|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..8..13..18..23..27~28~29~30~31..34~35~36 [Next] | ||||||||||
swood Loyal user 299 Posts 
|
Duster - I'm pleased that my idea left you feline good. (Apologies for the bad dad joke - my children rolled their eyes in sympathy.) I'm glad it's been helpful to you, and glad that you're liking the book!
|
|||||||||
|
swood Loyal user 299 Posts
|
And many thanks generally for the positive messages re. IS3. I've said it before, but it means the world that people are enjoying it.
|
|||||||||
Sashac Inner circle 1041 Posts
|
Peter was gracious enough to take some time out yesterday to show me this, and chat. What a lovely man he is. He performed it for both myself, and my girlfriend, and to be entirely honest: I wasn't the biggest fan of this specific piece.
Let me start with this: Peter is undeniably a genius, and has contributed SO much to our field, and brotherhood. This piece simply didn't tickle my fancy. The reason was mostly: process. Not that the effect is particularly process heavy (although, it certainly has some, but the genius here is that there are revelations and things occurring throughout), but rather that in many ways: it's just plain weird. I really don't want to go into too much detail, but I found it more convoluted than IS1 or 2, from the spectator's perspective. My girlfriend, who wasn't the easiest despite me encouraging her to let go (Russians!) was actually able to describe the method to me in detail. Literally, around 90 % of it until I told her to stop. Now: I don't think that would ever happen in the real world: Peter is engaging and charismatic, and Skype simply isn't the medium. So yeah, that's just my two cents from both witnessing the effect first hand, and reading the book. I haven't performed it yet, but don't think I will: it just doesn't suit my thinking. That isn't to say the book isn't great, the piece isn't extremely well thought out and the effect isn't powerful. I just found the process illogical (which by the way, I don't necessarily think is a bad thing, quite the contrary at times!) and convoluted. Just my two cents. Ultimately, this one really isn't for me, but I'm certainly not disappointed: I got to support a wonderful man, a large amount of work and a product which feels complete. The only thing I will predict (with personal certainty), is that this is not the last step in Isabella's journey. Sasha |
|||||||||
Tony Venetico Loyal user Chicago, IL 238 Posts
|
I'm in the US - prepaid - and haven't received it yet. I emailed the place I Paypaled a week and haven't gotten any response - Blah.....
|
|||||||||
|
252life Inner circle Ninth Circle, Hades 3253 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 18, 2017, The Duster wrote: Foiled yet again!! Double drats! you used those *** dwarfs again, didn't you?? 252IS9
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.
-Theodore Annemann |
|||||||||
TheDirectionalist Special user I predict that I will have this many posts when you read this: 931 Posts
|
How does this compare to Sudo Nimh's Eclipse? I don't have either, but am very interested in both.
|
|||||||||
|
252life Inner circle Ninth Circle, Hades 3253 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 18, 2017, TheDirectionalist wrote: I would recommend getting both if possible. If I had to narrow it down to one, it would be IS3. They compliment each other though. Eclipse really helped me get past a mental block with star signs.
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.
-Theodore Annemann |
|||||||||
|
The Duster Inner circle 1693 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 18, 2017, 252life wrote: So? You judging me and my business, a man has to eat If you want to ‘use’ one of my *** dwarfs – I can get you a discount You just need to choose whether you want a Happy, Grumpy, or Bashful ending |
|||||||||
|
252life Inner circle Ninth Circle, Hades 3253 Posts
|
Speechless.
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.
-Theodore Annemann |
|||||||||
|
252life Inner circle Ninth Circle, Hades 3253 Posts
|
You and your evil posse win.
252EffinDwarfs
Look for all the world like you're counting the brain cells in his cranium.
-Theodore Annemann |
|||||||||
|
Caveman Regular user 118 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 18, 2017, TheDirectionalist wrote: That's the question isn't it, and something that I was eager to find out as soon as I had heard that IS3 was going to be released. Eclipse allows one to divine someones date of birth and star sign. IS3 allows one to divine someones date of birth, star sign, and a thought of name. I recently finished reading IS3, and realized that I was already aware of the method for divining the star sign and thought of name, however it is the two methods combined that allows one to divine the date of birth. It's very clever, and the book is a bit of a masterclass on all of the methods therein. Mr. Turner explores concepts in here that he's gone over in other things he's published, but he lays things out in great detail ,and very clearly in IS3, perhaps more so than in any publication that previously contained these methods. I have not tried to pull off the entirety of IS3 yet, but I have no doubt that with considerable practice this can play as a powerful piece of mind reading. The star sign reveal is what I like most about IS3, and it is basically full proof; Mr. Turner's thoughts on the verbage to use when delivering the process and reveal are very insightful. However, and this is just me, being a star sign divination junkie, the method is still not where I want it to be when I'm performing a star sign divination; for me, the premise lacks a certain authenticity. It's just my own bias, but to me a star sign revelation should be more esoteric, with less emphasis on its mechanical nature. That being said, it plays powerfully, people react strongly to it, and it's relatively easy to master. The birth date revelation can be strong as well, but remains dependent on the name revelation. The name revelation is where this whole thing falls flat for me. I don't know if it's just me, or if it's the part of the world I live in, but I've only nailed this maybe 50% of the time, and it's not because I haven't memorized the method. What I keep running into is way off the grid name choices. Maybe in England, or more rural parts of the U.S., people continually think of the same old names, but that just hasn't been my experience at all, and has made me pretty reluctant to keep practicing because it's just not foolproof. Mr. Turner does go over ways to recover from a failed name guess and pull the rest of the routine off. Something makes me think that most folks are just putty in the hands of Mr. Turner and he probably pulls this off all the time with grace. Moreover, the name revelation appears as fairly unrelated to the rest of the performance, in that it really has nothing to do with the participant, or their star sign; there are some good ideas for tying it in, but to me it feels incongruent. It was never the name revelation that excited me about this release though. As I said, I've got a mild obsession with star sign divinations. I thought IS2 was just brilliant, and had hoped that IS3 was building off that concept, but it's really quite different. As I said before, I already knew this method from previous Turner publications, and had hoped that a new method bomb was about to be dropped, but no. My gripes aside, Peter Turner is a great thinker, and this book has his insights in spades. I enjoyed reading it and it has definitely provided some really good food for thought. As for Eclipse...it is built upon the foundation laid by IS2, and it's process is far more mathematical than linguistic. It arrives at a date of birth that is either exact or off by a day (perhaps that could be seen as a weakness, but for me it is a great strength, in that you can legitimately get a "close miss"; a strength Mr. Turner touches upon as well in IS3). Personally, I think what Sudo Nimh discovered when creating the Eclipse method is nothing short of genius. It allows for a straightforward method that revolves around the personal information of the participant, and allows for a wonderful opportunity to give astrological and numerology readings. I know that IS3 touted that it loses the "star number" which some felt was a concept fake to astrology, but it's quite relevant to numerology and the two are easily intertwined. Eclipse then allows for a star sign revelation that is 100%, it's very strong, and easy to perform after some practice. For those reading, I'm biased, this is my personal favorite because it lends itself to my style of presentation. What I hope for in the future, and Sudo please don't hate me for saying this, is that Peter Turner takes Eclpise and lends his creativity to it...I think there's so much potential there! |
|||||||||
|
Martin Pulman Inner circle London 3399 Posts
|
Isabella's Star, and its spin-offs, use simple arithmetic to arrive at a number that you have to uncover in some fashion. IS3 removes this part of the equation in favour of a clever combination of principles, fused from the Turner playbook. This makes IS3 potentially completely propless.
There are advantages and disadvantages to both methods. I would feel it would be very worthwhile knowing both approaches as the information contained within is valuable in its own right. |
|||||||||
|
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4191 Posts
|
Personally I absolutely love IS 3 and between that and ophiuchus I'm pretty much covered. Sometimes I combine the two so I use Ophiuchus to get the bulk but use the name part of IS3 to get the rest. This does give me the advantage that I can perform the name part in isolation and have the dob without the spectator having any incling that I know their date of birth. This gives me a huge amount of flexibility as to how and when to reveal it. For example I can use something like Richard Osterlinds AI to reveal 3 people's birthdays or I can use star sign stacking to get three people's signs then nail the last persons exact dob including the year.
Mark |
|||||||||
|
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 18, 2017, Sashac wrote: Opinions will obviously differ from person to person but I feel like IS3 is very much the complete opposite of your criticisms. I find that it is one of the most process-light/free propless routines that has been released thus far from the spectator's perspective. There's only really one overt process from the spectator's view and that is the portion to get to the zodiac sign (but in practice, I've used Pete's go to method for getting the zodiac sign for awhile now and I agree with Pete that it's the most direct and quick way to hit on the zodiac sign). Perhaps this difference in opinion comes down to the language? Perhaps in Russian what is very streamlined in English becomes more process heavy due to language differences? |
|||||||||
|
tomd Special user 747 Posts
|
^^ yeah I suspect that's a reason. I've found the English version to be the most streamlined and process light propless piece I've come across. And it's difficulty varies from which way you chose to perform it. This is my favourite "propless" effect and unless someone gifts me train tracking I can't see it being beaten for a while.
I don't plan on performing the star sign version for a while, as in my opinion it's harder. And I like the freedom of asking someone to think of a new birthday. |
|||||||||
|
Sashac Inner circle 1041 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 19, 2017, kissdadookie wrote: The performance was in English, and she's getting a degree in the language. Once again, this is just my experience with it, it doesn't take away from the fact that a lot of people will love this, and should. |
|||||||||
|
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4191 Posts
|
Personally Pete’s method for the star sign is my preferred method for getting someone’s star sign unless I don’t wan’t someone to know I have their sign. I find it extremely quick and direct and very light on apparent process. I have tweaked it very slightly so that I can get an extremely quick hit on 6 of the signs. I also love the name part Pete fully justifies the name in the scripting.
Now as far as process heavy I have found the opposite to be true especially when watching Pete. Now with any routine of this nature there is always a worst possible scenario as the route to some signs is quicker than others and cusp dates might be a little trickier but Pete averages about a minute from start to finish. As I mentioned earlier Pete performed this on my girlfriend at lads and she was blown away. She has one of the quickest signs to hit (after Leo) and isn’t on a cusp date and it took Pete probably just under a minute and she was blown away. One thing that particularly made me smile was that on the way home she asked me “How did he know the exact time I was born”. Those who have read the book will understand why that made me smile 
Mark |
|||||||||
|
tomd Special user 747 Posts
|
Haha great story Mark! Watching Pete really gives me confidence in the routine.. everything happens so quickly.
|
|||||||||
|
kissdadookie Inner circle 4275 Posts
|
Quote:
On Oct 19, 2017, Mark_Chandaue wrote: I haven't worked IS3 yet but working through the book and watching Pete's performance videos (along with knowing much of the techniques employed for IS3), it really is streamlined and lacking overt process for the spectator. This is of course highly dependent on the performer as well. The ploys used needs to look natural so if you hesitate at any point in obvious ways, that could very well make the effect come off wrong from the spectator's perspective and they might think that there is some process going on (because you're obviously doing some mental gymnastics there). So the key is to get this down smooth. IMHO for people new to much of what is taught in IS3, work on the zodiac portion of the effect first as a stand alone piece. Get that down smooth, it will go a long long long way for you for the rest of the routine. (none of this is directed at you of course, Mark) |
|||||||||
|
mindguru Veteran user 320 Posts
|
After reading this a few times, as there is a lot to take in. I feel that the combined methods are really a stroke of genius. I personally wasn't as keen on the method to know the name, or the fact that there would be no personal connection to the participant.
Even though I already knew the method for the star sign revelation, which I personally didn't like. I suddenly found myself changing my mind and appreciating the simplicity and justifications of the method. Also I don't understand why a lot of people have a problem generating a number, as was the case from previous works. Then again I'm into numerology so numbers and readings are normal to me. Overall it is genius thinking. I'm not sure though if in its entirety it's for me and I don't believe this will be the last word on this subject. |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » Isabella Star 3 by Peter Turner (236 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3..8..13..18..23..27~28~29~30~31..34~35~36 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Oct 18, 2017 08:51 pm 
X
| [ 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 < 
|