Anybody have any information on this effect. Has it been released, or is there any talk about releasing it? Just curious.

http://www.magicvideodepot.com/main/acti......am_Bill/

That was sweet.

Yeah... I love his work (especially his Dragon Matrix). Just got me thinking after seeing this one and how I could apply it to a routine I've been pondering for a few years. Thought if it were marketed, it could help me out.

The strength of this version is that the bill changes multiple times.

The weakness of this version, in my opinion, is that by performing it so many times in a row, it becomes obvious that the entire backside of the bill(s) is not being shown. I felt like I was watching a magician with Obsessive Compulsive Disorder perform the Buddha Money Mystery.

I know that I'm viewing this as a magician, not as a layman. I don't know for sure how laymen will react to this, and the only way to know that for sure is to perform it in the real world and judge the reactions. My gut tells me that the effect wouldn't be as strong as a "standard" bill switch routine where the bill is changed just once or twice.

I agree that the back is not shown completely...but I'm not sure the layperson would care. Also, a couple of the changes look a little fishy (again, I speak as a magician) as he covered the entire bill. I've shown this video to a few friends, and they love it and have no clue how it works. I'm just thinking the setup back there could help me with an effect I want to throw together.

Also, you are probably right in thinking it wouldn't be as strong as a standard bill switch or a double bill switch. But I think that is because it is always the same thing, either a bill or a bill-sized piece of paper. Now, if every time he unfolded it it was something completely different, that could be quite strong!

Just fuel for the imagination...

As is, I'd have to agree with Larry. The repetition is its strength as well as its weakness. I think we find it interesting because we're wondering how something can be set up for that many changes. But looking at it through my "lay people specs", I got bored.
It is fuel for the imagination, though. I think, if you were to cut off a couple changes and add some patter, it could be really effective. If you were to go in reverse order and talk about losing money, there would be some comedy potential there.

Have you tried contacting him through that site?

I disagree. I think the volume of changes adds to the mystery for laymen.
After one or two they may think something's up with the backs, but that many changes may have laymen dismissing the backs as impossibly gaffed.

The only real drawback that I see is that the bill always leaves the spectator's sight before each change.

I still like it, though.

I do like your patter ideas. Loosing money is always funny...as long as it happens to someone else.

Yeah...as long as it happens to someone else. Been on the wrong end of that a bit at times.

I couldn't agree more. I solid single change is breathtaking and strong to laymen; after the third or so change in this routine, who really cares anymore? Just my opinion.

Perhaps, at that point, it becomes a game of where is he hiding the extra bills. I see what you guys mean now.

Well, I'm just throwing out an opinion. Never having done the routine for people, I hate to judge it in too harsh a manner. I just think it falls into the "magic for magicians" category.

Well put, Clark. It's often difficult to judge a piece without seeing it in person. The routine could be better if seen live, or worse. That's why I don't like to buy online, though it's getting tough to find shops nowadays.

Well, take Daniel Garcia's Greed for example. In the demo reels, it seems to get great reactions and is a multiple bill change. I know they use the best shots when putting the videos together, but it gets me thinking. Maybe Hayashi's routine just needs a great story with an emotional hook.

This looks better than Greed to me. You don't have to keep folding the bill into every decreasing sizes. Also, I think the multiple changes make it stronger. I usually distrust audience reactions on video demos anyway. What plays well for others may not play as well for me.

The lead-in to this effect was pretty humorous, however!

All of his lead-ins are hilarious. You guys should check them out. lol

Honestly, I'm not a fan of Greed either. I don't think it takes a genius to "get" the bill changing as it is folded into smaller and smaller sections. Magicians are so often in need of seeing something "new" that they completely disregard if the handling is actually an improvement, but I guess that is another conversation.

Amen.

I showed this video to a few people, and they wanted to know where he could possibly be hiding all those bills. They felt it looked like magic. I agree with them, from a layman's point of view, that after so many changes it begins to really look like magic.

Amerigo

I'll be the first to agree that opinions make for horse races....

To me, this looks like a puzzle, and the change after change after change begs a person to ask exactly what your friends asked, "Where could he be hiding all those bills?" Most all magic leaves an audience with an unanswered question.

To me, it's all about leaving a better quality of question for them to ask themselves and, if you are really lucky, having them even assert an answer of impossibility.

Magic needs to be designed for the 'sharpest' spectator in the crowd. This sort of repeated folded pattern screams to be recognized as part of the method when done over and over, to me anyway. In my mind, it's is a very good example of magicians thinking - "More it better." You don't see the back so the bills, you can't hand it out. How is this not a step backward from existing methodology?

In my mind, to take away such strong features (listed above) of the original bill change in an effort to change the bill multiple times just doesn't makes sense.

An intelligent person, assuming they care enough to try and figure it out (which a huge assumption that most take for granted), is definitely going to want handle this bill. To most of the real world, "It's only real when I can touch it," especially when watching a confessed magician.

To me, this is the true power that close-up has over everything else; they get to prove it to themselves, up close and personal. Why design methods that remove that connection when methods already exist for that connection to be sustained?