You're completely right Falconer !!! There might be nearly no limits to our imagination...

Oliver.

Hi Oliver Ross

Is exactly like you said also: ". . .no limits to our imagination . . .

I have a huge collection of books on Big Illusions and I never saw this principle or this new combination in my books.I am delighted with this idea!!!

Falconer

I've just seen again Topas and still think he is using the "Op***** -sl**" principle, but slightly altered. And really, believe me, whith the original Steinmeyer's principle there are almost none angle issues

Also watched again Topas "One More" (speaker production) and for sure he is not using this principle, as was suggested before at this thread. It's more a matter of combination between a Wakeling/Zimmerman b**e and a clever, but not new, loading position.

Topas was using a similar system but not exactly the one described on the Steinmater's book ,

anyway the Topas version builded here in Europe ( I will clarify it was builded before that the Steinmayer 's book ) or the Quantum Mechanism system,

to me are not the best to be used even whit others illusions ,

I will explaine you why :

as example the Topas version ( where he used this system already as many here are thinking to use this system) has no sense especially speaking about all the total measurements,

I mean you need the top base plus ,

under you need few centimeters for the m?????? I mean the empty area plus ,

under this you have the loading area ( 20 cm ?),

and under you have few others centimeters for the m?????? number 2 ,

this has no sense to me,
totally the centimeters are more than a classic Table B..,

yes ,

you have the empty area between the loading area and the top base but totally the loading area seem to be bigger than a classic base because you have to place the m?????? number 2.,

this has no sense to me .

thanks.

The Topas illusion was designed by Jim Steinmyer and built by Willie Kennedy. It was the first time Jim used his new principle. He had built a small model of the concept months before that he showed me.

Thanks Mr. Dickens ,
well,
from what some friends told me ( they are also Topas friends) it was builded from an European builder but maybe the news can be wrong I don't know ,

this is not important to me now,

anyway ,

I think the problem still there ,

what is your opinion on my perplexity from the previous post?

thanks.

Very nicely made... Great principle BUT NO DRAMA

She's just laying there and visual effects happen. The problem, to me, is so many illusions are techniclly awesome but lack reason or presentation.

See how Orsen Welles or Richardi did their magic. Think plot, reason.

Pete, you should have read the first posst.

"I placed "performance" in quotes because this video was designed to showcase the illusion (which I had never before seen in completion)"

I took this to mean tht it was strictly a demo of the prop, which he kindly shared with us.

I look forward to seeing the full presentation in the future.


Blair

Anyway I must say it's a nice idea and well performed.....

Sorry to see you have not understand the concept. You should read again Steinmeyer's book.
And please this is for all, try to be a little less graphic with your explanations, remember this is an open forum, and most people don't know what are we talking about, ommiting some letters is not enough, someone could deduce the workings from your explanation.

Best regards.

Ok sorry Sorcer ,

but it's hard explaine the perplexity whitout describe a little bit what I mean,

anyway I know and I undestrand very well the concept ,

and frankly it's great especially used in that way ( I'm referring especially on the Quantum presentation I really like it ) ,

also I remember something similar ( done before If I remember as well) from Mark Parker , not the same but similar idea.



Anyway if you will ceck from the Topas version ( he already used this system in a different way as here someone dream to use ),



from that version you can understand better what is my perplexity,

to me it has no logical sense even if it's a nice idea and a beatiful prop,
but,

it's bigger than before .

In the plans in the book it is 9 inches in totall. It is NOT bigger. Sorcerer from reading your description it appears to me that you seem to understand part of it's working but not all. Besides this is the optical wedge. In his book he also describes the optical slot. I think you will prefer that.

Thank you for sharing Evans. I was waiting for a vid like this...

EVI

You guys are KiLLING me, YouTube says can't load movie???

Thank you Mr. Craig Dickens for the back up info. on the topas work, it is a gem. great use of the principles involved.

I will get this book. But isn't this the Fu Machu base concept that he used for his sawing illusion?

However, this looks to me to have some improvement because I see no difference in image brightness.

Jim

Yes it's the The Manchu concept whit some improvement.

James, this is founded in Bamberg's periscope concept, but is much improved. Another difference that should be clear to you is that the superimposed area is correctly aligned; that is to say, the image being "grabbed" corresponds correctly with the area it superimposes, unlike Bamberg's.

This piece is only one of many brilliant ideas in 'Technique & Understanding'.

Yes, I did notice that too! I kept watching to see misalignment but there wasn't any. Very nice! This base could be used for so many purposes! I can only assume there are electrical devices involved: additional light bulbs to lighten the image???

Jim

Hi Andrew Evans,

I just looked at your trailer and it was great to see some other Jim Steinmeyer pieces on it like 'Small packages' from Device & illusions and the 'three space mystery' from his book The conjuring anthology.
The only suggestion I have is to contact Mark Kalin to obtain the rights to use his 'Spiker illusion' and change the design because ,as it is now, you are exposing the method.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V7r_T2_1KUI&feature=related

Good luck with your magic,
Tristan

Very nice illusion! The principle behind it is amazing, and kudos to you for taking it from the printed page to the stage! I would love to see the full performance where the girl both enters and exits the box.

My only problem with this is not the illusion. Its the tag line you use at the end...Its strangely familiar! hmmm

Chad

ps check my signature...