Completely understood, hence why I talked about my pet coins across, which was an attempt to get the same ending of the Roth Super Clean Coins Across without the gimmick. I believe that's the same as his shell coins across you're referring to.

I just wanted to help steer the discussion back on track by asking rather than saying it's not the best, share your criteria for a good coins across along with an example if possible.

Very commendable to wish to inspire creative thinking. "Best" is subjective while "better" aways seems to lead to argument

for variety and help in deciding "best" or "better" there is an interesting coins across version called Almond Bothers in the upcoming TopHat Magazine.

It has a fun story -- then an alternative story on a Christmas theme. It used no gaffs and can be done with coins, nuts, candy, etc.

It uses a "one behind" approach and several sleights that may be new to readers, i.e. it is a three coin routine using two coins that move back and forth between the hands.
The audience thinks there are three objects in play -- which makes the final vanish very easy and clean.

Not saying it is the best coins across, just perhaps the best using that approach.

Bignickolson, I think this a very nice performance of a good trick. What I particularly like is that the trick has something other than the standard 'the coins are here, now one has jumped to here' type performances that we've all seen thousands of times. I believe the 'portal' presentation to be strong and interesting and could be expanded on with a little thought. Examples might include passing one of the coins through the table using the portal or the final coin through a spectators hand, perhaps even the portals could be more interesting, black discs or washers with holes in them etc (I know this changes the method but it is the presentation which interests me here).

Anyway, thanks for giving me something to think about!

All the best

Michael

I strongly disagree with the view of natural as presented by Vernon. I wrote a rough draft of an article on the topic if anyone cares to read it (I'll just share a link instead of clogging up this board with my ramblings).

https://www.dropbox.com/s/u5juj1wvnsuyd8......ocx?dl=0

I think describing the move done here as unnatural is missing the largest issue with it though. While it is unnatural, the bigger issue is the clutter of movements. One of the hardest things to do (in any form of communication (in the broad sense of the word)) is to cut out unnecessary bits and simplify as well as clarify every motion. This is especially important in terms of moves in magic. The more unnecessary motions you make during a move, the more attention is put on said move, and the more likely the spectator is to remember you doing that move, which is precisely what you want to avoid. When a spectator tells a friend what happened, you want him to say, "He had 3 silver coins in his hand and one by one they jumped to his other hand" Not, "he put 3 coins in his hand and then one by one they jumped to his other hand"

You talk about naturalness in the sense of your actions matching the supposed reality of what you are doing. I'm not sure if you're talking about the Hypergate (Stargate) routine or the other things referenced in this thread but to me your thoughts argue in favor of things like the pop up move. It may not be an "ordinary" motion which may be a better term than "natural" in this instance, but the motions perfectly match up with the supposed reality of displaying a coin and slowly showing it going into the other hand.

Could you clarify exactly what you are talking about when you say "clutter of movements"?

To quote ma91cm1ke (by the way, welcome to the Café Michael);

"the standard 'the coins are here, now one has jumped to here' type performances that we've all seen thousands of times" - as magicians, yes but to a lay audience.... No. That will be the first time they may have seen a coins across routine.

The presentation here is certainly different to the "standard" coins across, as is the handling, but once again who is your audience? Magicians. Lay public (non-magicians). Self gratification (in front of a mirror to please yourself!). Whichever is fine.

In terms of Stargate, may I ask the question - if you perform this effect, who do you perform it to please?

yeah, that was just in reference to the mention of Vernon's definition of natural.

On clutter - The overall action is putting a coin into your left hand. Looking at each action individually, you put the coin in a specific spot on your right palm, then you put the coin balanced on your curled fingers, then you pull the coin into your left hand. That's 3 actions to accomplish the 1 overall action. Even worse you repeat it for every coin, so to put 3 coins in your right hand, that's 9 actions when if you weren't doing anything suspicious you'd do it with just 1 action.

It's like in writing. If you're writing a short story and you add way too much detail that doesn't further the story or the theme of the story, the plot and the theme gets muddled. The hardest part of writing is figuring out what you can take out while leaving the story in tact.

It really does all come down to evolution. We have evolved not to waste energy, so we (as humans) wouldn't do more actions than necessary, unless we were trying to call attention to what we are doing. You want to communicate that the coins are the in the hand, not that you are putting the coins in the hand, so you want to minimize every action related to placing the coins in the hand, and maximize every action that indicates the coins are in the hand.

This explanation is too muddled (weird how everything seems to be related). There's a story Richard Feynman (my personal hero) would tell. He was asked to give a freshman lecture on Quantum Electro Dynamics (or something else equally scary sounding) and he said he'd be able to do it. When preparing it, he realized he wasn't able to explain it in simple enough terms. This didn't mean that the freshman weren't able to understand it, it meant that Dr. Feynman (and by extension everyone else in the world) didn't understand it well enough.

I need to understand this better to explain it well, I'll keep working on it, but does it make some sense?

Finally some one agrees with me that this is not natural smilennod I thank you
vinnby

NO

The pop up provides clarity. In most false transfers, the move must be done as a background motion. You cannot say look at this move to put a coin into my hand. That would kill it. In that sense, the move is muddled. And most muddle such a move by doing more moves in a basic false transfer than is necessary (from the point of view of the audience). In a standard false transfer one does not focus attention on the move.

In the pop up you can say and in fact do invite heat at every point in the move. Thus the move is not muddled but clarity is heightened by a factor of 100. When I perform this move in stand up, I hold my fist with a coin on top three inches in front of the helper's face. The audience sees the eyes of the helper watch as the coin sinks into the hand. This my friend is as strong as it gets.

I think what is going on here is that a good rule is being applied to an area where it does not apply. Some knowledge of the area is missing.

More study is required.

Simplymagicweb
This routine, Stargate, was designed to be performed for lay audiences. Here is the environment it is intended for. My goal is to stun the audience. To do this I use a specific kind of environment. I perform in an off site area, normally in a side room with a table and chairs set up in front theater style. An audience enters and sits through an entire show. Stargate is intended to be a level two feature of this show. It is somewhat like doing cards across in a stage performance. The audience's entire attention is focused on the presentation. As such, time is given to watching slow movements with lots of heat. And lots of time is devoted between magic events to allow the audience to follow the act.

This routine is not suited for a bar environment or a place where a waitress will put a sizzling steak in front of a customer when one coin leaps through space. AND, this trick is not intended to impress magicians.

At the end of one of my shows, the audience leaves the off site area babbling amongst themselves.

Too many people here ignore the thought behind all of this and lash out with inane statements.

Meh. I feel the movements required for the move don't fit the narrative of the effect without bringing along extra baggage in one way or another. I'm really not trying to be combative or argumentative, and I definitely feel like I'm giving the impression that I am due to poor wording on my part. I strongly suscribe to the idea postulated by Tommy Wonder (and probably many others before him, but it's the first real lesson I had in magic and it stuck with me after first reading the Books of Wonder) that if a spectator knows that "something" has happened, regardless of whether or not they have any idea what actually happened, then the effect has been cheapened.

I think of Dai Vernon in this (https://youtu.be/Hfyjpvp-ads?t=207) video which looks just perfect, but leaves me with a sense of unease while he's doing the actions. If he were to do the actions for real, he would pick up the balls, one at a time with his right hand and place them into his palm up left hand (cupped so the balls don't spill), then close the left hand around the balls and proceed. The fact that he doesn't draws attention to the action of putting the balls in the hand. Now, you can shift the moment (as Roger Klause would suggest) so that they really see the balls (or coins) going into the hand and maybe the spectator will relax the suspicion raised (consciously or subconsciously) that the odd way of placing the balls (or coins) in the hand raised, but not all the way. In order to relax all the way, the magician would need to open the hand to prove that nothing suspicious had happened.

This is how Slydini would've done it, and then in the action of proving that nothing suspicious had happened, he would do the necessary actions to complete the effect. (Although he would've been more obvious in his suspicious motions)

I just don't think half-relaxing spectators is enough to create the perfect illusion magicians should be aspiring for. It's better than not moving the moment, but I'd rather completely relax the spectators, or even better to never raise the spectator's suspicion at all.

I'm not trying to criticize the method or declare these moves are natural and these are unnatural. I'm just trying to understand the underlying principles involved so that they can applied to other effects to create the strongest magic possible.

I truly hope I am not coming across as lashing out. If I am, I apologize, it was not my intention.

Hello Al ,you and I have been butting heads for the last couple of years . I want you to know I was never ever mad ,you have given so much to the magic community with you magic and insights,,,,,,
what I try to do is put my work out to the magicians and in hop-e they might try and use some of my ideas good or bad and then make a decision if it is for them .....I once sent you a demo of me performing my palming technique of your coin thru a hanky you then proceeded to bomb the hell out of me telling me I know nothing about magic .....well maybe I don't but my palm was way better than yours in my opinion
.so this kjis it in a nut shell,, any how no hard feelings
vinny

SmileAndNode
You do not lash out as others have.
However, I think your knowledge lacks.
I do not know what to do about that other than to say, "We agree to disagree."
My magic is far from perfect and I believe I know its shortcomings better than anyone.
Reminds me of a story of two people studying a great painting. The younger man pointed out several errors in the work. The old man agreed and pointed out some other errors in this great work of art. The younger said to the older, "You seem to have studied the painting a lot." The older responded, "I did not, I painted it."

Al, your magic is revolutionary.

Your methods are demanding and hard to accomplish, which is why some do not take the time to learn them well.

I had a magician friend who learned your Pop Up move and Coins Across, he was perfection in execution and technique.

And I must say, in my opinion the placing of a coin on top of the fist is not unnatural in any way, it also emphasizes the coin sinking into the fist in a very open, artistic, and fair manner for the onlookers.

Since when has it been established there is a right and wrong way to do anything.

Thank you Al Schneider for clarifying who your target audience is for the effect, the thought behind the show structure and where what environment too. I'm sure this gets great reactions from your audiences, in the theatre style, formal environment presenting on a close up mat on a table.

This shows to me a great deal of thought has gone into this and for that my friend, total respect.

As long as the intended audience are entertained by the magic, job done.

Being someone who works totally standing up in mix and mingle situations or around tables, I still appreciate routines that don't immediately seem to fit in with my usual performing environment. There is always something to learn, unless of course you know it all!!!

Hi!

I agree with you and think in general it is important to do natural actions and gestures that are familiar to audience and they can relate. However I don’t think people put coins in his hands asking other people to look closer as a magician performing this routine would do, it is not something normal people do. Just as people don't normally introduce a silk in the closed fist or display metal rings…

I admit I don’t feel very comfortable about asking people to pay attention to the actions that I do, with the explicit or implicit motivation of them looking for something out of the ordinary, there is an element of challenge on it I usually tend to avoid. It is not the kind of magic I enjoy doing but it can be great magic. Actually, this magic has more impact if one satisfies the challenge (like most of Slidyni's routines). Most of the time I chose a different strategy to sate a clear initial situation prior the effect instead of that.

Talking about the move, I think the pop-up move does not try to replicate a casual coin transfer but, as Al says, it emphasizes the fact putting coin in the hand slowly and unmistakably, and people see very clearly the coin going in. That why I don’t think it looks more awkward than the pop-up move with balls (as in Vernon’s classic routine). On the other hand the false continuity the move has built in (like the shuttle pass) I think is very deceptive and disarming for a lay audience.

I admit also I don’t use the pop-up move, I didn’t play with it or performed it for people so my opinion is not based on my experience. But I want to try it out, possible I would not display the coin in the middle of the hand but in the fingertips and transfer it to the classic palm as I move the hand to the fist, I think in my hands it will better that way, it would be my option.

Pipo

When I watch YouTube acts, I don't what the tricks, but the way they handle props differently from other to show unique artistry in there performance.

Do you know if you fan a half deck in each and cross your arms ala Channing Pollack, it displays better then if you cross your arms right over left, then if you cross them left over right.

It was not until I seen Neil Foster produce single cards in arc or circle, that the I seen the unique artistry over the stagnate frozen are out to the side. Of course, this handling is not ordinary, magicians are not suppose to be ordinary and common. If they were they could not perform magic tricks.

Unique handlings and displays makes the one person stand out from all the others.

Are you a performer or just a guy that does tricks with no thought to your performance.

Al Schneider is not a know it all, but I have read his works and he is most definitely brilliant for what he has created. After all they are his creations, and the magic community is better for his offerings. His magic has made coin magic advance greatly. It his magic, not anyone else's, and he knows how he wants his magic performed and what is best for his routines.

I am not a know it all, as I am constantly learning and watching others to get new information on handling and movement.

I cannot believe all they amateurs are arguing with Al Schneider and the father of card magic Dai Vernon.

Whoa Bill, I wasn't saying Al was a know-it-all.... Just suggesting that everyone can learn from others? Amateurs from Pros and Pros from Amateurs. The word "you" wasn't meant to mean Al at all... A general you was meant, as in everyone.