The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ebooks, PDF's or Downloads » » In Plain Sight (by Mick Ayres & Jim Callahan) (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
Mick Ayres
View Profile
Special user
Hilton Head Island
990 Posts

Profile of Mick Ayres
Thank you, Jon! Thank you, Dean!

You guys are seeing more practical value in IPS than I initially thought. I'll consider your advice, Dean.

Warm regards,
Mick
THE FIVE OBLIGATIONS OF CONJURING: Study. Practice. Script. Rehearse. Perform. Drop one and you're done.
Cody S. Fisher
View Profile
V.I.P.
Austin, Texas
1173 Posts

Profile of Cody S. Fisher
I was VERY impressed with the "thought" that went into this routine. Simple...Logical...Memorable...My kind of magic!

My highest recommendation.

Cody S. Fisher
To Sign Up For My Members Only FREE Monthly Videos Visit: www.CodyFisher.com/store

Cody's Comedy Confabulation / Silk-2-Egg / Killer Prediction / Tossed Out Deck / Comedy Book Test / Las Vegas Aces / Three Ropes & 1000 Laughs
Jon Hackett
View Profile
Special user
UK
735 Posts

Profile of Jon Hackett
Absolutely, proffesionalism of the highest order.

Jon Hackett
It is not the brains that matter most, but that which guides them -- the character, the heart, generous qualities and progressive ideas. Doystoyevsky
Chris K
View Profile
Inner circle
2302 Posts

Profile of Chris K
Here goes my no-holds-barred review of this, both pre- and post- purchasing the effect.

Pre (before I ordered it): I have most of the releases from the past several years from both Mick and Jim. I would say I am rather familiar with both their works from the effects, forums (her and elsewhere, including Jim's forum), and a few emails between them and me. With that being said, when the effect was originally described, I was fairly certain I knew the approach they were going to use. I happened to be correct, 50% of the way.

This already goes into the plus column, they got me thinking about something I have thought about before, then I had an "insight". Of course, the insight wasn't mine and I have a personal rule, if somebody else's effect makes you think, you owe it to them to buy the effect.

Post purchase:

Brilliant. Even the part I figured based on the minds involved was scripted and designed so beautifully. The next phase is just as brilliant and the combination of the two phases, along with the psychology and approach is perfect. I had to change the approach because I am just like that, I reference the "Ghostbusters" movie, if you can believe that. I also lie a little bit about the characters (Paul Curry even).

I practiced and thought about this for about 12 hours prior to trying it on my close friend. Worked amazingly. Tried it on the tough guy at the office. Worked amazingly and he got so hung up on the first phase, he wouldn't even look at the second phase (which I happen to like better, personally, but they are both great).

Easily a 8.5-9 out of 10. It looks like real magic/mindreading/etc. It is designed to be utterly convincing as an act of real magic/mindreading/etc. It is simple and direct for the audience yet is complex enough not to seem dumbed down.

Congrats on a great release guys. I'm at least as harsh as I am nice on these boards so for me to be so effusive about something is quite telling. To me at least.

Lem
mormonyoyoman
View Profile
Inner circle
I dug 5,000 postholes, but I have only
2439 Posts

Profile of mormonyoyoman
Tried to write a good review, and found that I'd already written a better one long ago. The following is an excerpt from an e-letter to Mick....

Quick version: It's terrific!

Longer version: 99.999999% of magicians are going to screw this up. As Jim's intro specifies, this utterly and completely needs a good performance. No one without strong acting skills should attempt it.

You know it works, and I believe you. I shall be trying this myself someday soon, after MUCH rehearsal, and I only hope my acting skills are sufficient. But I came into magic & mentalism out of acting (a reverse of some magicians, I gather, who only later pick up on the need for acting) and I know that a good performance can carry off even a failed effect - or a mediocre script.

A review I'd write (Am I free to do so) is going to focus on the fact that this does all happen in the participant's hands. That, yes, there is a bit of a cheat -- the participant doesn't just choose a card, but they choose a card after the fashion you determine. This is the only weakness of the routine -- and you effectively turn it into a strength by making it into two test conditions, to "prove" you couldn't be affecting the outcome.

Magicians who wannabe mentalists are going to have a fit about the idea of ---- the top card. They will strongly feel the need to handle the cards themselves. I like that you urgently insist that we must resist the temptation -- except for the example of the 2d selection (demonstrating how to turn the cards over) -- of touching the cards at all. This requires giving up that sense of power and control which means so much to so many magicians (Definitely the beginning or young magicians!) and I'm not sure that they won't read the manuscript and insist on breaking your rules.

I don't have to tell you how good this is. I don't have to tell you how strong this is. I don't have to tell you how easily this could be performed badly.

This, quite simply, is dynamite. It's really too good to release, and I wonder if it's possible to talk you into not releasing it? (Gee, I just had this same conversation with Richard, and lost.)

*jeep!
--Grandpa Chet
#ShareGoodness #ldsconf
Craig Crossman
View Profile
Special user
Palm Beach, Florida
520 Posts

Profile of Craig Crossman
OK, here I go as the one dissenting voice in this and other threads about "In Plain Sight."

I really wish I had seen a video of this performance. Had I done so, I would have passed. Because when it comes to the process of how the spectator is supposed to freely select the card, I would have seen that how that card is selected is nothing like how it's described in Paul Curry's "Open Prediction." Yes, the spectator BEGINS with a shuffled, face down deck as in the Curry description. But then the spectator is asked to first CUT the deck and through a series of cutting, reversing and dealing steps then winds up with a reversed card. The card selection process is totally different than Curry's method. Period.

Here's how the product is promoted on the website:
"Your guest now deals cards face up, stops at a place of her own choosing, and now deals a single card face down to the table. She now deals the rest of the deck face up until all the cards are on the table."

Technically that's what happens but only AFTER the cuts are made which they neglect to leave out in the above description. It SHOULD have read "After cutting and reversing portions of the deck, your guest now deals cards face up to a reversed card which is her supposed freely chosen selection. She now deals the rest of the deck face up until all the cards are on the table."

I was misled by the wording in the product's description because I associated to it the Curry premise of how the cards are to be dealt from beginning to end. It's not. It's VERY different and for me, changes everything.

That said, obviously everyone in this thread enjoys the product and I went with their recommendations. Please understand that I'm not saying this isn't a good, well thought-out effect. It is. It's just not done in the manner described by Curry which was what I thought I was buying. Just be aware of that before you make your purchasing decision.

Craig Crossman
Jon Hackett
View Profile
Special user
UK
735 Posts

Profile of Jon Hackett
Surley it's irrelevant?

Are you performing for spectators? Or magicians?

This effect to the spectators is even more amazing than the curry Open Prediction because they have no idea what it is.

Its entertaining and more to the point, the second phase, which means, the part they will remember more clearly, is exactly they method described, deal them face up, decide to stop, deal aside, carry on dealing face up.

Are you not intending on leaving your spectators with the feeling that they saw a very entertaining gentleman, who showed them a miracle which is a migicins challenge and no one else in the world can do it, but last night their freind did it!

This ebook is the perfect example for me, magicians now, especially with the digital-techno-super-highway-interweb era want new methods, fast, that will elevate their magic.

Reality check, methods should fit with the presentation and natural misdirection.

You can only be entertaining when you focus on entertaining them, and not fooling them, because then, your only fooling yourself.

I only wish one third of the effects I bought had everything built in like this effect, I would be a better performer for it.

Jon Hackett
It is not the brains that matter most, but that which guides them -- the character, the heart, generous qualities and progressive ideas. Doystoyevsky
fvdbeek
View Profile
Elite user
490 Posts

Profile of fvdbeek
Quote:
OK, here I go as the one dissenting voice in this and other threads about "In Plain Sight."

And that's ok with me. Your review is the best.

Frans
Craig Crossman
View Profile
Special user
Palm Beach, Florida
520 Posts

Profile of Craig Crossman
Quote:
On 2008-11-08 07:17, Jon Hackett wrote:
Surely it's irrelevant?

Jon Hackett

No Jon, in fact it's the most relevant thing of all (to me). This effect is being billed as "The solution to Paul Curry's Open Prediction!" But it isn't. The chosen card is not "chosen" in the straightforward manner that Curry details very specifically. To me, how the card is selected is the most important thing of all! Why? Because if there is any doubt regarding the validity of the card's selection, even if it's a subconscious doubt, it lessens the impact.

This I believe is the key that holds true for any effect where the spectator must physically pick a card. That is why I have devoted a great deal of my efforts towards this very thing. You see, when I ask for someone to name a card out loud, everyone knows with 100% certainty that their selection is a free choice. Everyone intuitively knows that I can't force someone to speak aloud a specific card's name. So when I show that I predicted their card somehow, it makes the effect that much more impactful!

So the challenge for me as a mentalist, is coming up with ways to have someone physically pick a card and yet have everyone know, with 100% certainty, that it was a free choice. Believe me, that's not an easy thing to do. Over the many years I have learned a few precious methods and have developed a few of them myself.

This I believe is the main attraction to Curry's premise and it was what I thought I was buying with In Plain Sight. But it isn't, because of the reasons I previously explained.

And don't call me Shirley...

:)

Craig Crossman
Nathan Pain
View Profile
Inner circle
iowa
2819 Posts

Profile of Nathan Pain
I guess the large number of methods I have for forcing a free choice are useless...

Nathan
...
Jon Hackett
View Profile
Special user
UK
735 Posts

Profile of Jon Hackett
***! I haven't seen Airplane for ages!

Your post entirely proves my position, your trying to fool them, but that's fine, I don't really care.

Oh, and you obviously havent performed the effect. In fact, I bet you wrote the review before even finishing the ebook.

Do you actually think real magic exists?

Jon Hackett
It is not the brains that matter most, but that which guides them -- the character, the heart, generous qualities and progressive ideas. Doystoyevsky
Craig Crossman
View Profile
Special user
Palm Beach, Florida
520 Posts

Profile of Craig Crossman
Quote:
On 2008-11-08 12:11, Jon Hackett wrote:

DO you actually think real magic exists?

Jon Hackett


Jon,
Actually, many of the people who see me perform ask themselves that very question! If I may, I'd like to quote Jim Sisti regarding Mentalism:
Quote:
Mentalism has been called 'Magic's last frontier.' It's really the only form of the art left where the audience can think that what they've just seen is, perhaps, real.

That's the reason I chose to become a mentalist as I explored all the specialized areas of magic, i.e. coins, cards, illusions, escape, etc. A mentalist is a person who performs feats of "magic," but in a way that suggests some kind of psychic ability was used to accomplish them. In my experience, mentalism continues to be the one area of magic that elicits the highest visceral response from those who experience it. So I continue to seek out products and ideas that help me to further enhance that response. Therefore I must remain true to my quest in seeking out that which is the most impossible.

Craig Crossman
Jon Hackett
View Profile
Special user
UK
735 Posts

Profile of Jon Hackett
If you changed the angle at which you came at your 'quest' I assure you, you would have more success.

And heck, you might even be able to make a living at it!

I supose you do tricks, and I do performances.

Jon Hackett
It is not the brains that matter most, but that which guides them -- the character, the heart, generous qualities and progressive ideas. Doystoyevsky
takeachance
View Profile
Inner circle
3305 Posts

Profile of takeachance
Craigs point is a very valid argument and brings balance to the forum. His opinion on this will help others in their decision. I stated that I wasn't a card guy so was unaware of Curry's prediction method. Craigs honest evaluation is what this Café needs more of, constructive and objective critiques, with an explanation as to how he came to his decision. Personally I think this is a great piece of entertainment. I performed it for a group of 15 hard line critical peers that will shot me down and burn me at any opportunity. They had no idea how, and better still, luv'd the story, build up and end revelation. Basically they were entertained. I really think this is a gem. Its easy, can be done on the fly with any deck and has a great story and structure. It makes me look like a pro. And Craig, thanks for your review, I hope I didn't confuse you, I truely try to make very honest post here on the Café, and hope you continue to as well
cheerz all
Craig Crossman
View Profile
Special user
Palm Beach, Florida
520 Posts

Profile of Craig Crossman
Quote:
On 2008-11-08 14:27, Jon Hackett wrote:
I supose you do tricks, and I do performances.

Jon Hackett

Jon,

I never call them "Tricks" and my performances are always met with sounds of wonderment and resounding applause.

Craig Crossman
joe161205
View Profile
New user
81 Posts

Profile of joe161205
Craig, I believe you are a very good mentalist, but maybe you still think like a magician, who try to get good method rather than performance. I have this and it concentrate on presentation. I believe the audiences will be enterteined with this without knowing how the method works. However, if you trying to fool magician, maybe its not work. This just my opinion
Mick Ayres
View Profile
Special user
Hilton Head Island
990 Posts

Profile of Mick Ayres
Craig,

I am grateful for your willingness to post your clear thoughts and feelings about In Plain Sight. I love to read any honest opinion about my efforts. Thank you.

I wish to address a few assumptions that are being made in this thread: First, I have NOT billed IPS as "the solution to Curry's Open Prediction". Rather, I offered it as "A solution..." only. I fully realize the variety of 'solutions' to Curry's challenge are legion.

Second, to my knowledge, Paul Curry passed away before coming up with a solution that was acceptable to him...so, he did not offer a 'method' as an answer to his challenge.

Third, the nature of proposing a solution to Curry's Challenge means that the rules are subject to interpretation. Without going into the methodology, the IPS presentation allows the guest to deal the cards openly. Whether this is done with a straight-deal or a stud-deal is irrelevant in my opinion.

My practical experience with IPS has shown me that out of hundreds of performances, not one guest has ever questioned the validity or accuracy of this drama. Based on that, I feel the concerns you expressed in your initial post about the procedure are not valid...or at least, if you were to give IPS a serious try, you would find this to be true.

In your posts here and in your PM to me, you stated you feel IPS is a strong presentation and a wonderful effect. If that is so, may I ask why you would have 'passed' on it? I only ask because that confused me.

Thank you again for sharing your honest opinion, Craig. I'm enjoying the dialogue.

Warm regards,
Mick Ayres
THE FIVE OBLIGATIONS OF CONJURING: Study. Practice. Script. Rehearse. Perform. Drop one and you're done.
Craig Crossman
View Profile
Special user
Palm Beach, Florida
520 Posts

Profile of Craig Crossman
Hi Mick,

Sorry you are confused. I'll try and clarify. My point is that I bought IPS based upon the assumption that it was a solution to Curry's Open Prediction conundrum. Reading your website's promotion led me into believing that was exactly what I was buying. Here is what your website says:

Quote:
Unfortunately, Paul Curry passed away before coming up with an adequate solution to this daunting presentation...known today as 'Curry's Open Prediction Challenge'. Will Curry's elusive proposal ever be solved? Yes!

So silly me, I thought that was what I was buying, namely a solution to Curry's "Unsolved Card Problem." Again quoting from your website:

Quote:
Your guest now deals cards face up, stops at a place of her own choosing, and now deals a single card face down to the table. She now deals the rest of the deck face up until all the cards are on the table. Your predicted card has not been seen. The guest turns over the single face down card...it matches your prediction!

That is an accurate description of how Curry lays out his rules for the card's selection. But that's not what actually occurs using your IPS. It is not the free selection procedure outlined in Curry's criteria although reading the above once again led me into believing that was how the card was selected. Of course had I seen it performed in a video, I would have known that it was not and of course I would have passed.

Now as to your statement about how one interprets the rules of a challenge. I'm not so sure that the nature of proposing a solution to something, by definition means that the rules are subject to interpretation! Tell that to all the mathematicians over the past centuries who tried coming up with a solution to Fermat's Last Theorem. If you changed a rule, the answer was invalid, period. No, the proof was recently solved not by changing any rules, but by using a clever new mathematical method that didn't even exist until recent times. I was hoping that you had come up with something new and clever to reach the solution. You didn't. You just, as you said, changed one of the rules. To me, that invalidates the outcome and Curry's Challenge remains unsolved.

Mick, I was not looking for something "close" or "like" Curry's Challenge, I was looking for a solution to it and from reading your description, that's exactly what I thought you had come up with and what I was buying.

I hope that makes everything clear. Let me say once again that I like your IPS and all the thought you put behind it. But it's just not what I was expecting to buy based upon your website's description of the effect.

-Best,

Craig Crossman
Mick Ayres
View Profile
Special user
Hilton Head Island
990 Posts

Profile of Mick Ayres
Craig,

Thank you again for taking the time to respond. I really appreciate your compliments about In Plain Sight.

I understand your point now. However, I still feel the description is adequate. In the conjuring world, effect-descriptions are traditionally based on the audience's interpretation of events. True, the guest does not stop exactly "at a place of her own choosing" (though she certainly will believe it is).

I agree with you about the inflexibility of rules concerning mathematical or scientific theorems...but in the subjective world of mentalism and card play, doesn't thinking-outside-of-the-box come with the territory?

I am hoping it is fair to say you did get a solution to Curry's Open Prediction...just not the one you were hoping for.

By the way, if did ever come up with that Holy Grail solution we're all hoping for...let me know and name your price. I'll want it, too! Smile

Thanks again, Craig.

All the best,
Mick
THE FIVE OBLIGATIONS OF CONJURING: Study. Practice. Script. Rehearse. Perform. Drop one and you're done.
fvdbeek
View Profile
Elite user
490 Posts

Profile of fvdbeek
Quote:
effect-descriptions are traditionally based on the audience's interpretation of events

That's a cheap escape. Laypeople don't buy effects nor do they read the adds that promote them. There are a lot of things we traditionally were doing but nowadays aren't doing anymore.

Quote:
True, the guest does not stop exactly "at a place of her own choosing" (though she certainly will believe it is).

So I guess you change the text in the ad?

Frans
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Ebooks, PDF's or Downloads » » In Plain Sight (by Mick Ayres & Jim Callahan) (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.26 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL