I'm thinking this is going to be impractical for an audience of about 100-200 people in a medium sized auditorium with a poker sized deck.

My thought is possibly to use jumbo cards and a bigger fruit, maybe a miniature watermelon.

Thoughts?

This is the type of effect that tells if you know how to be an entertainer. It takes handling of props, handling of the spectator, and showmanship.

Having a bigger card will not improve the trick or make you a better showman.

If you have the complete Tarbell Course, may I suggest you read or re-read and absorb the 1st few pages of each book. It oovers the things I have outlined.

Write out you patter and get you blocking for the effect. Take command of your audience.

I wasn't asking for a better trick. Please don't make assumptions about my talent or showmanship.

I've done this effect several times in parlor settings, but I would just like some thoughts on bringing this to the stage, not my personal ability.

n_n

Rockthemike,
While you may have felt offended by Wmhegbil's advice, it was concise and completely accurate. A larger card will not improve the effect as much as a more pointed presentation. Leipzig did a full stage act with regular sized cards and was most successful. Notably, he would have a committee onstage with him....to verify the various points and effects. This conveyed the intended effect easily to the larger audience. You might consider that as a presentational point.

Controlled lighting (whenever possible) such as a spotlight can help keep the attention exactly where you want it, as can other elements...found in Tarbell as well as other books. Billy Mc Comb has some good advice as well in his book: "Twenty Five Years Wiser". In summary, keeping the audiences attention focused exactly on one single point at each step in the performance will allow you to present a small effect with maximum impact....and allow it to play BIG.

All that having been said, I think it would be pretty interesting to see this with jumbo cards and a watermellon. showmanship & presentation would be key in either case, but if the audience can't see what is happening, they may have trouble getting into the performance.

Thanks everybody, including wmhegbli, for their thoughts.
Guys, I'm not trying to boost the effect, I'm only trying to make it visible for everyone.
I don't see why you have to question my showmanship when I'm only looking for thoughts on this presentation (again, in ordinance to the card being visible).

And Bill, that's exactly what I mean.

Rockthemike, this is the 2nd time I have offered you advice and help and you come back with anger and feeling attacked or put-down.

I therefore will not explain any further as you clearly do not understand what I have written.

So, I will make you happy and never offer my advice to you again. Sorry, for trying to help. By the way, if you read my post, I did not say, "your or rockthemike's Showmanship", I used the word showmanship meaning the undertaking of a presentation. I wish you well in trying to perform magic.

billappleton, yes from a magicians point of view that may be of interest, but for a lay audience, they are the same trick, card in fruit.

What I'm worried about is the torn corner. I want that to really pack a punch, but I think the power of it might get lost due to the size of the card. Since I don't have experience in this on stage, I'm just looking for your thoughts guys.

Watch david williamson on the worlds greatest magic from years back!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gCzTYrnOg-8

He does a trick similar to this but with his Rocky Racoon. You will see that visibility is not an issue.

-Brandon

How many thoughts do you need before it sinks in?? Or are you simply looking for validation? No one is making assumptions about your talent or showmanship, but I for one am beginning to question your understanding of them.

The success of the trick (any trick) relies on the visual image that the spectator has in their mind, not the visual image that they see just with their eyes. A volunteer's reaction and verification could sell a vanishing dime to the back row.

How do you think radio worked so well before television was invented??

The power of the torn corner will not get lost. It is the reaction of the spectator finding that the corner matches that evokes the required audience response, not the audience seeing for themselves that the corner matches.
Even if you use Jumbo cards most the audience still will not be able to see that the corner matches exactly and those that do will think you just somehow switched it out.
If you want a truly powerful card in anything routine get yourself an Intercessor as this allows you to have a nearly perfect non corner switch routine.

Thanks guys. I guess in a way I was looking for validation, but I did want to hear your guys' thoughts as well.

Do they make a 'Jumbo' Intercessor - <== note laughing emoticon, meaning this a joke - <== note explanation of emoticon -

Hey Mike,

For years I performed Card In Orange from the stage and it's just as baffling as it is in the parlor setting.

The watermelon idea from Bill could add to the novelty of the effect.
Or a goat. WoW!
;-)

Thanks Bruce! I'm sure I'm gonna use regular cards now, which is good because I don't have to buy more jumbo sets LOL

And btw, the watermelon idea was mine

Thankfully you understand what others were trying to say, I'm glad this thread is now heading in the right direction.

This trick can be performed in front of hundreds of people and play well, ya just hafta know how to play it big. Card in Orange is one of my favorites, it's hard to not love the classics.

The torn corner method is one of my favorites, I have a method I'm partial to using which requires no expensive gimmicks nor duplicate cards if need be.

Think of it like a David Blaine Special..

the reaction of the audience member on the stage with you.. looking at their card.. and the corner match.. will sell it to the rest of the audience..

Some of the new video demo's hardly show the effect at all.. they just show reaction shots to sell the trick.. This is frustrating to those of us who want to know what the effect looks like.. but it's a gREAT SELL to other spectators.

That's actually very telling for the state of TV magic... The title of most any magic show could be, "Spectators react to the Magic of (insert name of magician here)".

The kinds of demos that you speak of are flying in the face of what they purport to do. Demos were originally intended to show the trick so the potential magician customer could actually see what they were going to buy. The initial reason was noble in light of how worded descriptions had degenreated to the point that they didn't exactly lie, but they were becoming very good at shadowing the truth. Words were used to distract the buyer away from the trick's inherent flaws.

Video that shows minimal aspects of the trick but focuses instead on the emotions it creates, is as much a disservice to the buyer as TV ads that suggest that if you buy "our brand name product", you will be surrounded by a fun and sex-filled lifestyle.

"Buy this magic trick, and you will become a mysterious, social god."

Of course this kind of advertising works because people are narcissistically stupid and prove every day that P.T. Barnum was right.

But back to the main point of this thread, knowing how to use such spectator reaction will sell the trick to the audience in much the same way that such reactions are being used to sell pre-packaged miracles to instant magicians. We are marketing BS and hokum to the audience, interpreted as an entertaining experience.

Understand the tools... ALL the tools, and use them for best result. Although I love and respect stage magic and grand illusion, I cannot deny that I have heard MANY, MANY times from spectators that they feel close-up magic is so much more "magical". So, if you can get that kind of reaction from one person on stage, let their reaction speak to the rest of the audience. It is more contageous than many of us realize. They will believe the validation given to something if it comes from one of their own who is fortunate enough to view things at close range, far more than they would believe their own eyes viewing something they themselves can see from a great distance.

For me this thread is a back-and-forth between the advantages of a classic version, and what rockthemike is thinking of, which I see as an innovative new way to try this. the whole watermellon angle might end up as really funny, or at least really messy, and may lend itself to yet further innovation or discovery.

seems like lots of the new stuff is really old stuff repackaged or jazzed up in some way, like bubble gum recombobulator or powerball 60, etc. so for me I would rather try to be innovative and fail than stick to a classic formula that is guaranteed to wow the audience.

Innovation is not a bad thing. But, innovation with intelligence through study and education is better. The Darwin Awards are largely based on innovations incorporated otherwise.

In magic, failure resulting from tweaks to classic formulas most often happen when the tweaker doesn't really understand why the classic is a classic. They simply see it as "the old way of doing something".