The Magic Cafť
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index Ľ Ľ Latest and Greatest? Ľ Ľ F.U.2 by Lloyd Barnes Ľ Ľ TOPIC IS LOCKED (186 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page 1~2~3..10~11~12 [Next]
GeraintClarke
View Profile
Elite user
410 Posts

Profile of GeraintClarke
Watch the trailer here > https://www.ellusionist.com/fu2-by-lloyd-barnes.html


Click here to get it 50% off : https://bit.ly/IqT6zt
JasonL2112
View Profile
Regular user
164 Posts

Profile of JasonL2112
I do like this for the right audience and may just snag it to have in pocket.

Am I understanding right that each "pack" comes with not only different cards, but different force methods as well?

"HINT: If you want to learn Geraint Clarke's '2 of hearts' force - get pack #1."

So to get all force methods, one would need to purchase all 3 packs even if you didn't plan to give away the cards and had no need for that many? Just trying to understand.

Is Turner's force (used in the demo reel) included (with all or any) of the packs?

Either way, congrats to Lloyd on the fun release.
Lloyd Barnes
View Profile
Elite user
482 Posts

Profile of Lloyd Barnes
Thanks for the possitive feedback man!

Just to clarify, the same download comes with any pack you pick up. Geraint's psych force is taught on the download. Pack 1 will contain a 2 of Hearts though, which is perfect for his force. However, he does explain that you don't need a 2 of Hearts for it to work, it can be any suited 2, which each pack will definitely contain.

Peter's force is not taught but we do explain exactly where people can learn it. There are 8 forces taught in total on the download, plus we give sources for 4 other psych forces that we know and love. As we say in the demo, you can use any force you like so we included a few different ones in the trailer for people to see how it plays out but we also provide a solid choice of forces that you can start performing straight away too.

Hope this helps and thank you again!

Lloyd
Creative & Project Development at Ellusionist

Facebook

Twitter

Instagram
JasonL2112
View Profile
Regular user
164 Posts

Profile of JasonL2112
Yeah, that makes much more sense...

Fully understand that any force will do (and I like I'm sure many have several favorites), but I had been thinking about looking deeper into Peter's work on the topic lately so was just curious if any of that is included. I'll need to break down and grab the his PDF regardless. Smile

Appreciate the clarity. I'm sure some will get bent over this release, but I can think of plenty this will play well with.

Sincerely hope this thread doesn't go sideways. Smile
EobardT
View Profile
New user
24 Posts

Profile of EobardT
While it's great to see you guys respecting Asi's work as it pertains to method, is the whole premise of the trick and the effect generally not still directly taken from Harrison Greenbaum?
Noel
View Profile
Regular user
Surrey, England
132 Posts

Profile of Noel
Absolutely criminal theft.
brandon90
View Profile
Special user
Atlanta
556 Posts

Profile of brandon90
How original
mantel
View Profile
Elite user
480 Posts

Profile of mantel
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, GeraintClarke wrote:
Watch the trailer here > https://www.ellusionist.com/fu2-by-lloyd-barnes.html


Click here to get it 50% off : https://bit.ly/IqT6zt



Click here to get the original video 100% off : The FU Deck

Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, Noel wrote:
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, EobardT wrote:
While it's great to see you guys respecting Asi's work as it pertains to method, is the whole premise of the trick and the effect generally not still directly taken from Harrison Greenbaum?


Absolutely criminal theft.


Not criminal, only immoral.

Quote:
[The FU Deck]

PERFORMANCE RIGHTS
After some research we found out Harrison Greenbaum had created this presentation for the effect.

Harrison reserves all theatrical (theatres, comedy clubs/venues, touring shows, etc.) and film (TV, movie, Internet, streaming, and any future audiovisual medium) rights to this effect.
EobardT
View Profile
New user
24 Posts

Profile of EobardT
Ok so they did steal the actual creative element of this trick from Harrison, but made the effect make less sense by mashing it together with that old fine print guarantee trick from Sankey. Very nice
Aaron Vlack
View Profile
Regular user
102 Posts

Profile of Aaron Vlack
This is the type of magic that we want to offer people?
brandon90
View Profile
Special user
Atlanta
556 Posts

Profile of brandon90
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, Aaron Vlack wrote:
This is the type of magic that we want to offer people?


Its Ellusionist.... and Lloyd Banks... what else do you expect ? Those guys just see dollar signs and don't care about the consumer
mantel
View Profile
Elite user
480 Posts

Profile of mantel
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, brandon90 wrote:
Quote:
On Jul 17, 2019, Aaron Vlack wrote:
This is the type of magic that we want to offer people?


Its Ellusionist.... and Lloyd Banks... what else do you expect ? Those guys just see dollar signs and don't care about the consumer


You mean Lloyd Barnes. Ellusionist hasnt too my knowledge collaborated with famous rappers yet...

Ellusionist doesn't seem to care about creators either, as they seem to be violating Harrison Greenbaum rights. Funny thing is Ellusionist posted that ďHarrison reserves all theatrical (theatres, comedy clubs/venues, touring shows, etc.) and film (TV, movie, Internet, streaming, and any future audiovisual medium) rights to this effect.Ē

If thatís the case isn't posting the trailer, a direct violation of Harrisonís rights?
Kaliix
View Profile
Inner circle
Connecticut
1423 Posts

Profile of Kaliix
I'm curious, what Greenbaum trick are you referring to? Is it the one where he writes F@$# YOU on the card? That can't be it. Is there another one?
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel J. Boorstin
GeorgeKerzon
View Profile
New user
65 Posts

Profile of GeorgeKerzon
Not my cup of tea to give someone the finger and expect laughs from them. Kinda brash, maybe good for teenagers that love swearing at each other.
pegasus
View Profile
Inner circle
England
7576 Posts

Profile of pegasus
I like the concept and used in conjunction with DFB, but not a fan of the FU middle finger content personally.
Lloyd Barnes
View Profile
Elite user
482 Posts

Profile of Lloyd Barnes
A Statement Regarding FU2 and False Accusations ||

I wish that we werenít reading this together and it was my hope that transparency and logic would prevail in this situation. However, it hasnít and itís upsetting that this statement needs to be written at all.

You may be aware that last year, I released an effect called The **** You Deck. Within hours of release, Ellusionist was contacted by Harrison Greenbaum under the pretence that the effect was not ours to release. The method used was a method heíd been using for a similar effect in his stage show. We immediately and without questioning him removed the effect from sale. As that was morally right thing to do, even though the effect was unknown to the magic community as a whole and was unpublished.

We stuck with our decision in good faith and because we took Harrison at his word that it was his effect. In the following hours, we were contacted by Asi Wind, where I myself had a productive phone call with him where he explained that he was true originator to the core method used in The **** You Deck. He was first to market. Of course, we kept the effect off sale and it would never be sold again in that form. Iíve had tricks that others have independently created that replicated my own work and itís horrible when people refuse to pull it off sale. I would never do this to another artist. Period.
The following year was spent entirely reworking the effect to remove Asiís method. Meaning we needed no full deck and no switches. It's just a force. Weíve since discovered that the use of the phrase **** You as a gag during a card magic routine even predates Harrison. More on this later though. I kept the ending of the effect, a singular gaff card that replaced the Joker with a **** You emblem and a change of the Ace of Spades in the Guarantee section of the Joker, to a different card to a reveal.
Although this could be seen as similar to Harrisons ending, the outcome, as a whole, is not. To explain Harrisons routine; A book is in view. A card is freely named, inside the book is a bookmark (a playing card), a move happens as the card is removed from the book, the bookmark is revealed to have a sticker on the face of it saying **** You. (He's put that online for magicians to deduce the similarities.) The sticker is removed to reveal that it was hiding a real playing card, which is their named card.

With my routine; A single card is placed in view in the spectators hand, a card is chosen via a force, the card is turned over to show itís a Joker thatís been designed to say **** You and upon closer inspection the Guarentee has the name of their chosen card. No sleight of hand, no sticker, not a freely named card.The only similarity the routine shares with Harrisonís are the words **** and You.

The differences?
- No freely named card
- No book
- No indexed deck
- No switch
- No sticker
- No reveal of a normal playing card.

The similarities?
- The use of the phrase **** You.

The selected card is revealed in some way. And certainly not in the same way. Itís not a sticker thatís removed to show a playing card was hiding in plain sight. After yesterdayís release of FU2, Harrison immediately posted on Facebook and other platforms that 'ELLUSIONIST HAS STOLEN MY TRICK AGAIN'. Whatís most concerning about this, is a select vocal few people have taken this false statement at face value and simply believe it. I get it, itís the way the internet works at the moment.

Anyone with a social media account can come to a conclusion, say it loudly and convince others to believe with zero critical thinking on their own behalf. Itís sad. Itís a sorry state of affairs but itís the modern world we live in now.
More deceitful and slanderous lies were spouted by Harrison like ĎLloyd stole this from me.í I can assure you, I did not know of Harrisonís existence until after the original release of The **** You Deck.

Something he found very hard to believe as he performs so many shows. Again, none of which Iíve ever seen. I live on the other side of the Atlantic Ocean. 4,255 miles roughly.

He took a completely immoral recording of Geraint Clarke, entirely without consent and posted it wholly out of context to support his narrative, in what I can only guess was an attempt to spark rage and out-cry. A grown man did this. Let that sink in.

But most of all, he completely believes that FU2 and his unpublished performance piece are entirely one and the same. Which, although they share a small similarity, are entirely different.So I want you all to ask yourself, what defines an original creation?My thinking is this and Iíd like to hear any different opinions if you have them. An original effect/creation should have at least 2 of the following elements:

1. Entirely different method.
2. Entirely different routine.
3. Entirely different plot.

Wayne Houchin released Sinful, coin in Coke Can in 2006 (From what I can find). That was the first time I can find that a Coin in Can effect was ever created (I may be slightly off but Iím just using this as a basic example). Since then, off the top of my head, I can name 4 other versions of Wayneís Coin in Can plot being released on the market. Porthole by Luke Osland, Breakthrogh by the Menghel Brother, Osmosis by Dalton Wayne & C2C by Peter Eggink. With my previous list of what I believe defines an original creation, these only tick one out of the 2/3 necessary requirements to be an original relase. Different method. The plots are the same and the routines are the same. However, I DO believe that these all warrant their own independent releases as they each bring something new to the table. And you donít hear Wayne Houchin posting slanderous and defamatory statements over the internet each time a new one is released. Heís a smart man with integrity and loves magic.

To me, itís quite clear that FU2ís method is wildly different. No index. No switch. No sticker. No full card reveal to be hiding in plain sight. That is undisputable. Where it could be seen as similar. The use of **** You, but not a sticker on a normal playing card. Itís a Joker that has **** You written on it and the **** You Emblem in place of the Joker image.

It reveals the card only by name, in the Guarantee section of the small print. Itís a basic force and card revealed routine. Now, Iím pretty sure nobody living today can lay claim to a pick a card/reveal a card plot. So that canít be argued.

 Does he own the intellectual property to revealing a card and saying **** You?

Well, after doing some searching; Harrison explicitly told us on (this time) a legally recorded phone call (where all parties consented)that the earliest video he has is from 2009 performing it in a show.

However, David Sleaze, The Punk Magician (real name Greg Travis) performed a card effect where a card is chosen, he reveals it and THEN exclaims **** You to his spectatorÖ in 1989. The year after I was born.

20 years before Harrisonís and 30 years before FU2. Donít believe me? See for yourself: https://youtu.be/kJiUVp890TY?t=97

Again, although not exactly the same, it is similar. Does this mean that Harrison ďstoleĒ the idea from David Sleaze? I wouldnít say those words myself but itís hard to imagine that he didnít see this video, especially as a professional stand up comedian who seemed to know a-lot about comedy and magic in our phone calls. And David Sleaze (although before my time as Iím now discovering) is a well known comedy magician. Itís not hard to imagine seeing that and coming up with a card trick that uses **** You in a reveal and being able to claim sole Intellectual Property to it.

Even after seeing that right now, if anyone did believe they had sole Intellectual Property in the use of **** You in a routine where you reveal of a playing card, that claim is now null and void.

The first time around Harrison had a problem with the index deck method, we pulled it without question. Although unpublished, the method was almost identical.

Now, heís trying to tell us he owns the intellectual property of using **** You in a reveal. And now we know different. Whether he knew it or not.

There are 3 effects on the table here and Iíll list the dispute and chronological orders for you. So we can have a better, in depth understanding:
1989: David Sleaze performs an effect where a card is chosen and revealed, proclaiming **** You AFTER the reveal. Unpublished.

2009: Harrison performs a card trick where a card is named, found in a book, itís revealed with **** You shown BEFORE and then the card is revealed behind a sticker. Unpublished.
2019: I release FU2, where a card is placed out in the open as a Mystery Card, a card is selected, The card is revealed to have a Joker changed to a Middle Finger and the words **** You in place of the words Joker. The small print reveals the name of the card.

The only thing that we ACTUALLY share here is that ''**** You' is revealed before the reveal of the card. Neither of us can claim the use of the words **** You with the reveal is ours. It's everyones. We can't own words as magicians.

So the real argument, if using rationale and logic is; is someone a thief for sharing the same ordering in timing of a reveal in a card trick? Both reveals are different ĎGaff card vs. Normal card with a sticker on the face thatís removedí. Because neither of us can claim the use of using **** You in a card reveal is either of ours now. It predates us both. And what makes it ok to think that itís ok to call someone a thief and try to tarnish theirs, their peers and the company they work forís reputation when they know in their heart that itís true independent creationÖ of the timing of the reveal.

Iíll leave you on this. Whether itís someone you respect or itís someone unknown to you; Never just believe something anyone says without having respect for your own integrity and the use of critical thinking to understand the truth behind the statement. Sometimes, the magic community can be worse than extreme Social Justice Warriors. Not all of the community but a select few. To everyone else, thank you for the outpour of messages, comments, shares etc. It wonít be forgotten and youíve helped me to understand that I can hold my head up high, not being the guilty party. All of this over a card trick.

Lloyd
Creative & Project Development at Ellusionist

Facebook

Twitter

Instagram
brandon90
View Profile
Special user
Atlanta
556 Posts

Profile of brandon90
Only the guilty feel the need to explain themselves.
videoman
View Profile
Inner circle
4238 Posts

Profile of videoman
Quote:
On Jul 18, 2019, brandon90 wrote:


Only the guilty feel the need to explain themselves.


I have no horse in this race but that statement is such utterly ridiculous rubbish that I could not let it go unchallenged.
I suppose one could also state that those who have no facts to present in order to make their case often proclaim idiotic stock lines as the only defense of their beliefs.
magicinsight
View Profile
Inner circle
3669 Posts

Profile of magicinsight
I agree with videoman. If Mr. Barnes did not coem on the Carfe to defend and clarify his position, people would say why doesn't he make a statment here and therfore msut be "guilty" as charged.. IF he does defend and clarify his position, as he did, the nhe is still considered "guilty." While I do not have this effect and will not get it because it does nto suit me personally, but I certainly appreciate and respect Mr. Barnes' taking the time to write a legnthy and factual stmeent explaining his position and the history of this particular effect and its various variations.
Michael
ďBelief matters more than truth. Every moment, belief in imaginary things alters lives while truth sits unnoticed and waits.Ē
óHakim, Loreweaver
travisb
View Profile
Special user
Vancouver, BC
514 Posts

Profile of travisb
1. What we can get away with and what we ought to do are not the same thing.

2. Ethics in magic are about community and friendship, not about legalistic maneuvering.

3. Do unto others, yo.

Travis
The Magic Cafe Forum Index Ľ Ľ Latest and Greatest? Ľ Ľ F.U.2 by Lloyd Barnes Ľ Ľ TOPIC IS LOCKED (186 Likes)
 Go to page 1~2~3..10~11~12 [Next]
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2019 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.28 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL