; these were often just as ‘edited’ as videos are now. All this said, I personally didn’t edit videos until recently; and now I only do it to make the demonstration more dynamic. The downside is that certain people seem to enjoy telling you how obvious the method is rather than appreciating the power of the effect. I’d still rather appeal to sensible people with imaginations – people who will use and appreciate the effects I develop. |
|||||||||
acmp Elite user Nottinghamshire 466 Posts |
Matthew,
I guess it's not easy for those in the know to forget what they know and experience the magic as a lay person. As for condemning an effect as being obvious, I guess the best retort must be, 'but you didn't think of it'. And yes, I am guilty of this.
acmp<><
"Well if I had one wish in this god forsaken world, kids It'd be that your mistakes would be your own" |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
If you are buying an effect for a method and then want to work it in front of people that is just stupid.
Matthew if you are editing to make things more dynamic, this is part of the problem of which he speaks. The trick should do all that on its own.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
Quote:
Matthew if you are editing to make things more dynamic, this is part of the problem of which he speaks. The trick should do all that on its own. Nah, that's not true. If it were, no video would need editing. 'Why edit a film, the story should be gripping without any cuts?' Performing for a spectator, which allows for personal interaction and misdirection is entirely different to performing to a fixed perspective. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
And you say this from how many years of experience?
See Matthew you will never learn this, for you already fortunatly enough know everything, but you are speaking of 2 different mediums. Maybe 3 actually. Your speaking of magic, in which we have certain skills which entertain people. This can and is done regularly on TV and video with NO EDITS because it is strong enough to stand on its own. The edits you speak of to make the trick "more dynamic" are what magic in general is suffering from right now. If your doing editing to make things "more dynamic" as you claim you are putting out sub standard magic. Where will this editing process be when people are watching? Film editing and story telling is another form of entertainment. Many films need to be edited for many reasons. One is to hide the work. Go see a film made live and you would never recognise it when it is on film. It is made far more entertaining and cohesive. Film is a different medium. You are using excuses as cruthces. If you have to edit to make things more "dynamic" (as you claim) you are wrappng up poor magic in a different paper. Now we get to the third dicipline. Advertising a trick. That is what the editing process you use is. You are editing things so that it comes off as YOU think it is percieved by the spectator. You edit it so it sells the best. It is a HUGE part of what is wrong with magic. Always has been a problem with copy that basically tells a different story than what the trick is. But when you intentionally edit out work, and do things like this, it is to hide bad magic.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
Quote:
And you say this from how many years of experience? Danny must you really be so dull? Quote:
Go see a film made live and you would never recognise it when it is on film. Really, I wouldn’t have realised that after my three years of film school, Hollywood family members and media production experience. Editing serves many purposes. I think it should be avoided in magic, however I do not think editing is a sign of weak magic. Even in this clip of Vernon editing is used. http://youtube.com/watch?v=PpC4fvrdiUk Sure it’s not flashy editing, and it’s very sparse but it’s still there nonetheless. It offers perspective and breaks up an otherwise long shot. Quote:
If your doing editing to make things "more dynamic" as you claim you are putting out sub standard magic. If you put as much energy into your act, rather than spouting bile about others work, who knows where you’d be Danny. |
|||||||||
gsidhe Inner circle Michigan 1725 Posts |
If you are marketing a trick and routine, and it cannot stand on it's own without editing, there is something elementally wrong with either the trick or the routine. Editing to avoid reverse engineering I can accept, changing some angles so that you get audience reaction shots or a better view...fine, but editing to make it look like it plays better than it really would in real life? To make it look easier or more exciting? Perhaps editing out the part where you make the entire audience turn around for a moment so you can "secretly" pull something out of your jacket...
Not acceptable. As far as "who knows where you'd be" in reference to Danny... He is already at a place that a lot of us would kill to be in. Do some research before you lash out. Besides that, he made a valid point. You just don't seem to like being disagreed with, and you are sensitive about your youth and lack of experience. Don't worry..It will come. Gwyd |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
Quote:
If you are marketing a trick and routine, and it cannot stand on it's own without editing, there is something elementally wrong with either the trick or the routine. In my first post on this topic I wrote “I personally didn’t edit videos until recently; and now I only do it to make the demonstration more dynamic.” I still stand by this. I never remove a section of footage; I just offer greater coverage to make the video (not the trick) more interesting. So long as you are not lying to the perspective buyer, editing is simply a matter of taste. As I also wrote in my first post, I think in some instances editing magic demos more heavily does have a justification. Quote:
He is already at a place that a lot of us would kill to be in. Making personal and pointed remarks about other people’s hard work? Mmm. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-02-19 16:16, matthew leatherbarrow wrote: You have no idea, which again seems to be a theme. Where exactly am I now Matthew? It is funny how you claim your family experience as your own. 3 big years of film school makes you a good magician why? Your making our point for us. Thanks. Just to clarify so you don´t get your feelings hurt, hen you edit video to make it mroe dynamic (even if your family is big hollywood types) you are selling the sizzle not the steak. Now this is not all bad mind you, provided you have a good enough quality steak to back up the sizzle. If you have to edit to make it "more dynamic" as YOU have told us you do, you may not have enough steak. This is all I am saying Matthew. No need to get all offended.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
How about a radical idea? We try and comment on a topic without mentioning age or experience. Disagree with an opinion by constructing a counter opinion, and explaining it fully. Or just add to an already established opinion.
Trying to undermine an opinion by questioning the authority of the writer makes these things really dull. It just results in petty name calling. Quote:
You have no idea, which again seems to be a theme. Quote:
It is funny how you claim your family experience as your own. 3 big years of film school makes you a good magician why? See what I mean? I thought it was clear that I was discussing editing. That is what this whole topic is about. Having been taught by professional filmmakers for three years, and worked in a post production environment – I might just have a grasp of what editing is about, regardless of the footage. Perhaps Danny, I might even know more about it than you. I don’t have clue who Dannydoyle is. All is see is someone who is terribly hung up about young magicians and ‘experience’. I haven’t seen you perform; I know nothing of your work. I only comment on what you write. I would appreciate the same courtesy. Quote:
If you have to edit to make it "more dynamic" as YOU have told us you do, you may not have enough steak. But I believe I wrote: Quote:
And then to clarify: Quote:
I never remove a section of footage; I just offer greater coverage to make the video (not the trick) more interesting. So long as you are not lying to the perspective buyer, editing is simply a matter of taste. If you cannot understand the nature of my posts, fair enough. I don’t really think it's appropriate behaviour to make coy references to the quality of my effects. Quote:
No need to get all offended. As far as I’m concerned you are being offensive. |
|||||||||
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21219 Posts |
Matthew, your age and your experience you don't want to be judged upon? Your kidding right?
THE ONLY thing anyone can base an opinion on IS AGE AND EXPERIENCE. You gotta be kidding? There is no virtue in simply having an opinion. Age and experience, well more experience really, is what QUANTIFIES an opinion and makes it one of value. A few years will show you this. Your right you have NO IDEA who I am, and yet you post some "maybe you would be further" nonsense as if you think that will cut me to the quick. The problem you run into is that without research you have no idea how silly this little quip by you makes you look to those who DO know me LOL. You want to be judged on your opinion, but you don't want anyone to know where that opinion comes from. Your family is Hollywood types, so that qualifies you as some sort of something. My father was a carpenter, so what? I can't hammer a nail without hurting myself. It is not genetic sorry. So you want to be able to say things nasty, but not have them said about you? You want to brag about your family and hollywood experience and claim it as your own, and in the next breath you want to ignore that age and experience matter? Your posts are confusing at best Matthew. Go ahead, lash out again at someone you have NO CLUE who he is or what he does. It seems to be what you have left. Or if you want to be the adult you pretend to be, maybe try to think a little bit about what we are saying. Let me also clarify. If as you say in one post, you are editing for what I will call "asthetic" reasons, great. No problem with me When no work is being done, and it makes the video look better from that perspective, then editing and adding is ok. Heck I am not sure I even disagree with added crowd noise, no biggie. BUT if you do it to make the trick itself MORE DYNAMIC as YOU SAID, then it is wrong. The trick, if you are selling it, should stand on its own! PERIOD. Now if it is a DVD for promo, then things are a bit different. I hope this clarifies a bit.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
Danny, are you just looking to be antagonistic?
It seems that aside from you being very pedantic about my use of the term ‘more dynamic’, we agree on the use of editing in magic demos. On more than one occasion I have made it clear that I am discussing the actual video; not the effect, yet you are still labouring the point. The only reason I raised my media credentials is because you made very condescending remarks. See you talk about the importance of experience, and showing respect for it. Yet despite my personal and extended experience of editing, film and different mediums you yourself blunder in with comments like: Quote:
And you say this from how many years of experience? Perhaps we just shouldn’t comment on each other’s posts anymore. Go on, I’ll give you the last word. |
|||||||||
NabsS New user Geneva (Switzerland) 97 Posts |
Just to return to the original problem, it's actually a quite a dilemma. On one side it's quite unethical to hide "catches" in an effect, and on the other side, if the trick isn't edited/shot at an ideal angle, the method can be seen by an experienced magician, making the effect unmarketable. But another question can arise: is it ethical to bundle a bunch of old principles, tied together in a "new" effect, and market it as something new.
|
|||||||||
Kex Special user Arlington, Texas 577 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-02-19 11:58, Dannydoyle wrote: But what is done on television is not always what magicians do in the real world. Any magician should know that if they are to perform on TV they need to pick an effect that will play well on TV. Sure you can entertain the crowd that is there and interact with them but you still can't misdirect and interact with the camera. Just because something isn't perfect for the camera does not make it imperfect for a real world audience. The two are simply not the same and can never be compared. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Right or Wrong? » » Misleading advertising - video trailers? (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 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 < |