|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
usa Regular user 183 Posts |
100% agree with truthteller, also I use internet to check out new effects, I do like technology that lets us see before we buy on-line.
Do I only buy tricks that fooled me even after several viewings? NO Do I buy routines that suit me, will play well for me or I see potential in them (stuff I can change maybe)? YES, and that doesn't change if I know the method or not, I will still get them. Example of this would be me running to the store and getting color monte the very next day I watched it performed on certain website. And that was AFTER reading many if not mostly bad reviews of this effect on this very forum. I knew more or less the method, I liked the potential of this effect and I got it and I'm glad I did. Just trying to fool me into buying an effect I can't use is bad strategy, you may get my 15 or 20 bucks and adios muchachos (just don't spend it in one bar, make it last) Also it's harder and harder to fool people thanks to the technology (ironically) that lets you fool them in the first place. |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
As a performer, my audience will see this trick from beginning to end. I want to know what it is they will be seeing, not just a couple of highlight moments which may or may not be the trick's saving grace. I need a better idea of what I'm buying and the current demo video does not provide that.
|
|||||||||
Steven Leung Inner circle found the Magic Rainbow after 1614 Posts |
Well, if a full length performance with Blaine styling wired levitation film editing, that simply means... it is not practical in real world, just like Matrix 2003.
Regal's sudden deck with full length performance video clip do not give me any clue, that is a perfect example what is a demo video clip is all about.
Most memorable moment - with Maestro Juan Tamariz & Consuelo Lorgia in FISM Busan 2018.
"Being fooled by a trick doesn't always mean they are having a good time" - Homer Liwag https://hhpresents.com/ https://www.glitchstudiohk.com/ |
|||||||||
Steve Hook Inner circle Raleigh, NC, USA 1266 Posts |
Quote:
On 2003-09-09 19:27, Steve Hook wrote: Teller and usa: I guess you guys didn't read my post, which explained why a vid is not always a good idea or fair to the inventor. Otherwise there wouldn't have been mention of equating it with a demo in a shop. Apparently taking the time to write a thoughtful reply to you won't get serious consideration in return. Nor did the reviews Sean, Shaun, Eebie, and Lithus wrote. Oh well.......
Like Bonnie Raitt said, "I miss Little Feat more than I miss being 8 years old." Thanks for the concerts + recordings, Lowell, Richie, and Paul!
|
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Steve, I did read your post.
I just think you are wrong. However, if you had read my post, you would have read the part where it said that many of us are interested in demo vids NOT becasue we need to be fooled, but so we can evaluate whether or not we feel the effect is workable by us. In the current video all we have are a couple of magical changes to go on. The rest of the trick could be doo doo. Your post seems to imply that the trick would not withstand the scrutiny of something closer to a real world demo or else the inventor would have chosen to do so. It makes me think he is hiding something, that the trick is not as good as it could be. If I think he is hiding something, he will not get my money. As an inventor trying to make money, I think realizing that a large portion of your customer base believes this might be of market interest. As to your claim that close up magic doesn't work on TV, I disagree. I was the production assistant on the entire ETM money series and not once did we have to "cut out" a performance section to hide a move. If the creator needs to use a 2 camera shoot and use a well placed closeup, that's fine. If a quick fold needs to be done off camera, just drop your hands. At least I as a consumer know that there is a moment I need to cover. As it stands, all I know if that a couple times quadrants of the back of a card change color. As someone who spends years looking for the right effects for my repertoire, this is not enough for me to be assured that the entire "trick" is of the quality I require for performance. I mean, you have to admit Steve, that right now the information provided is absolutely minimal. As to reviews, I will say this, without intending any offense. The reviewers you have cited have no history or credibility with me. (Except for Sean Fields, wasn't he the one Regal blasted about using a video cut to hide a move in HIS demo??? And Eebie who spoke highly of Vincenzo Ravina's latest release. All of Ravina's work was panned recently in the Linking Ring review section, on the Channel one forum, and by myself on mylovelyassistant. So if eebie thinks Ravina's material is quality, I think you can see my reluctance to believe him in this instance.) I do not know these gentlemen's knowledge of the history of our art, I do not know what their performance experience is, and I do not know what caliber or style of a performer they are. All of them could be Blaine clones and love the trick because of the flash and trash of the video. Also, I think Steve you know of as many stories as I of "friends" of inventors reviewing tricks on these boards. (Not saying that's the case here, but again, without that information reviews have little value to a critical reader.) Your assertion that a video is unfair to an inventor is simply without basis. If the inventor intends to sell his product, then the customer base needs enough information to make a decision. We have yet to be provided that. If this was a trick he was just putting up to show, let him use all the editing he wants. But to sell and the customer should know the requirements of the full routine. (Imagine a killer rubberband video demo. All you see are these amazing shots of a rubber band linked to a ring in the most fair of grips, but you never see the "Get in" or "Get out" of those grips. Now you buy the DVD and the work is HORRIBLE. I mean it looks like your playing cat's cradle with yourself for 6 minutes before you can get to the point that was shown on the video. Is that fair to the consumer? According to your argument it would be fair to the inventor.) And, once again Steve, so your reply can be as thoughtful as mine, let me reiterate that we as customers do NOT "have" to be fooled in order to recognize the value of a trick and desire to purchase it from its creator. We just need to know we are not getting a piece of unworkable trash with two or three visuals peaking out of a mess of cluttered handling. Looking forward to your thoughtful reply, Steve, Truthteller |
|||||||||
Sean Fields V.I.P. Winnipeg 894 Posts |
Well, I wasn't going to chime in on this one, but...
I agree truthteller, that the Color Fusion video is minimal, you really don't see a whole lot of the effect. I am quite sure Mr. James did this to show the audience reaction to this effect. In reality, he is hiding very little, if anything in the demo video. In 'Simple Fusion', there is NOTHING to hide, a card is chosen, folded, a corner torn out, the card changes color. In the 'Complex Fusion' part of the demo, he shows what most magicians are interested in, the actual effect. He does gloss over the selection and signing portion of the routine, but really, is watching a spectator sign a card entertaining? Moreover, does it REALLY affect you, and your choice to buy (or not buy, for that matter) the routine? Do not think that I am coming at you 'guns a blazin' in particular. I DO agree with you that the demo video should show more of the effect, and less audience reaction. Really, all you see in the video is the changes from 'Complex Fusion'. It would have been nice to see 'Simple Fusion' in its entirety. I do believe that there has to be a balance in a demo video. I do think the consumer should get an honest viewing of the effect, but I also believe that the creator should watch out for their best interest. Unfortunately, not all of us are as ethical as you, I, and everyone else on the Café ( ). There ARE those who watch videos over and over again to save themselves a couple of bucks, and there are far more of these people (I refuse to call them magicians) than most of us would like to admit. The worst thing is these people learn the effect from watching the video, and go and show all their buddies. That hurts the creator, the success of his effect, and magic in general. In some instances (Sudden Deck, for example), a demo video does not need the aid of 'camera misdirection' because even if you can see how it is done, you still have to BUY THE GIMMICK. That is a key point. Any effect that is essentially sleight of hand, or uses a simple gimmick that is easily made can, has, and will be pirated. Any effect that cannot be made will be bought. On a side note, I don't think David Regal 'blasted' me for using an edit. He didn't like it, as he felt is was unneccessary, but I did speak to him and explain that it was to adjust the camera, not to hide anything. The fact that I did omit a handwashing sequence was completely unintentional. Regardless, Mr. Regal still reviewed the effect in question (Flight 204) highly, which is really what counts, now isn't it? This was supposed to be a thread regarding Color Fusion, not the ethics of video demos. I, personally feel privelaged to have access to online demos. Good, bad, whatever. It wasn't always this way, and it doesn't always have to be. Take demos for what they are, DEMOS. A quick video to give you an idea of what the effect looks like. A lot better than 'hyped' ad copies, wouldn't you agree? The bottom line is this; Color Fusion does not have the greatest video. It doesn't show the effect that most people who buy the effect will be doing clearly. Nothing in Color Fusion needs to be hidden, as there is very little to hide. A new vid would be nice, but not neccessary. I own the effect, and think it is great. If you choose not to purchase it because you feel the video is misleading, that is understandable, but realize you will be missing out on a very unique, off beat effect. Sean |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Sean,
Perhaps my choice of the word "blasted" was harsh. I only know of your effect incidentally, and I cannot judge how much the camera edit helped/hindered/affected your demo. I'm just relating what was said in the Genii Magazine issue which to someone unfamililar to the workings of you effect implied, at least to me, something was ommitted. However, I will happily conceed to your statement of what happened. But here I think is the crux of the issue. You write: "He does gloss over the selection and signing portion of the routine, but really, is watching a spectator sign a card entertaining? Moreover, does it REALLY affect you, and your choice to buy (or not buy, for that matter) the routine? " And I say, maybe. Now hear me out. You tell us that it is merely a selection and signing, but as a potential purchaser I don't know that to be true (from the video). There could be an awkward handling of the card, there could be a weird folding process, there could be many things that would make the trick a piece of doo doo. A lot of work could be left out in those cuts, work that could be left out becasue it is non deceptive. (And the same is true of each transition between the visuals shown. As a creator yourself, Sean, I'm sure you realize that the transitions are sometimes the most difficult part of any trick struture.) I chimed in on this forum not to blast Color Fusion, which I sincerely hope is a great trick, but to offer a suggestion to the creator of an effect which seems to be receiving a high degree of skepticism (for various reasons including an association with previously disapointing projects). I contend, that had the video been more forthright, he could have salved at least some of the burn left from Matrix 2003 et al. And yes, you hit upon a very important point. There are too many people who would try to rip off this effect by reverse engineering the video. Of course, these are the same people who would have no compunction swapping the file, or just tipping the method to their buddies, or even putting out a minor variation in their own name. (Interestingly eebie was defending Caffeine Rush, which is a knock off effect. I cannot rely on his review of Color Fusion's originality in effect or method as he has established that his ethical worldview is slightly more free than mine. A clear demo video and I can judge if this product meets the requirements I feel should be in place for originality etc.) I believe many people, like me, will avoid this effect until we see it live. We have been burned too many times with great descriptions and even flashy moments but have discovered an otherwise unworkable piece of pseudomagic. Those are lost sales. These sales could be regained with a clear demo video, assuming the trick has merit. The clear vid may or may not lead to lost sales from people reverse engineering, but I would beleive this would be less than the number of people you would gain from a clear video. After all, if we like the effect, its just EASIER to pay and get the real work, no? Further the people who are of the caliber to reverse engineer are the same people who would have no problem swapping the file it or copying it regardless. The number of thieves out there doesn't change. Only the method they use to steal. Just an opinion from someone whose been a part of the magic community for over 20 years. Take it for what its worth. |
|||||||||
HuronLow Special user 689 Posts |
I agree that many might feel not giving a full performance of an effect might be unfair. Some might justify that even if they do figure out the technique involved and such, they will buy it if it has potential. If only most magicians were like that. Sadly, many are not. One clear magician that has been victimised in that sense would be Brent Braun on his fantastic take on a CTW, Outside In.
What if you were the creator? Some magicians, after figuring out an effect, might still buy it, but the majority simply, will not. As for thrash you buy that might not be able to perform in the real world but look good with video edits, it's just your luck. No one really knows how good or bad an effect is until the reviews come out, and reviews come out only from people who bought it in the first place.You could have your full routine there, but practicality could still be hidden, or restricted limitations. We have to give magicians the benefit of a doubt, or no one would be satisfied. IMO, the color fusion demo video has shown us what we need to see, but not enough to let us figure out the exact moves he is doing during the signing process, or any other part of the routine. Without a doubt, this leaves us rather frustrated as magicians. Clearly, the video is impressive to many of us, or the effect and video would not be discussed to this extent. Rewinding, forwarding, and playing the video in slow motion will not leave us with the method, but will leave us one thing to do for those who are impressed by this visual delight. BUY THE EFFECT!!! -Huron
The T&R Project.
A revolutionary take on the Torn & Restored card. Available now at www.HuronLow.com |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Again, Huron, I disagree. I'm not left with a feeling of frustration. I'm left thinking he's hiding something and the trick is not good enough to withstand a real demo.
And by saying "It's just your luck" makes you sound like a con man. "Sorry kid, you lost on this one, how 'bout taking a chance on what's in this box?" It's this "take em for what you can" attitude that has caused many of us to be skeptical. And again, when it comes to reviews, these reviews need to be from people who are qualified in order to be effective. [For example, Shaun says that one phase was ommitted becasue to include it in the video would tip the method. Well, if it would be that obvious to us, how do I know that it wouldn't be that obvious to my audiences. Only by seeing it can I judge whether its a solid concept that would fly in the critical world of corporate entertainment (even if obvious to magicians), or if its another case of a magician deluding himself into believing this stuff actually fools lay people. My standards may be quite a bit higher than these unknown reviewers (though I'm sure great human beings)]. You also say, "No one really knows how good or bad an effect is until the reviews come out." Not true. I can go to a magic shop and see a demo and know right then and there. Provided the demonstrator doesn't make me close my eyes every time he has to hide a move. And I agree the video is impressive, but I can't say anything about the trick. I haven't seen enough of it. A couple of flashy moments does not a trick make. The editing is amazing. The video quality is outstanding. But the material remains a mystery and the creator will loose money until 1)a real demo is shown or 2)an established reviewer from a major magazine gives it the nod. Its his choice. |
|||||||||
Sean Fields V.I.P. Winnipeg 894 Posts |
Truthteller,
First off, I have to commend you on a few things. Your conduct in this thread thus far has been admirable. Many people simply get p!ssed off when their opinion is contested, and react harshly. You have been very diplomatic, and I applaud you. You have been a great example of professional conduct. I must also congratulate you on your use of the word 'doo-doo', funny word! On to the matter at hand. I know many people feel burned by Expert Magic's past offerings, and that has jaded their view, and increased their reluctance to buy another effect from Expert Magic. I have no affiliation with Expert Magic, other than that of a customer, but I do think that given time, and a few more reviews, the perception of Expert Magic will change, at least in regards to this effect. As far as video editting goes, many creators who put together demo videos get wrapped up in producing a fancy, well put together video, and sometimes lose sight of what is important, the effect. They are not always trying to hide something, but rather put together an enjoyable video. This is not to say that there are not those out there who use video to their advantage. Honestly, I would be more leary of an effect that DOESN'T have any sort of demo video, but has a KILLER ad copy, than one that has a highly stylized one (Braco's Floating Ball). Again, I just wish people would realize that demo videos are not a right, but rather a privelage. When I first started in magic, I had to buy most, if not all of my effects sight unseen, I didn't have the privelage of internet demo videos. Demo videos are a favor from the creator, to the consumer. They only have to show the basic effect, not the whole routine. Again, this is to prevent piracy, or simply for stylizing the video. I mentioned before that simple effects with simple gimmicks (such as Color Fusion) are far more prone to piracy and reverse engineering than heavily gimmicked effects (such as Sudden Deck). People HAVE to buy the gimmicked effects if they want to do the effect, even if they know how it is done. They do not have to buy the simple effect if they know how it is done, and this happens far more than any of us would like to admit. Sean |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Thanks for your kind words, Sean. Dittos to you.
Please do not take my arguements as a plea for mandating video demos. Rather, look at them as a suggestion for those who choose to offer video demos. If you do a video that clearly defines your product, it will sell. If you do a flashy video that leaves a lot to our imagination as to what we're really buying, some people will assume you are hiding something. If you can give us the flash AND show us the trick, money will pour into your pockets. |
|||||||||
Sean Fields V.I.P. Winnipeg 894 Posts |
Truthteller,
I know I am not an 'established reviewer', but I do feel my opinion/review on this effect should count for something. In my 16 years doing magic (I am not that far behind ya! ) I have seen a LOT of magic come and go. Both good and bad effects. Well known, and unknown creators. Especially in todays day and age of magic where any kid with an idea he thinks is orginal wants to release his effect, Color Fusion is really a 'breath of fresh air'. By the way kids, you don't get rich creating and selling magic tricks, believe me. Stick to performing, way more money there. I agree wholeheartedly, Truthteller. Style AND substance are equally important in a demo video. I just don't want people to take them for granted, and think they are entitled to a demo video. |
|||||||||
truthteller Inner circle 2584 Posts |
Sean,
I do not mean to disparage your opinion. However I know so little about you and your work that I cannot place your opinions in context. Mike CLose, I know who he is, his style, and can place his ideas (whether I agree or disagree with him), in context. Same is true of Swiss. I know Swiss is an arch skeptic and if he pans a coldreading/mind reading book, I know to take it with a grain of salt. And yes, there is more money in performing however it is in some ways harder work. I know many average performers who have gone the way of dealer/creator and have done quite well OFTEN SELLING SOMEONE ELSE"S MATERIAL WITHOUT PERMISSION. And its also often a matter of personal ego and a quest for fame than money. But that's another topic in itself. |
|||||||||
usa Regular user 183 Posts |
This all reminds me of an article in latest genii by David Acer "as seen on TV"
Read this sentence: "Fortunatelly, through the magic of televison......we had only to cut .... omitting the OFFENDING and EXPOSITIVE portion" ! Thank gods he is not selling this (in a way he is by way of comercials) but if he put this up for sale on a website he would have me believing this thing works in real world when it clearly does not. Would you blame me that if he did sell a trick by a video demo now after reading this I would be somewhat sceptical and asked myself: "what did you cut out this time?" |
|||||||||
Sean Fields V.I.P. Winnipeg 894 Posts |
Fair enough. I don't expect you to know who I am, I just wanted to point out that you and I both seem to have quite a few years behind us as far as experience goes.
I agree that some people do quite well selling other peoples effects without credit/permission. I do however, want to point out that there is a HUGE difference between a creator, and a dealer. The creator develops effects, and sells them to dealers, usually greatly discounted, and the dealer sells to the public. In all honestly, the dealer makes more money than the creator. As far as money vs. ego is concerned, you are right, that IS a whole other subject that could warrant a thread unto itself. For the time being, lets just stick with the subject at hand. It seems that we agree for the most part, but do have our differences of opinion in regards to some aspects of the topic. I think we can agree that the bottom line is Expert Magic would be wise to produce another video, one that shows more of the effect, and less audience reation. Sean |
|||||||||
Review King Eternal Order 14446 Posts |
Right on Sean!!! We have a Pro's take on this post now!!!
Expert Magic, are you listening??? Chris
"Of all words of tongue and pen,
the saddest are, "It might have been" ..........John Greenleaf Whittier |
|||||||||
nelly Regular user 122 Posts |
what about this for an idea.
They do a pre- view demo for say $5 that is just a straight forward uncut 1 to 1 performance. That way we can see it properly and if you decied to buy it you get your fiver back too. And if decied not to buy then your only a fiver down. Ta dar |
|||||||||
eggshell Regular user Chorley, England 146 Posts |
Can I chime in to say that there are a fair number of demos out there that just look like people are in their bedroom doing an effect to a cheap web cam and they don't impress me at all. Sean your C.R.E.A.M was done in the near dark (which it didn't need to be) and only the fact that I guessed the gimmick but was impressed by the technique got you a sale.
I agree with Truth teller that demos need to be very much improved. I tend to buy tricks (unless I know how they are already done and so have confidence in purchasing on-line) by going to my local magic store because the guy does a demo warts and all. If folks want to charge sometimes exhorbitant prices then they need to be prepared to put in a bit more effort to be consumer friendly up front. If doing a full demo means that people may guess the secret then frankly I am not sure it is worth paying money for and I sometimes think that a lot of reluctance in doing these demos is that any magician with a bit of experience usually recognises a variation on an already well known technique and realises they don't that effect. The place for that kind of variation is on some of the excellent compilation DVD's out there not as stand alon £30 tricks. Yes I am cheap , I know !!!
Visit my blog at : http://thewizardsball.blogspot.com/
|
|||||||||
emyers99 Inner circle Columbus, Ohio 4741 Posts |
I'm not going to weigh in on the demo video topic, but I do have a question about the trick itself. In the video, they show a spectator selecting a card and then folding it into quarters himself. Can this be done with the piece by piece color change or just the simplex version.
|
|||||||||
YousifS Regular user USA 194 Posts |
It can be done with both.
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Expert Magic : Color Fusion (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.09 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 < |