As I recall, the deluxe version of _Roy Benson by Starlight_ came with a DVD of some of his performances. But I don't remember the billiard balls being on it. His Chinese sticks routine and a weird comedy routine where he was on the floor. But no billiard ball or other manipulation routines.

As a side note, I remember that the photo gallery of the Dover edition of Wilfrid Jonson's _Magic Tricks and Card Tricks_ had a photo called "Roy Benson's Hand" showing a close-up of his hand in the middle of backpalming a card. Seems kind of strange thinking about it now, but the photo inspired me to work on my card manip routine.

----- Amado "Sonny" Narvaez

Thanks, guys. Sorry for missing that in the thread.
Here's another question for Levent though: after watching the dvds, a question for Levent the magic historian:

Levent,
When you were tracing the history of the multiplying Billiard Balls, I was wondering when the first "modern/contemporary" version of the effect was marketing as the "Excelsior Ball Trick" what size were the balls in those original sets? Also, I assume they were wooden balls. Thank you.

Jim

Hi Jim:

I'm currently at sea on ship and away from my library. But if my memory serves me correctly in that period Roterberg in Chicago was selling the wooden balls & shells in 1 1/2" and 1 3/4" diameter while in England Ellis Stanyon sold them in 1 5/8" and 1 7/8" diameter.

However bear in mind some professionals such as Clement De Lion were using larger balls (between 2" and 2 1/4") on the vaudeville stage in the 1890s. Also some used balls made of materials such as celluloid, Ivory or Ivorine. In those cases the shell were often made of metal.


Best regards,
Levent
http://www.LeventMagic.com

Levent,

Just ordered this and your Manipulation Act DVD.

I cannot wait for them to arrive.


Thanks,
Mike

Wilfrid Jonson's book is great! What a great selection of photographs of contemporary magicians, too!

This wasn't the first magic book I read (thanks to my grade school and public libraries), but it was the first magic book I ever owned. I got it when I was ten years old, and I still have it. It is indeed a gem.

Whit, I'm not sure why, but it tickles me that part of your Teleportation Device routine comes from this book.

Whit,

I still have my paperback version from my teenage years. It is still one of my favorite books.

David

The strange thing about the Dover edition of the Wilfrid Jonson book is that, at least for me, I enjoyed the photos more than the tricks in the book. There was, though, one great idea about using an elastic and fishing line up the sleeve for a magnetic knife or wand effect. Years later I saw Jimmy Ray use a similar principle for a rising card routine where the deck could be handed out for examination after the selected card rose.

----- Sonny

Sonny, I used that idea in my youth, to 'magnetise' a c/changing cane, before going into the c/change. Great idea - now I know where it came from.

Just to put this thread back on track, Levent's M/Balls dvd is fantastic. It will remian in my library for as long as I draw breath.

Regards,

Dave

Hi Dave:

I just saw your post and I am truly touched by what you wrote!

Thank you!
Levent
http://www.LeventMagic.com

Levent, I had been eagerly awaiting the release of your dvd and bought a copy at Blackpool last week. Having watched it through (just the once so far!) I'm very impressed. It's a dvd which somehow reminds me of reading a well referenced encyclopedia, with an engaging editorial voice accompanying the text. I don't remember watching a magic dvd quite like it.
It's got me quite excited, hopefully I can add some flair to my manipulation work.
Might I say, it's was extremely good value. I was surprised how cheap it was...obviously I'm not complaining!
I enjoyed seeing your act in the opera house but unfortunately arrived too late on the Friday to catch your lecture. I don't suppose you're planning on coming back to the UK any time soon?
Neal.

Levent. It was good to meet up with you in Blackpool. Thanks so much for your lecture (sorry it took time to get the sound right)and for your performance in the Sunday Show. (and, of course, for your Billiard Ball DVD's - essential viewing for anyone interested in "The Billiards")I shall pass on your regards to my good friend Dave Andrews when next I see him.
Best wishes,
Brian Sefton.

That'll be Fleetwood, then Mr S.

Looking forward to it.

Dave

Hi Brian:

It was great meeting you in Blackpool, thanks for all your help and for introducing me to the pleasures of "Poundland" and "Gregg"!

Neal:

I'm glad you enjoyed the DVDs! At present I have no plans to return to the UK, but will be in France later this month.

Best regards to all,
Levent

Levant, I bought your DVD at Blackpool and love it. It has taught me several new moves and routines that will help my own routine develop.

But, I will say that your single 'chapter' on change over’s was not enough. There are many change over’s that I know off, and ways of showing both hands empty. I use them in all my Billiard balls, thimbles and coin manipulation routines.
The reason I use them is simple, when working a comedy club or to teenagers who are willing to heckle you, someone will always shout out 'It’s in the other hand'.

When you perform to music, you can avoid this situation because it is not the right environment for them to shout, but I work real world gigs and it doesn’t matter how clean your vanishes are, it all comes down to where the ball was last.
A spectator knows it has not vanished, it doesn’t take much to think 'well it’s not in that hand, so it must be where it was a few seconds ago, the other hand!'
In a music routine, they might not have the chance to say it, but they think it for sure. This ruins the magical value of an act and turns what you are doing into a form of juggling; i.e. interesting to watch, I know your using sleight of hand, but I'm not fooled'.

Convincers solve this problem. By showing both hands empty, you are changing the line of thinking in a spectators head because they have seen both hands empty. If you do one near the start, it changes how that spectator sees the act from that point forwards so that later moves can be done without as much questioning, or the need of convincers. But you still need to show both hands empty at least’s one time in an act to turn the routine from juggling to magic.

Don’t get me wrong, they can be overdone. You only need one or two to set a standard for the whole act and with a change of vanishing techniques, it adds just a little confusion in how it is all being done to work. But without them, ALL your vanishes were the same, it was in one hand, it moved to the other and vanished. You might fool a spectator once, but after the second time, they know where to look. Changes in vanishing moves don’t eliminate this problem.

As for changeovers and double empty handed displays. The two I perform the most is holding an object in finger palm, showing the invisible ball. With a billiard ball, this has to be angled perfectly to avoid flashes. But with a half flesh coloured ball, you get a little more leeway. You use the flesh coloured skin technique in your misers dream, why not use it in billiard balls as well? But ultimately, angling the hand correctly can do this.
But my main move is to position the ball behind the back of the hand and hold it there with the thumb of the other hand while showing both palms empty. It creates a nice clean image and stumps them.
There are many others, such as the ones you showed in the chapter. But that repertoire is immediately increased when you utilise topits and sleeving. These are other techniques missing from the set.

Anyway, I love the DVD and it has helped me with a couple of moves I was eager to learn and couldn’t find anywhere. But I don’t want you to discard convincers because they definitely have a place in manipulation acts.

Steve

In my opinion, if you're getting called on a move, it's too late for an acquitment.

And bare handed changeovers... really?

I guess if it's working for you, keep doing it.

-Travis

You have them in coin routines (wipe clean, muscle pass), card routines (elmsey, back-palm), thimble routines (thumb clip, back of hand palm show) and every other sleight-of-hand / manipulation effect there is.

When you have convincers for every other type of magic routine in existence, why should balls be any different? Especially when you using such a big object, its even more important because its easier to track.

Regardless on your thoughts about using them, the point is, an 'ultimate guide' should not have excluded them. He shows us many, many productions and vanishes which he never uses himself, why not convincers?

I would mostly agree with Travisb and add that because the ball is so big vis a vis other objects, (and 3 dimensional) it is LESS convincing in a changeover palm than a flat object. As Levent points out, a changeover palm without reasonable cover is probably not really a 'convincer'.

I think Levent left them out of the 'Ultimate' because he ultimately found them less than credible. I believe that Levent was using the word 'ultimate' in the sense of being inclusive of only the best ideas or of historical importance, rather than meaning to include everything ever done.

JNeal

The only time I use a changeover palm with a billiard ball is when I'm holding a silk in both hands by adjacent corners and the changeover palm is executed in the action of showing the silk on both sides. Thus there's a reason for the two hands to approach and "changeover." I then produce the ball from the silk.

Speaking of showing a silk on both sides, I think in Scarne's autobiography he mentions being in the audience of a magic show and going up on stage to assist a magician. The magician handed him a silk to examine, and Scarne did the bit of showing the silk on both sides. Later, after the show, the magician sought him out and, based on the way he handled the silk, asked if he was a magician.

----- Amado "Sonny" Narvaez

Hi Steve:

Sorry for the delay in my response, I have been traveling to a magic festival and only recently noticed your post.

When I created my DVD sets on the Billiard Balls and the Misers Dream, several friends had suggested that I use the word "Encyclopedia" in the title. I rejected that, because I was afraid that "Encyclopedia" would imply that they covered every Sleight, Gimmick, Prop and Routine in existence. And clearly that is not the case! IF these had EVERYTHING they would not be just 3 DVDs, they might be as long as 50 DVDs in which case I would be guilty of making people watch 100 hours of video to learn one trick

Also, I worked hard to provide the viewer with never before revealed material at what I believe to me a very low price. If I went beyond 3 DVDs the cost to the consumer would spiral out of control.

Getting back to the content, the way I go about creating these videos is first I spend a lot of time researching everything I can find on a subject. In fact the PDF files on these DVDs are well over 1000 pages long. I learn every move and routine and then I cull the moves and routines that I think are most valuable to the viewer. If there is a move that I personally do not feel is technically good, but IS historically important, I will include it.

I think it is important to note, that the title is "Levent's Ultimate Guide" and not just "The Ultimate Guide". These are highly personal works that exhibit my feelings and are essentially my thesis of a given trick. Being that all Art progresses, these DVDs cannot be the final word. My hope is that these DVDs give the viewer a strong foundational knowledge, that put the magician on the right track to explore these classic effects in their own way.

If you have theories that diverge from mine, that is perfectly fine. That is what Art is all about.

Best regards,
Levent in Antibes, France
http://www.LeventMagic.com