[/quote]

You must mean, "Off Broadway". Criss Angel never worked Broadway. Broadway and off broadway two different venues altogether. The Mindfreak show was originally planned as a off broadway show, but because of the revived interrest in magic which was created by David Blaine's t.v. specials, a t.v network took quick notice and Mindfreak, the t.v show was born. The reason for using camera tricks and special effects on some illusions was to keep things fresh and improving. Criss Angel, and I'm sure many others would have a hard time keeping their show fresh and original if they had to have a new episode/show each week. So yes, Criss Angel cheated, or whatever you call it. No one has ever accused a magician of being honest.

Criss Angel took advantage of magic just like Valentino did. The only difference is one did it by exposing illusions, and the other person did it by using camera tricks and special effects to create the illusion of an illusion taking place.

Bob, you're right on the money! Saying "camera tricks" is the modern-day equivalent of saying "it's all done with mirrors". It tends to be a fallback in lieu of the real explanation. As you rightfully noted it applies just as much to magicians as it does to laymen.

The issue might be that when someone gets the reputation of using editing or video trickery as the first option for a method, all of their other effects tend to be painted with the same broad brush whether they should be or not.

Gary, the "off-Broadway" discussion has been around the block so many times on here that I didn't want to bring it up again. I'm pretty sure that most everyone knows that he is New York run was in the basement of the old WWE building and was hardly a legitimate Broadway house.

To blame the rigors of a weekly show as an excuse for using video trickery just doesn't seem valid. Many have done it in years past very successfully without resorting to video methods. Yes it is extremely challenging and requires the efforts of great consultants and directors to pull it off. For me the honor in magic starts at the top. Mark Wilson was adamant about maintaining the integrity of what he did on camera. Sadly that same honor isn't always maintained by many in this generation.

These discussions are gone round and round with everyone having a very strong belief that opinion on them.

Sadly this thread is not about rehashing all of those old discussions. There are many other threads discussing whether it is right or wrong to use camera tricks, this is about "revealing" methodology to the lay public and to be fair it's not anymore right to reveal specific methods with cameras as it is to reveal cards slights or palming.

At least that seems to be the majority of thought in this particular thread.

I don't think I denied it was the majority supported idea here.

I would not support the idea of saying it for any particular trick,
as one would not necessarily be able to tell.
However, I don't think it is wrong to say that some magicians on television use camera tricks.

I don't understand why some "magicians" feel that they must tell their laymen friends (and those they'd like to impress) how any other performer does his effects.

For some reason, the contemporary philosophy seems to be, tear the other guy to build one's-self up. I can understand not liking another performer, or not liking what we perceive to be their philosophy or methodology. But bad mouthing someone makes you look as bad as the person you are talking about. As professionals we should act as professionals. Also, suggesting or confirming a suspected methodology doesn't just discredit that one performer or that one routine. you've just confirmed as an inside source that it is used; it could be used for anything and by anyone in their minds. I cannot tell you how many times I've heard, "it's done with mirrors" even for things that it would seem crazy to use one (like vanishing silk in tt).

I know it goes against our egos (it does mine) but if asked I say, "I just don't know.". If asked about a performer, "I heard he was very good", or "I'm sorry, I don't know much abou him.".

Tony

Magicians who don't bad mouth each other? Since when? We are notorious for bad mouthing each other, especially behind others back. Why so surprised by this? Magicians bad mouthing other magicians has been going on since you and I were in diapers. Stealing, lying, cheating are just a few negative things magicians are known for.

"the contemporary philosophy seems to be, tear the other guy to build one's-self up" Is that it? Eureka!!

"I know it goes against our egos (it does mine) but if asked I say, "I just don't know.". If asked about a performer, "I heard he was very good", or "I'm sorry, I don't know much abou him.".

As I said, we magicians are known for lying. We will tend to lie about any situation just to save our ego. But, what are we without our ego's? Are you seriously suggesting that magicians put aside their ego's for the biggest egomaniac in our industry?

No thank you, and I'll also say that if anyone chooses to mention it's camera tricks, that's not exposure anymore than telling people it was done with mirrors. Revealing a method, or exposing a method involves much more than just saying magnets, camera tricks, mirrors, etc. If this is a big problem for some of you, then it's your own problem.

An ego is very important to a magician. It's one of the reasons we get involved with magic. Not for the ego trip, but for thje attention we get. The attention we get is what gives us our ego. Some have bigger ego's than others, but to ask us to give up our ego's for a guy who has the biggest ego, no...I don't think so. I'm not giving up any of my ego for Chriss Angel, just aint happening. If I want to tear him down to elevate myself I will, but I don't only because Chriss Angel is a piece of you know what, and not worth my time. He is a disease to magic. I think all the laypeople who thought he was something should learn that Chriss Angel used a lot of camera tricks. That'll teach him and anyone else who chooses to devile our art with such nonsense.

***Above post is meant as satire***

I have no issues with Mr. Angel, and exposure is wrong.

Bob,
I thought I made it clear that I do not encourage pointing out a specific magician as using camera tricks,
only saying that camera tricks are sometimes used by magicians.

Who have I bad mouthed?
Nobody.
Unless you are suggesting that a certain someone is using camera tricks,
which apparently some think you shouldn't do.

I don't think there is any unspoken agreement that magicians won't perform illusions on stage.
I think there IS an unspoken agreement that a camera is a trustworthy method to show what a magician's trick looks like for someone actually there.
I do NOT think it is OK to call out a particular magician as using camera tricks.

As I think I've made clear before,
if magicians don't speak against that use of camera tricks publicly,
how can we expect them to stop being used?
Ultimately I think this DOES turn into an issue of whether or not a use of camera tricks is ethical.

Ethics? In an art form based on deception?
I'd say that as long as it is legal and entertaining, anything goes.

Tony

Criss Angel levitation vanish http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sAfA2NRSkZ4
Dynamo levitation in Sao Paulo http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xQIhpZ4PQdM
Dynamo hoodie vanish http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Iw3bxLDML0o

All the debates around modern TV magicians Dynamo, Cyril and Criss Angel these days should be gathered in one and unique question: Can post editing video tools be considered as a magic method?
Most old school magicians will immediately say no, camera tricks are not magic, magic has to be done live... your audience should see what live audience sees...

But on the other hand some will argue that for television, we should rethink how to present magic, because some classic method just won't work for TV

So is the use of camera tricks legal?
If we rethink the question, Copperfield "Floating Over the Grand Canyon" http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=quDXr3gJpgk should be considered as the first generation of CG video edited magic... so... if even Copperfield, the greatest magician ever, used video editing and camera tricks to accomplish some of his reputation makers effects, why are there so much criticisms toward Dynamo?
The question may not be "Can we use camera tricks?" but how much do we use? Or how clever are the ways we use them as a hidden tool?

"I don't think a magician should say anything negative about another magician to a lay person, ever."

As long as we close our eyes to low art, we will continue to have the low perception of our work that exists, lumping us in with children's performers and wannabees.

I'm with Pakar on this one. If the effects can't be done live and in real time, don't do them on TV. Pretty simple. Start doing magic that is more clever than contrived, and you will not only see a change in yourself, but a change in the world.

No shortcuts in art. The method should inspire as much as the effect.

The simplest solution to not talking bad about another magician is for magicians to stop doing stupid s**t that is erosive and bad for the art.

Televised abuse of the medium is the forbidden fruit that has poisoned our art, and it can never be reversed. The damage has been done.

The next step is to take a show like America's Got Talent or Fool Us, and simply get the 'judges' onboard to create a miracle that will be so impossible that the ratings are blown through the roof. No magician could EVER compete with it in a live performance.

From here on out, great magic can only be done live. And that's because of the lack of anyone at the top with the guts or character to stand up to producers and directors, and cut out the ego driven, hyped video editing tricks that pass for magic on TV. If you like that stuff, go see Harry Potter movies. Don't claim that you're a magician and then abuse the medium.

Thanks again to Pakar for having the character to raise such important character issues.

Jimmy Fingers

You're welcome Jimmy.

Just wanted to add my twopenn'orth. I do live magic and mentalism and I LOVE the reaction from being able to suspend reality for the audience for a few minutes. Even after years of doing it the wonder on the face of someone who has seen something IMPOSSIBLE still gives me a warm feeling. In the 12 or so years I have been performing there has been a noticeable increase in TV magic here in the UK and this has obviously had the beneficial effect of increasing people's level of interest in magic in all its forms. However the one down side (and it is a big downside) is that as the tricks on tv become more "impossible" due to post production techniques ( i.e camera tricks) the real magic that we do in their hands and in front of their eyes can be diminished as they say " yes you have somehow made the signed card that I tore into 4 reassemble itself and appear in my wallet but Dynamo ( or who ever) can do that and then disappear in a puff of smoke leaving only his coat. How does he do that?" I would never discuss how a magic trick is done by someone else and if I have any doubt as to whether it is a camera trick or not I would give the benefit of the doubt and just reply along the lines of " I don't know but its amazing isn't it?" but if it is obvious that what is shown on tv could not be done live and it is quite clearly a camera trick then I have no qualms about saying so. Special effects belong in movies and are not magic. They are interesting in their own right but I do not feel bound to keep secrets of an audio visual technician in the same way I do those of a magician. Stooges I have no problem with. I don't use them but feel that that is a matter for an individual performer. So long as the trick can be done in the same way live, then tv magic has a point. If not then it is just special effects and should not be confused with magic!

Hello, I'm not a magician but I hope my opinion is still valuable. I also hope my english isn't too bad.

I am 100% with the OP here and I would like to react on this, because it seems very important to me:

"this actual post isn't about whether or not magician should use camera tricks but whether or not we should reveal the use of those camera tricks to laymen"

Now I could tell a magician is talking. Jokes aside, it is actually of course all about using or not camera tricks should be considered fine or not. If someone use camera tricks on his show to make it viable then it's not longer a magician and then the magician code does not apply for him. As simple as that.

IMO it is exactly the same with magic abusing with stooges. There is actually a whole world between cheating and tricking and you should all condemnt those cheaters without mercy. Not hating talking, just what it seems to be the common sense.

I would end with this: I was until recently bored with magic because I was unable to detect at 100% whever it was a camera and stooges trick or a "legit" trick. Now I'm a bit more aware of how magic is done, the "legit" one still amaze me when I know the secret while the first makes me feel I lost my time when I could have just watch, as suggested before, Harry Potter.

I look at it this way. If one uses CGI or any type of digital special effects on a small level AFTER already establishing themselves as a reputable magician who can perform before a live audience, then I see nothing wrong with it. If one builds their reputation on using special effect, but can't generate the same excitement performing live, then they should never be referred to as a magician. They are just simply actors, and some of them are terrible actors and would never make it as just an actor, or as just a magician. I consider them to be the grey zone of the entertainment business. Not good enough to be successful as a magician who performs in front of live audiences, and not good enough actor to get a role on a soap opera.

I compare them to singers who use voice effects to make them sound better than they actually are.

Use a camera trick. Use a stooge. Use a pink elephant. Just don't get caught.

Also don't try to build yourself up by tearing others down.