|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8..16~17~18 [Next] | ||||||||||
vinsmagic Eternal Order sleeping with the fishes... 11033 Posts 
|
A real false transfer is to make the audience believe you have a coin say in the right hand. then put this invivisble coin in the left hand , and wiggle squiggle or what ever so slightly
and make them believe you transfered a coin when you transfered nothing if you can do that then you would have pulled off a miracle,i could do this |
|||||||||
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts
|
Let's see a video of it.
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
Michael Landes New user 76 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-16 07:18, Jiceh wrote: I in no way intend to disagree with you. However, I have an anecdote worth considering. I have seen VERY few false transfers of any sort that I have found convincing in the least. However, I had a friend for many years who was an exception. Back in the late seventies he met Sigfried (of Sigfried and Roy) and he asked my friend if he would show him something. My friend DID A FALSE TRANSFER. PERIOD. It was, in fact, a particular ROV, but the point is that it was a simple false transfer of a coin, devoid of any context whatever. He didn't even bother with a clean-up. He stayed dirty and just showed his left hand empty. Period. And Sigfried's eye's widened and he admitted he had NO IDEA what had happened. This did not surprise me at all. Magicians in particular are so used to lousy false transfers that don't convince, that a sufficiently well executed one will fool magicians easier than lay people, as they assume a fake transfer could not be so convincing. My friend would never have done such a thing for a lay person. But with a magician he was without fear. |
|||||||||
|
Michael Landes New user 76 Posts
|
I'm sorry. I'm not sure I was clear in my anecdote. Sigfried did not suspect that the coin remained concealed in my
friend's right hand, even upon reflection. |
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-17 14:18, Michael Landes wrote: Maybe Sidfried was not specialized in close-up and even if he knew the false transfer concept, he was not very well versed in retention vanish... It's natural for a magician to suspect the other hand in a false transfer even if the illusion is perfect |
|||||||||
Mb217 Inner circle 9688 Posts
|
Well, I know you don't like "challenge" Al, and pretty much take exception with anyone that disagrees with you or do not use you as a direct reference to most things in coin magic.
And yes, I applaud what I said and gave example of here. Did you at least find something of worth in that?  As to my magic, well, I'm definitely not completely cut from the cloth of your royal robes but I do pretty good, and will just continue to play the cards I have to the success and happiness they've shown me, and keep sharing the wealth with others here that might better appreciate things I've done.
I gotta tell'ya, I'm sorta glad I'm not exactly what you seemingly believe I (and most others here) ought to be, to be considered worthy, but I do respect your opinion, especially when you look so deeply into my eyes to see so much and so little all at the same time.
*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 
|
|||||||||
nicolasmtg Veteran user Argentina 379 Posts
|
Well mr Shneider, you claim that you don't like to challenge but you are challenging the guys over here
I think you dunn have to fight guys, magic is our passion and as that each of us have put diferent thoughs on our magic . Remember that this is an art and in ART the most important rule is RULES ARE MADE TO BreaK THEM
well hope this peace the waters
and as for the topic of the post itself I think that to succed on making a false transefer we need to aim to their brain and not to their eyes
--------Magician and director at NONTRICKS.COM--------
|
|||||||||
|
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts
|
My comments were not an attack. MB simply said he applies the things I was talking about. He did not specifically name them. My response was to point out that he does not apply them. Case in point here is a clip of him doing a trick.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sfso1HfDEj0 He clearly looks at his audience during the revelation of the effect. I do not. I am only showing a difference of doing something. So I do not think he shares neither my opinion nor what I believe. Yet he stated he did. I am pointing out that we disagree on what should be done. Apparently my pointing out that we do not agree is considered an attack. I find this most interesting. Who is not willing to change? Who thinks they wear royal robes? And nicolasmtg, it was not I that said that I did not like challenge, it was MB in his previous post that said, “Well, I know you don't like "challenge" Al,” Perhaps you would indicate where I said I do not like challenge. If you would look back in a series of posts MB and magiclaura blasted me for post after post about my inability to present matrix correctly. I accepted that for what it was. But that attack was merciless. No one came to my defense. That attack on the way I did matrix went on and on. I invented the trick and from what magiclaura and MB said it is the worst version that exists. I let it go. Now MB and you are attacking me. You owe me an apology. Al Schneider.
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
|
Mb217 Inner circle 9688 Posts
|
I like that trick Al, loads of people do.
It's one of my off-the-cuff Quickie Trickies. Thanks for re-posting it.
Sorry I didn't perform the way you would've but as you know Al, not everyone can do you.  More seriously though, I was actually presenting that to a camera, so my focus was toward it. If I had been doing it in person for an actual spec, it would've taken on a different nature. But I still thought it was pretty well done, to the beat.
And despite what you think here, you're not the only one that has talked about such things. Other people have talked about these things. I wasn't necessarily agreeing specifically with you, more so the string of/spirit of the discussion itself as to such moves, whys and hows. Also, I didn't mention your response to my post as any such "attack?" And I mentioned the word "challenge" because you did, you seemingly saw it in my eyes. I was simply responding to your way of seeing all this. And I never said that your Matrix was not presented correctly, never! Show exactly where I said such a thing? I dare you to repost it here so that others can decide if I really said such a thing about your work. I did say that I thought there had been some great improvements, new moves, etc, that had made the trick more than what it had been originally presented as. Basically, I thought there had been some good progressions on your basic work. Some agreed, some didn't. You thought it was perfect as first delivered and took exception with anyone that thought otherwise, that didn't agree with you, and I just told you so. And if I blasted you at all, it was more because of your arrogance and dismissive nature toward others. If no one came to your defense, despite all your wonderful magic, well, that should've told you something. Clearly you didn't get it. Never said that your Matrix was the "worst version ever invented," no sir, never said it. Again, show where I said just that? And I'm not attacking you, just not letting you say the sort of nonsense you like to so callously say to people, simply because you are "Al Schneider." Oh, and by the way, I don't remember Laurie ever being nasty to you the way you put it here, she's not like that, she is a lady but a game one. She will stand up for what she thinks and will not be bullied, ignored or pushed around by the larger boys club here. Good for her. Other than that, all due respect.
*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
|
|||||||||
|
vinsmagic Eternal Order sleeping with the fishes... 11033 Posts
|
AL WAHT WAS WRONG WITH MBS EFFECT,,,,, ??? Al if I put up a demo you would have a negitive comment..
all I know when I do it all I hear is from the audeence is gasps...... SORRY FOR THE CAPS some people talk the talk others walk the walk if one can do a good retention vanish then that is all it takes period ,,,,,,enough of the theory.... vinny |
|||||||||
|
Michael Landes New user 76 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-17 15:15, Jiceh wrote: Fair enough. So let me give you a second anecdote to make my point. This also happened with the same friend in the late seventies. He was working on his version of Expansion of Texture. I had watched him go through the sequence literally in excess of one hundred times. In his version he ended dirty with a half dollar concealed in his right hand. Always exactly the same sequence, which I knew by heart myself. Well, after seeing him go through it over a hundred times, one night, I stopped him when he finished. "What did you do?" I asked. "With what?" he replied. "Why, with the coin that's usually left in your right hand," I replied. He gave me a puzzled look and turned over his right hand saying, "It's in my right hand!" Please think about the above. natural handling trumps .............. everything. His name was Bill Whittington. Another friend of mine, Paul Chosse, would often for his amusement, tell a spectator exactly the method he was going to use. Exactly. Then he would say, "but I don't do it that way myself," and proceed to do EXACTLY WHAT HE HAD DESCRIBED. and the spectator was completely fooled. Natural handling trumps everything. |
|||||||||
S2000magician Inner circle Yorba Linda, CA 3465 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-09-30 08:51, landmark wrote: From the studies I've read, that's not what they're doing. They watch the ball as (and shortly after) it leaves the pitcher's hand, then shift their focus to the spot where they expect the bat to hit it. You're correct that they don't track it for the duration of its flight, but the inferences come from the start of its flight after it leaves the pitcher's hand, not before. That coincides with my personal experience (and a .597 batting average my last year in Colt baseball). |
|||||||||
funsway Eternal Order old things in new ways - new things in old ways 10309 Posts
|
Quote:
I have seen VERY few false transfers of any sort that I have found convincing in the least. I see this as challenge ;-) I have long envisioned making a video of 6-7 different Transfers against a modeled actual transfer of a coin. The challenge will be to identify which of the demonstrations are "real" and which are "false." Then, more information will be supplied and you get to go back and change your vote. Even with repeated viewings I would wager that no one will get all 6 correct. Is that "convincing" enough? Difficult to do with my crippled hands, but I will get back to work on the project.
"the more one pretends at magic, the more awe and wonder will be found in real life." Arnold Furst
eBooks at https://www.lybrary.com/ken-muller-m-579928.html questions at ken@eversway.com |
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-17 17:36, Al Schneider wrote: Al, you do the best version of matrix I have seen for the reasons you give in your DVD...and maybe because you invented it... Obviously, it's not a version for magicians but for a lay audience, it's really a great piece of MAGIC and MYSTERY. I don't like versions where the magic occurs at the same time that the method. Your version is just the opposite. Congratulations. I'm reading your book and it's a real pleasure... |
|||||||||
|
Michael Landes New user 76 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-18 07:06, funsway wrote: Hi. I'd like to start out by thanking you for the smiley face after your first line. Ego's can run so high around here it can, and does, hamper productive conversation. Second, I'd like to congratulate/thank you for taking my comments as a stepping off point for productive comments/criticism, and being willing to put yourself on the block, so to speak. For these reasons, I wanted to make some kind of response as soon as possible. I must say, however, that no, I don't think your suggested test/experiment would address what I mean by convincing. As to what would, I'll give this some thought and get back to you.
Meanwhile, here's another example of what I'm talking about: Back in the early nineties, Paul asked me to film him at his home. We lived on the West Coast. He had recently gotten close to Mr. Bauer, who lives in the Detroit area, and Ron had apparently requested that Paul make up a video of his diagonal palm shift for reference and for friends. Paul was only too happy to comply. I came over and set up the camera in front of a table and Paul sat down and set to work. There was no editing at all. He just sat down and talked to the camera explaining his thinking about the diagonal palm shift, which consisted almost entirely of "Do it as Erdnase describes!" As he chatted he illustrated his words by executing a half dozen diagonal palm shifts. Each time he executed the sleight he replaced the stolen card to the bottom of the deck and started again. He then detailed each of the three refinements described in the McMillen book. Again, as he spoke he illustrated his words by executing the work a number of times, each time replacing the stolen card to the bottom of the deck and starting again. So all in all he worked and spoke for perhaps 20 minutes without editing. He executed, in all, perhaps 2 dozen diagonal palm shifts or more. We reviewed the tape together and sent it off to Ron. A week later Paul told me he needed me to come over and re-do the tape with him. It seems Ron's friends thought the tape was a practical joke. They didn't believe Paul was doing anything. They thought he was just sticking cards into the deck! Paul's replacement to the bottom of the deck was as good as his diagonal palm shift. Since they never saw a card again once it had been inserted into the deck, there was no hard evidence that it had been stolen out again. They just didn't believe it!! That's an example of "convincing." The only change Paul made in the second attempt was to SHOW the stolen card before replacement in the deck. By the way, EVERYTHING can be improved.
Some weeks later, Paul was overjoyed to tell me that Ron had pointed out certain tells and had helped Paul eliminate them and that his execution was much much better now! |
|||||||||
magicalaurie Inner circle Ontario, Canada 3004 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-17 15:15, Jiceh wrote: Maybe Siegfried started with close-up and appreciates magic and its performers. 
My, my, Al Schneider talking about me? Interesting. Maybe some will look it up.
Maybe I'll provide a link. Here's one I recall: http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......&forum=3 |
|||||||||
|
Jiceh Special user France 742 Posts
|
Quote:
On 2013-10-18 14:40, magicalaurie wrote: Maybe Siegfried started with close-up...but it's not enough to be sure not to be fooled by a classical sleight. Just an assumption. |
|||||||||
|
Michael Landes New user 76 Posts
|
I'd just like to take a moment to refer to Mr. O's original post. His reference is to a small wonderful booklet called
Convincing Coin Magic (Farelli, 1946). Like all Farelli books it's a must. I don't know if it's available in hard copy but it's certainly available and cheap from lybrary.com. Highly recommended. |
|||||||||
|
fringeMagic New user Fort Worth, TX 33 Posts
|
The efficacy of a false transfer is not measured in only the moments immediately prior to and following the sleight; credibility is achieved in the seamless flow from cause to effect.
Quote:
On 2013-09-16 23:02, Curtis Kam wrote: No matter how short and sweet a performance might be, a magician doesn't walk into a group of spectators, execute a retention pass, and walk away. This study dismisses the usefulness of these subtleties to the mechanics of the sleight as if it were an isolated event; but, the conjuror isn't simply interested in convincing the spectator that he/she has moved or placed an object. On the contrary, the magician is melding this singular mechanical action into a series of similarly mechanical (hence uninteresting) motions to obscure the *actual* cause(false transfer) from the *perceived* cause(magical vanish) which is emergent from the intended effect. An odd analogy I use in terms of methodology is reductionism vs. holism, i.e., science(process) vs. religion(miracle); find a way to link cause to effect without obvious process and you have a miracle. [no offense intended, just the most direct way to conceptualize the relationship between sleight of hand & Magic] Even the simplest sleight of hand is rooted in complex *social* interactions; to magically effect a vanish, the cause can't be perceived as part of the false transfer. Any lapse or unnaturalness in the motions and social cues of the exchange will stand out; since it is natural to direct the gaze to an area or object of interest, and it's natural to swap hands or change stance to gesture with the dominant hand, or to make eye contact with an eminent spectator in the audience, etc. Therefore, multiple "layers" of misdirection are suited to the multiple layers of human perception. Practical redundancy (that this article seems to argue against) of conscious and subconscious social cues are not an added level of complexity but required levels of naturalness, preventing the observer from isolating any single action as the cause(false transfer) of a desired effect(magical coin vanish) |
|||||||||
|
Al Schneider V.I.P. A corn field in WI surrounded by 1080 Posts
|
FringeMagic
Very well stated. Most magicians believe that if it looks like the coin went over there, it is magic. In my move the mechanical motion has been reduced to a very small motion of the thumb. The real work is in what you call "complex *social* interactions" This is where the magic is. By the by, what is your background. For a table hopper the way you talk is unusual. I have a degree in physics and have studied human interacton a great deal. Magic is a small part of my world interests. Your words suggest that is true of you also. Just curious. I think others may be interested from where you get your thoughts.
Magic Al. Say it fast and it is magical.
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Nothing up my sleeve... » » What makes a false transfer credible ? (7 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8..16~17~18 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Oct 17, 2013 04:29 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2026 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 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 < 
|