I have no doubt the mechanics of the card are phenomenal and the workings are an advancement for his type of gimmick.
But you can’t control the angle that light will hit it in the real world. Especially if more than one person is watching.

Video can hide a lot of sins and I trust Eric’s judgement so I’m not convinced.
I’d love to hear some more real world opinions on just how far you need to be away to guarantee success with this.

Also, in flat controlled lighting red and blue will look nearly identical but I guarantee you that blue will give be a lot more forgiving in real world conditions.

I agree about blue being much better at hiding things. I should have gotten blue. Again, this is the most advanced gimmicked card I’ve seen in 30 yrs. Deserves an award for creativity for sure. The issue is depth. Because of the way the gimmick works, the dirty work is never flush. And you can’t use your fingers underneath to make it flush. The handling of the opening and closing is super smooth. Better and easier than any previous gimmick of this type. The downside is that to get that smoothness, the tradeoff is some depth that you can’t eliminate.

Again, I will keep experimenting because I really want to be able to make this work.

I agree, Eric is very trustworthy. Pretty much all cards like this are visible to an extent. You can never say completely invisible. That's just not true IMO.

I too trust Eric’s opinion and it certainly would make me go Blue instead of Red now that I realise it can never go perfectly flush ( due to the mechanics ) .
I did have to screen shot the cards and really zoom in to see the slight discrepancies though on both cards .
I think the routine is so punchy and visual that by the time anyone has had a chance to join up the dots you have done the easy clean up and their signed card is back in their hand . Also all the focus will be where the holes appear ( not disappear ) , it’s just natural instinct as it’s so visually strong . If they have any idea that this sort of creativity can be achieved then they are far more than a layman imo . Most magicians don’t even know these sort of gimmicks ( certainly not this clever ) exist .
Put it this way if these were being sold as marked cards everyone would be moaning they couldn’t read them at all imo Gaz 🙂

Can you do the trick with the deck in your hand?

If not the second you pick up the deck and put the card that's done all the magic back on the deck only to hand it out, anyone who is paying attention will have some idea what's up.

I agree that its not ideal but usually there are ways you can routine around this problem.
For instance, just off the top of my head perhaps you could pick up the deck just before the final change and wave the deck in front of the card. Then place the card on the deck to free up that hand to pick up the hole punch and tap the card (now on top of the deck) as you say that a simple tap makes the card go back in time so we're all left wondering if any of this really happened after all. By the time you finish that sentence their signed card is back in their hand.

In cases like this I will then usually cop off the gaff and hand someone the entire deck as well while the gaff gets pocketed along with the hole punch.
This type of thing will generally fly past most specs. Not perfect but workable I think.

Eric mentioned this James Bond gaff having pulleys and wires and such and while I know he was being facetious I do wonder what doing a DL with this gaff will be like?

My pulley statement isn’t actually far off. Because of the system, the card does not lay flush with the top of the deck. So there is a small gap. Doing the necessary move is essentially equivalent to doing a quadruple lift.

Joe the idea is your audience don’t think it’s a gaff as after all you took it off the deck as their signed card in the first place ( in the same manner as you end ) .
When you drop it back on top at the end you nonchalantly just turn it back face up and offer it as a souvenir just off the cuff .
You seem to be implying that your spectators think you have a gimmick as soon as you start the effect in that case you are running before being chased imo Gaz 🙂

Respectfully, self-delusion like this has held magic back for decades.

The spectator has no clue if that's their card or not during the effect. And the longer the trick goes on without them seeing the face of the card, the less certain they will be. Signing the card might actually make it weaker because you have them sign it and then you turn the signature away from them during the magic portion. If signing it was to make them know you didn't switch it, wouldn't you have them sign the side you were going to show them during the trick?

"When you drop it back on top at the end you nonchalantly just turn it back face up"

You can't drop it back on top "nonchalantly" because that's the moment when all the heat is on the card so it's the point when your actions have to be motivated. If you can do the trick with the deck in your hand you MAY be able to do the switch in a motivated way (which is why I asked the question). But if you need two completely free hands for the trick, and have to pick up the deck at the end to do the switch, most people would be suspicious of that action.

Well Joe I have been doing magic for 4 decades so I totally disagree with you .
They see the face of the card at the beginning when they sign it or whether they just select it and do not sign it . Do the dl turnover using the dbacker gaff and it’s their card now face down in their eyes in your hand otherwise you are doing it wrong imo . I am sure you can do the effect with the deck in one hand anyway but you are missing the point . If you think that a good dlift with or without a dbacker don’t fool a layman we may as well all pack in card magic as it’s probably the best sleight there is when done well , it kills laymen Gaz 🙂 Ps I will still
do it at the end and give them the card but I won’t be begging them to check it out with the aura of it’s not a gimmick type attitude hence I will be nonchalant , natural and casual as it’s just a card after all right !

Sorry to disagree with you Gaz but putting the card back onto the deck to enable it to be shown and maybe handed out surely has to be one of the weakest moves in magic, so totally illogical and all eyes directly on the “”card” or multiple cards masquerading as one, I’ve seen it done many many times with the spectator giving a little sideways glance to their Friend as if to say did you see that? Most don’t say anything but they know something just occurred

Sorry for the confusion , I mean a dlift is possibly the best sleight in card magic when done well . Every effect normally has a weak moment and of course you wouldn’t put the card back on the deck I f you didn’t want to hand it out . I am just saying because of the dbacker combined it all looks as it should look and the visual pros of this effect out way the cons . Having said that it all depends on how good the card looks like when you receive it as from Mickael’s video It’s superb but I have seen someone else’s card now online and it doesn’t look as invisible as Mickael’s infact no where near as invisible Gaz 🙂

That’s very interesting Gaz how these gimmicks can appear so different!

I have a 'pulley' version I picked up from Michael two years ago from Blackpool. Is this the same or a new version? Keen to know what the improvements are.

I'm also aware of a simplified version from twelve years ago. Thanks in advance.

Hi Kobra this is a newer version it does a lot more and it’s very easy . I had the one you mentioned myself from two years ago as well .
Magical wishes Gaz 🙂

Thank you Gaz for the swift response. That'd sold it for me, the previous was very clever.

I've been a fan of Sharpie Thru Card since the current version of it was first released. I've been wondering when all is said and done if Matrix Art has anymore impact than STC. MA has more phases but that in itself doesn't make it better. I know that in the past I have done what I believed to be some killer coin routines with multiple phases but at the end its the cig thru coin or bite coin that they remember most. STC can often have that same kind of memorable impact too, and I'm not sure that MA would up the ante enough to offset some of it's downsides.

Plus, for me personally, I happen to like the direct impact and focus of STC. It's simplicity is it's virtue. The switch in and out is dead easy as well as totally natural and if you apply a little SF it almost works itself.

Then there are other benefits IMO such as I'm almost always carrying a Sharpie but I never carry a hole punch with me. How many hobbyists will quickly begin to leave MA out of their performances for that reason alone?
If you table hop professionally then that's a different matter, but you still have to consider pocket space.

But I do love the jumping hole plot and I do love a great gaff. Mickael is a creative genius no doubt.
In the end they are both really just eye candy. I doubt anyone will ever have a great presentation for either one. You just do it. It's purely visual, words aren't really neccessary.

But I like that you are using a Sharpie to have them sign a card anyway, then you do a trick or two with the signed card, and then you throw in STC almost as an after thought. Icing on the cake so to speak. Which all makes perfect sense because because the Sharpie and the card are already in play. To introuduce a hole punch kind of interrupts the flow of things IMO.

Anyway, just thinking out loud. I'll probably pick MA up eventually just because it's so darn cool.

I honestly don’t think anyone will do it with a hole punch. MC doesn’t even teach that handling. The would take a lot more effort and cozy handling. STC really is the perfect gimmick. So well made it is truly invisible. And the handling is super clean with SF.

I have Pot Hole by M. Close. It's the best moving hole I have ever had or seen. I can't imagine this being better.

You may be right. Probably best to not even bother trying to use a signed card and further complicate things.

Just bring out the punched card, ask them if they’ve ever seen a marked card or say this is what they do to used cards in casinos, and get right into the effect. Maybe present it as some kind of quick eye test, do a top change, and as you lean forward to place the dupe on the table you thumb the gaff off the top of the deck into your coat pocket. Now you’re clean to use the deck however you wish.

A color changing deck effect might be nice to follow it with because you’ve subconsciously already hammered home the color of the “deck”, and the punched card with the different colored back is still on the table to further make it clear. Have your contact info on the face of the card and leave it with them when you move on. This would also allow for fans of red backs to get away with using a blue gaff.

Ha, that all just popped into my head as I was writing this but I just read it over and it’s actually a pretty good idea. 😃 I like it. Just wish I still did restaurant gigs.