|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5..16~17~18 [Next] | ||||||||||
vinsmagic Eternal Order sleeping with the fishes... 11027 Posts 
|
Werner seitz was a mater at this .....
|
|||||||||
fonda57 Inner circle chicago 3104 Posts
|
What makes it deceptive? You do. If you don't then you flash.
|
|||||||||
harris Inner circle Harris Deutsch 8834 Posts
|
....and sometimes it is a flash of silver or copper...or the spectator' mind/perception that makes it edible ....or credible.
Anyone keep their thumb between the coin and the hand receiving the coin? Harris looking for food for thought in coin magic
Harris Deutsch aka dr laugh
drlaugh4u@gmail.com music, magic and marvelous toys http://magician.org/member/drlaugh4u |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27464 Posts
|
? Where did you get the detachable thumb update?
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
harris Inner circle Harris Deutsch 8834 Posts
|
A credible edible transfer.....priceless and gets 2 thumbs up....
and other random thoughts from Dr. Laugh ???? see pm to J.T.
Harris Deutsch aka dr laugh
drlaugh4u@gmail.com music, magic and marvelous toys http://magician.org/member/drlaugh4u |
|||||||||
boydy Special user Ayrshire, Scotland 884 Posts
|
For great examples of deceptive false transfers watch Ross Bertram's coin effects. They still baffle me to this day. I do not intend learning them.
Also this by Mike Gallo. He makes excellent use of the Ramsay subtlety while using a wand in his coins and cylinder and a great convincer at the end. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v2nclJZZe2w |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6737 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-18 07:27, Jiceh wrote: Your analysis/description is totally relevant IMHO. This is called a "feint" and used to be the basis for magic. Actually the master who nowadays has done the deepest search on the type of feint that you describe is Al Schneider. And Al is very good at explaining it in details and his book "The Theory and Practice of Magic Deception" gives it proper consideration but it's in his "The Al Schneider Technique DVD Set 1-4 and in "Al Schneider's Magic" that he supplies the "how to" do it properly. Al's work is essential in the way he leads us to be aware, as performer, of the strength of such feints. Now if we get to the very end of this, we cannot do a feint for every sleight in a routine. If we take what you suggest to the letter, we would have to do this for example at every step of a cups and balls routine... It's too heavy and the repetition would become over proving and we shouldn't, as Al Baker used to say, "run when nobody is chasing us". This is probably why Al Schneider suggests to initially follow the procedure you descrive so as to "establish your gestures" (the ones used later on during a false transfer) as legitimate. But once the gesture is established, the feint that you describe becomes unnecessary. In Transit Actions however have to remain as the guiding misdirection principle at every step following the initial feints.
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Yes, you don't have to use the process each time you use a sleight...and you musn't.
Once the magic atmosphere is created (and accepted by the spectators), the method can be more direct because real magic is simple. But in order to keep the impossibility aspect of the act, you have to combine methods...and we, magicians, have a lot of tools to do this... But above that, we have to structure the effect first(the method comes far after that). We must spend as far time on the method as in designing (structuring) the effect. This is missing in a lot of routines. Curiously, it's the effect (and not the method) which create the impossibility because effect simulate the real and create the illusion. Method is the way to realize it. |
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Lawrence
Great post and topic Very interesting! |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27464 Posts
|
It helps to start by having a sufficient answer to "what are you doing transferring the coin from hand to hand" that works for your audience and does not include "i have to do a sleight now".
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-28 14:47, Jonathan Townsend wrote: I disagree but just a litlle bit. In fact, "transferring the coin from hand to hand" is most of the time used because we need it for the method. I prefer starting "designing" the effect and its inner structure (dreaming the effect). Asking myself "what are I am doing transferring the coin from hand to hand" comes far after because it is about method... |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27464 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-28 15:00, Jiceh wrote: If you want your audience of magicians to admire you sleight of hand - that works very well. "is most of the time used because" ( don't know better?) Try this instead as a guide: Actions the audience can see are for the audience - so they can better see what you are showing them. And a corollary to keep folks out of trouble  : Whatever methods you use to please yourself are probably best kept at home and used in private.
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
I never do tricks for magicians
Actions the audience can see are for the audience : Yes, I think it is a better rule They don't have to see you transfering a coin from one hand to the other. They just have to known without a doubt where the coin is (when whatvthey believe isn't the reality, it is because of a false transfert, for example). For example, in a four coin dispartition, if you combine method (false transfert, shell, one behind priciple, lapping) in a 3 phases routine, it is very difficult for them to remember that in one phase you transfer the coin from one hand to the other. Just a thought experience because I don't recommend using this procedure. |
|||||||||
|
Lance Pierce Special user 878 Posts
|
Re: the scientific research linked earlier:
If researchers somehow believe that observers interact with anything on video the same as they do with something live and right in front of them, I just don't know what to say. It seems quite obvious that you can occlude the face and head on video all you want, but having the person in the video standing before you and talking to you is an entirely different thing. One coin vanish on video, divorced from the context of a routine or a presentation, reveals practically nothing. In controlling the conditions of the experiments so they can see specific results, they have to strip everything away from the magic except the mechanics, but the effective performance of magic is and always has been primarily a psychological endeavor; here, "psychological" meaning the manipulation of assumptions and expected outcomes. Until researchers come to that understanding, they'll never come close to figuring out what we're doing. |
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-29 11:31, Lance Pierce wrote: I don't think they made such an error. They simply seem to analyse only one aspect (angle) of the false transfert. They "isolate" that aspect to understand its components. Obviously, their procedure is entirely different from what magicians do and use... |
|||||||||
|
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27464 Posts
|
Have a look at the early studies of the visual cortex and feature detection for some context. (Hubel and Wiesel)
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
|
Lance Pierce Special user 878 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-29 12:59, Jiceh wrote: I never said it was an error. I suggest that what makes a coin vanish work well and consistently is the context that surrounds it and not just the mechanics of the vanish itself. In fact, a vanish that relies only on technique and nothing else tends to undo itself as soon as the hand is shown empty. Successful and effective magic is an application of psychology, not moves. Or, stated another way, moves in magic work well when they support the psychology of the deception. If any researcher wishes to understand how the mind can be fooled in such a way, the focus needs to be on chains of assumptions and not movements of the eye. |
|||||||||
|
Lawrence O Inner circle French Riviera 6737 Posts
|
Lance, what you are saying is music to my ear
Magic is the art of emotionally sharing live impossible situations
|
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-30 01:10, Lance Pierce wrote: I agree. You're right |
|||||||||
Mb217 Inner circle 9674 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-30 07:16, Jiceh wrote: Me too, I agree with the deeper dive here by Lance. I would only say that as a practical matter, the "chains of assumptions" made by the discerning spec's mind, plays out as the "movements of the eye." It's how we can see the mind working on the matter. 
Similarly I think, it is true that you cannot see a speeding bullet, but the mechanics behind it being shot and hitting something are the immediate realities we can begin to perceive, rightly or wrongly. The rest must be deduced as to movement and relative eventualities. If the gun is pointed a certain direction and shot, the spec's perception (chains of assumptions) begin from there (even if it was only a blank). I'm just sayin'. Good talk.
*Check out my latest: Gifts From The Old Country: A Mini-Magic Book, MBs Mini-Lecture on Coin Magic, The MB Tanspo PLUS, MB's Morgan, Copper Silver INC, Double Trouble, FlySki, Crimp Change - REDUX!, and other fine magic at gumroad.com/mb217magic
"Believe in YOU, and you will see the greatest magic that ever was." -Mb
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » What makes a false transfer credible ? (7 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5..16~17~18 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Sep 25, 2013 04:33 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2026 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.05 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 < 
|