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]
Magicsquared
View Profile
Inner circle
1246 Posts

Profile of Magicsquared
I understand, Mr. Ayres. I actually wasn't concerned about how much money your audience has. That's not a factor for me in deciding who I want to perform for or in what venue. I have no doubt that you perform for wonderful people and you give them a great show. But for me personally that's not a performance situation I'd be interested in.

And just to set the record straight, I never called this effect "garbage."
Steven Conner
View Profile
Inner circle
2353 Posts

Profile of Steven Conner
Quote:
On 2008-11-14 18:52, Magicsquared wrote:
I understand, Mr. Ayres. I actually wasn't concerned about how much money your audience has. That's not a factor for me in deciding who I want to perform for or in what venue. I have no doubt that you perform for wonderful people and you give them a great show. But for me personally that's not a performance situation I'd be interested in.

And just to set the record straight, I never called this effect "garbage."


If you buy a trick that doesn't suit your fancy, sell it, give it away, or put it in the drawer and forget about it. I remember back in the 80's when magicians use to say that Eddie Tullock only did a top change, a pass, a double lift and a false shuffle. Not only that, it wasn't that good. Well, Eddie made $250,000 a year being terrible. If you can improve on the Open Prediction, have at it but don't knock what works for others.

Steve
"The New York Papers," Mark Twain once said,"have long known that no large question is ever really settled until I have been consulted; it is the way they feel about it, and they show it by always sending to me when they get uneasy. "
burst
View Profile
Veteran user
Memphis, TN
308 Posts

Profile of burst
Lem,

I think I very clearly stated that if he feels it doesn't fit him, then he shouldn't do it. I pointed out that certain things fit certain people and sometimes they don't. Also note that my post ended with, "There are variations in art to fit the variations found in people."

I wasn't ignoring what he was saying at all, I was clarifying my thoughts on this. He even stated in the post right before your's that he understood what I was expressing.

I was also trying to counteract some of what is seen as negatives, such as the complaint of how he wants the end picture to look like. He thinks it should look a certain way and I completely agree with him. I share his opinion so much so that I thought out how to have the same visuals that he seeks, and that was before he ever posted his feelings.

And of course the analogy is flawed. It's an analogy, it isn't going to line up perfectly. You're using one subject to talk about another, there's no way it's going to line up completely. It's used to further illustrate our opinion. I understand what he meant, I'm sure he understood what I meant. I'm also sure you understood what we were trying to get across. I could probably argue the specifics of every analogy, but there isn't a point to if I have the slightest understanding to what they attempting to convey.

Magicsquared,

Excuse me if I seemed to be taking up for him or bashing you. I have absolutely no problem with you not liking the effect. I felt I should say that certain things can be changed, is all. I did take up for Mick in that one part, but I see now that I was misunderstanding what you were saying. I think your opinion should definitely be shared, as I am sure that others will feel the same as you and it's good for that opinion to be out there for them to read. On the same note, I also think my voice should be heard when I say that I think those things are obtainable with what is supplied.

As for the analogy, I should have said that I agree with you. To follow up with what you said, a crap play done by one person can be a work of art by another. I'm sure you have seen this happen before. I know I have on many occasions.

007,

Maybe I should have put a "for me" on the end of what you quoted.

And as for the mistake part, a mistake is for if the first OP is missed (purposefully). For the procedure, which I think is what you were referring to, I was suggesting keeping with it being used as a warm up. You tell them what the procedure should be, then tell them that you are first going to warm up to it and do the first phase. The second phase plays exactly how you describe it to them, just as you pointed out.

And as I said a couple of times now, if it doesn't fit who you are, don't do it. There are many methods to every effect. Find what you are comfortable with and do that.

Personally, I'm never completely disappointed with an effect. If I don't like the method, the script, or whatever else about it, I still learn from it. I learn what works for me, I get a better understanding of what it is that I do want, do like, don't like, etc.


I'm done now.

fo' rilz,
/paul.f
fvdbeek
View Profile
Elite user
490 Posts

Profile of fvdbeek
Wow, you guys really take this seriously ! Hey, it's just a $20 trick, not a Shakespearean performance !
takeachance
View Profile
Inner circle
3284 Posts

Profile of takeachance
Quote:
On 2008-11-15 07:05, fvdbeek wrote:
Wow, you guys really take this seriously ! Hey, it's just a $20 trick, not a Shakespearean performance !



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

Profile of mormonyoyoman
See, Mick? I told you not to release it!

*jeep!
--Grandpa Chet
#ShareGoodness #ldsconf
Mick Ayres
View Profile
Special user
Hilton Head Island
990 Posts

Profile of Mick Ayres
I'm glad I released "In Plain Sight", Chet. Good or bad, the reviews given on this thread have been honest and direct...I certainly appreciate the fact that no matter how people feel about the effect, at least they are THINKING about it!

Well, with the exception of Fvdbeek...he still thinks its just a trick. Smile

Best to all,
Mick
THE FIVE OBLIGATIONS OF CONJURING: Study. Practice. Script. Rehearse. Perform. Drop one and you're done.
muse
View Profile
Special user
Scotland
926 Posts

Profile of muse
Quote:
On 2008-11-15 07:05, fvdbeek wrote:
Wow, you guys really take this seriously ! Hey, it's just a $20 trick, not a Shakespearean performance !


Shakespeare had his good points, for sure. But no-one ever says that all those monkeys with typewriters could come up with a half decent plot for a card trick, now do they? I rest my case.
ggarcia
View Profile
Veteran user
San Antonio Tx
389 Posts

Profile of ggarcia
I havent purchased this but it has been performed for me by a friend. is it a good effect? I think it is but its not one that I would perform or one that I would invest $20 in. that is just my opinion. to others this may be a top notch effect. this is effect is not about the method but about the routine. having been in magic for sometime, the method(s) was of course obvious from the beginning. if you are considering this to maybe fool a fellow magician...forget it. this will not, and I repeat will not fool any knowledgeable magicians. this should (and from the posts written here has been tested) fool layman. the story is enticing for the lay public. as for this being a solution to curry prediction effect. maybe on foggy day it might be. does it follow the curry guidelines - yes, but I personally think it stretches them quite a bit. this is not the type of solution I think mr curry would have wanted for this. again my opinion. if your looking for routine that will definitely fool the public, this is one of them. it is very easy to do. instead of practicing your sleights you will need to practice your performance and script.
mormonyoyoman
View Profile
Inner circle
I dug 5,000 postholes, but I have only
2439 Posts

Profile of mormonyoyoman
Quote:
On 2008-11-15 09:57, Mick Ayres wrote:
I'm glad I released "In Plain Sight", Chet. Good or bad, the reviews given on this thread have been honest and direct...


Maybe. But, gee, I wish I had posted my prediction before this thread got rolling (rather than "just" e-mail it to you) -- I can hardly believe how accurate to detail it has turned out. Kreskin couldn't have asked for a more accurate prediction!

*jeep!
--Grandpa Kreskin Chet
#ShareGoodness #ldsconf
goldeneye007
View Profile
Inner circle
London
1487 Posts

Profile of goldeneye007
Quote:
On 2008-11-15 14:58, ggarcia wrote:
I havent purchased this but it has been performed for me by a friend. is it a good effect? I think it is but its not one that I would perform or one that I would invest $20 in. that is just my opinion. to others this may be a top notch effect. this is effect is not about the method but about the routine. having been in magic for sometime, the method(s) was of course obvious from the beginning. if you are considering this to maybe fool a fellow magician...forget it. this will not, and I repeat will not fool any knowledgeable magicians. this should (and from the posts written here has been tested) fool layman. the story is enticing for the lay public. as for this being a solution to curry prediction effect. maybe on foggy day it might be. does it follow the curry guidelines - yes, but I personally think it stretches them quite a bit. this is not the type of solution I think mr curry would have wanted for this. again my opinion. if your looking for routine that will definitely fool the public, this is one of them. it is very easy to do. instead of practicing your sleights you will need to practice your performance and script.


With all due respect to Mr Ayres, I like your post ggarcia! Your points are very close to the feelings I have.

Cheers! Smile
Ben BV
RicHeka
View Profile
Inner circle
3999 Posts

Profile of RicHeka
After I clear my plate of the plethora of material before me ...I will definitely check this out.
I...like 'some' here...happen to perform for real folks on a regular basis.Mick Ayres material thus far has been an inspiration and a winner for me.I just downright like the way the man thinks.He is one of several here who have this effect on me and others..it's all good.

IMHO,one could actually go on the road with their own adaption of his Hoodwinking's or Predictabilities or combo thereof and make a nice living.

I have done so on a much smaller scale.To wit:[added a few adaptions of Micks material,to all of my own stuff]..however,I hate to travel....but it still works for me.
My feelings about 'multi-faceted' e-books from most 'established' working pros...if I can get one or two valuable ideas and improve my performance or performing repertoire..It is worth it to me.

Hey Mick...thanks a million!

Rich
Mick Ayres
View Profile
Special user
Hilton Head Island
990 Posts

Profile of Mick Ayres
You're welcome, Rich. It's always good to hear from you!

Thank you all for the honest comments. I'm glad to know that (either way) IPS is getting strong reactions.

Cheers,
Mick
THE FIVE OBLIGATIONS OF CONJURING: Study. Practice. Script. Rehearse. Perform. Drop one and you're done.
Bill Lhotta
View Profile
Veteran user
on top of a 14000' mountain in Colorado
356 Posts

Profile of Bill Lhotta
In the bonus section I really like the way Ryan Frame ties the two different forces together to make them appear the same. After executing the second phase using Ryan's method I truly believe the spec will believe both forces to be identical, and since the second force is so clean they will have nowhere to go to back track.

Mick's presentation makes this a nice showpiece instead of just another card trick. Nice job Mick (and Jim)!

By the way it may have already been mentioned, but there is a fabulous treatise by Allan Slaight on James' "51 Faces North" in the James File volume 1. There are over a dozen solutions to this plot by some of the top names in magic and mentalism. Ken Krenzel's first method is one of my favorites.

Cheers!

** Bill **
Chris K
View Profile
Inner circle
2266 Posts

Profile of Chris K
First off, I need to apologize. Based on PMs as well as posts in this thread, my post must have been very poorly written. Both burst and MS responded by pointing out the exact same things I said in my post like I never said it. Example: I said: "This goes for magic too, the presentation itself may not lend itself for what you want to do as a performer (the infamous bra trick for magicians is an example). It may garner spectacular reactions but it may not be for you.", burst responded by saying "I pointed out that certain things fit certain people and sometimes they don't" as if it wasn't what I had just said. I know you said it. I agreed with it in my post, said I agreed with it in my post, then rephrased it in my post. Not sure why you would try to isolate that part of my post while ignoring the rest but whatever, it really doesn't matter to me, I know what I meant.

I don't want to come off the wrong way, though, so let me be CRYSTAL CLEAR: Since both people misunderstood, the problem in communication is on my end and I apologize.

Moving forward, I just won't respond to anything anybody says, ignoring everything everybody else writes and simply share my opinion. As such, I am going to write another post, after this, which will now reflect my new outlook. I just wanted to apologize in as clear a way as possible.

Lem
burst
View Profile
Veteran user
Memphis, TN
308 Posts

Profile of burst
Lem,

Relax, man. I know it was a misunderstanding. As for why I brought that up, you said to me:

Quote:
On 2008-11-14 16:55, Lemniscate wrote:

. . . you are saying what works for you should work for somebody else (I am paraphrasing, so correct me if that was not your implication).


You asked me to correct you if that isn't what I meant, so that's what I did. As you pointed out in your most recent post, I did very clearly state that, basically, one size does not fit all.

Best to you,
/paul.f
Chris K
View Profile
Inner circle
2266 Posts

Profile of Chris K
I've found the perfect illustration on what In Plain Sight means to me as a performer but I need a little bit of an intro first. I will try to make this relatively brief. However, in order to put everything in context, I need to take a minute to explain why and how I was doing what I was yesterday.

On the train on the way home last night, I started working up a couple of new sets. The holiday season will be here soon and I need to start thinking about my new routines for the new year. Since most of my paid performances (as a part-timer with a more than full time regular job) are rebookings, I find myself performing for at least SOME of the same people quite often. As such, I find that I often need to change things around to keep it fresh for them (since, generally, they are the ones who book the parties).

There are several ways I do this. One of the more basic ones is to classify my effects. Examples are cards-impromptu (e.g., Richardson's Impromptu CAAN), cards-open set-up (e.g., Ayres' Howjadothat), cards- secret set-up (e.g., James' Further than That), cards- gaffed, etc.

By classifying my effects like this, I can construct a set. "Hmmm, I open with a secret set-up but now I have to follow with either an impromptu or open set-up", you know, stuff like that. It's only one part of a multifaceted approach, btw.

In any case, I realized that I was not willing to put In Plain Sight as an impromptu effect even though it is quite easy to perform in an impromptu setting. The reasoning is the basic presentational premise is SO important to the effect that I would never consider doing it without it. In fact, I tried an experiment on the above-mentioned train. I tried the effect "impromptu", explaining the rules and such, then tried it again on different people using the page from the ebook. The second was, for multiple reasons, much stronger (I assume you can all reason out at least 3 reasons why it was so I won't bore you listing the reasons I came up with).

So, here I was, with an effect that COULD be performed impromptu and yet I never wanted to perform it that way. That is how strong the presentation is and how I important I felt it was. For $20, it's absolutely no contest, totally worth it.

Lem

PS- Paul, I didn't want anymore on that in the thread, so I PMed you. But, to be clear since I read it and it wasn't: my apology is real. I do feel I wasn't clear in my post(s) and didn't mean to take away from that.
burst
View Profile
Veteran user
Memphis, TN
308 Posts

Profile of burst
Just to throw it in, an apology is tossed your way and yours is fully accepted.

/paul.f
RLFrame
View Profile
Elite user
447 Posts

Profile of RLFrame
"In the bonus section I really like the way Ryan Frame ties the two different forces together to make them appear the same. After executing the second phase using Ryan's method I truly believe the spec will believe both forces to be identical, and since the second force is so clean they will have nowhere to go to back track."

Thank you Bill. You made my day.

I suspect that people who haven't done this don't realize how people can 'get into' the presentation. If the audience is engaged and lively, the presentation makes them feel as if they part of something rare and special. They react accordingly.

My personal way to do it, further gives a sense of building tension for the second phase that was expressed as a concern in this thread. In my version, for the first phase, I claim that history proved that no spectator/participant could actually turn over one card at a time and match the prediction. That way was tried for decades and they were just frustrated time after time. It just didn't work. Then I acknowledge that the rules HAD to be stretched (another criticism herein)to technically meet the requirements, but probably not as Paul Curry intended. Even with stretched rules, I claim that only a handful of others have been able to write the correct prediction and almost none are able to repeat it. "Tonight, if successful, and that is a big 'if', you will be only the second group of people in history to witness it hit for two straight times. I was fortunate to hit the last time I tried it two nights ago, and I have a good feeling about you tonight. Only once other person has ever done it twice in a row and he missed on the third and hasn't hit since."

Of course, after phase one hits, they want to go for the record, (nobody likes a tie) but I try to talk them out of it, finally conceding, saying "Well, if we are going to do it again, I want no part of backing into any record. Let's try something that has never worked before: the way Curry likely intended, one card at a time..." and so it proceeds with the second phase.

Gudaytuya

Ryan Frame

The Abnormalist
dafin77
View Profile
Regular user
134 Posts

Profile of dafin77
I have a worry about this effect that I don't think has been expressed. I wonder if people think it's a reasonable worry. If you first tell your audience that magicians have been trying to solve a problem posed by a well-known magician named Paul Curry many years ago, and then you perform something that isn't a solution, that wouldn't begin to satisfy Curry himself or the magicians you've just made reference to, as if it were a solution, then I worry that you are doing a kind of injustice to Paul Curry and other magicians who followed him. Put it this way: If a magician were to say of me, after I was dead: "David tried throughout his life to come up with a way to meet a challenge he'd set for himself, but never managed it. I'll show you what he never managed to achieve" whereupon this magician performed some effect that did not at all meet the conditions I'd set for myself and failed to meet, then said magician would, I submit, have done me a significant disservice. He'd be, in effect, saying falsely, "David couldn't come up with what you're about to see."

I don't have this effect, so I may be mistaken about how the presentation goes. My worry is based on what I've read in this thread.
David Finkelstein
dafin77@hotmail.com
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 0.24 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