The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » New to magic? » » Continuity / consistency between effects (3 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
mlippo
View Profile
Inner circle
Trieste (Italy)
1107 Posts

Profile of mlippo
Quote:
On Aug 6, 2020, Ed Oschmann wrote:
No discs, just a digital download from penguin.


Your Chicago Opener presentation is something I like a lot!
Seriously thinking to adopt it, ditching the one I've been using for years

Mark
Ed Oschmann
View Profile
Special user
Lake Worth FL
928 Posts

Profile of Ed Oschmann
I adapted Pops card from the pocket. I didn’t do it in the Castle performance, but this is the way I do it most of the time.

https://youtu.be/1tUocvFGqNA

Thanks for the kudos!
Ed Oschmann
View Profile
Special user
Lake Worth FL
928 Posts

Profile of Ed Oschmann
Quote:
On Aug 6, 2020, Bob G wrote:
Oops! Just realized, Ed: the disk you mentioned *is* the one with your Chicago Opener! So that makes the disk *two* disks for the price of one, no?


What two for one are you talking about?
Bob G
View Profile
Inner circle
2130 Posts

Profile of Bob G
It was a lame attempt at a joke. Of course we're not talking about disks anyway, but the idea was: I looked at the disk you referenced and thought, "That looks like fun, but it doesn't have Chicago Opener, so if I *were* buying magic, I'd have to decide whether to buy this disk *and* the one with CO. On looking again, though, I realized that CO *was* on the disk you mentioned, so I'd just saved myself a hypothetical $30. If you see what I mean.


Does the Café have a picture of a lead balloon?


See you, Ed.


Bob
Nikodemus
View Profile
Loyal user
288 Posts

Profile of Nikodemus
I purchased Ed's Penguin lecture. It's brilliant. Full of really powerful effects - mostly not too challenging. A couple are virtually self-working. Lots of useful tips along the way.
And all explained with charm & humour.
Aus
View Profile
Special user
Australia
950 Posts

Profile of Aus
I wonder if the concern of "discrepancies" in the magic we perform is just another case of running well not being chased.

Psychology dictates that the human mind can only effectively and accurately focus on one thing at a time. It's when we divide our attention to more than one thing that our recall and perceptions of events start to falter.

We see this psychological tendency utilized in many principles of magic. Take the humble criss cross force for example, where we are forcing ether the bottom or the top card of the deck and obscuring that fact by physical displacement of the various halves of the deck and time misdirection by virtue of divergent patter that shifts the spectators mental focus away from the cards for a moment. With these simple ingredients in combination, the criss cross force works effectively.

The effectiveness of misdirection falls on the same principles which when boiled down to barebone concepts manifest as the following. For example, the audience will pay attention to what moves. They will also pay attention to what makes noise. What doesn't move and doesn't make noise doesn’t attract attention. The audience will always look where the magician looks. The magician must never look at what he wishes to conceal. The audience will treat as important what the magician treats as important. The audience will treat as unimportant what the magician treats as unimportant. Of course there's a lot of meat that attaches to these barebone concepts but the basic tenets of what I'm talking about are there.

Here is an social experiment for you to try to get real life validation of these concepts. Take a matchbox and take the draw out and place a folded up 5 dollar note in it. Ask you spectator/participant to match this investment and to place 5 dollars of his own money in the draw along with yours. Place the matchbox draw back into it's sleeve and make the following proposition.

Recall the events that transpired to this point highlighting your actions of extracting the matchbox draw and placing the money in it without making reference to the fact that one of the 5 dollar notes belongs to the spectator. Just say "we" placed 10 dollars cash inside the match box.

Now make the offer to the spectator that you will sell the matchbox and it's contents for 7 dollars to him/her. Further making the point that they would be making a $3 dollar profit on the deal considering that there is 10 dollars cash inside the matchbox.

You'll find that 9 out of ten people will jump at the chance without realising that half the money in the matchbox was theirs in the first place and in paying you 7 dollars your essentially making an 2 dollar profit on this deal. You will find that the majority of the hesitation if any stems from a "to good to be true" mentality that comes into play but they often can't place their finger on why they feel like this.

This experiment highlights the power of time misdirection and repositioning focus of you spectators.

I think sometimes the pessimism of these concepts can be traced to some extent to videos of live performances where these principles and concepts can seem more overt rather covert to the magic practitioner. But there needs to be a better understanding that there is a substantive difference between perspectives that makes this appear so. Firstly, you as a magical practitioner are privy to knowledge that the average spectator is not, so what seems obvious to you may not be obvious to a layperson who doesn't have that knowledge.

Secondly, videos give a panoramic view which puts the spotlight more severely on everything which is substantially different then the limited perspective and focus of a real spectator in a real life performance. The margins of a person's peripheral vision is a lot less in a live performance then that of watching a video performance, which means the effectiveness of the above concepts and principles are substantially different then what you would perceive on a video performance. This also has a direct collation on one's perspective of what is considered a gutsey or bold move.


Well my tendency leans towards the more psychological concepts of masking so called discrepancies I do see some value in more physical solutions.


Structuring your Acts by using tricks that give a natural congruence can remedy any perceived discrepancies. For instance I constructed a three trick set for walkaround using Nick Trost's Observation Test, Garrett Thomas Stand Up Monte and finally Ambitious card. The premise of the set revolves around the exploration of the common cliches of "seeing is believing", "the hand is quicker than the eye" and "it's all done with smoke and mirrors".

Much like Chicago Opener, the Observation Test ends with a odd backed card in an off colored deck, but since the back color of the cards or card is the primary focus of the trick I make sure that the face value of the card is of the same value of money card of my stand up monte gaffs. It's then a simple matter of taking the odd backed card from Observation Test well putting the remainder of the deck away and proceeding with the stand up Monte routine.

At the conclusion of Stand up Monte I end with multiple queens which logically wouldn't belong in a standard deck of cards, so I put the duplicates away well retaining one which is used in my final trick the Ambitious Card ending in a Omni deck finish. As you can see there is an inferred logic that exists from one trick to the next that doesn't need an overt explanation.

The added advantage of using the same card in each consecutive trick cuts down on the deadtime that would otherwise be involved in selecting a new card in every demonstration.

Of Course you could do this on an individual trick bases if you wanted to.

For Chicago Opener you could replace the odd backed card back on top of the deck at the end and do a color change of the top card to it's opposite backed mate, then peel it off well simultaneously necktieing the deck well showing the now changed card. Replace the card back on top without revealing the odd colored card on top then double undercut the top two cards to the bottom then bottom palming the odd card out at a convenient moment.

Of course this is all extra work you will need to add, however I would be asking the question first, is all this necessary or do I just think this t is necessary?


Magically

Aus
Nikodemus
View Profile
Loyal user
288 Posts

Profile of Nikodemus
Tommy Wonder addresses this question on his Visions of Wonder DVD. He talks about "taking it out of the frame".
He has deliberately designed TAMED CARDS to cycle through 4 different force cards each time he resets. I.e. it is only on the 5th performance that he gets back to the first force card. This is aimed at restaurants etc where a spectator might watch him perform the same effect for another group.

He also gives a funny example of deliberately keeping a heavy Zombie Ball in your dressing room . (I presume this was hypothetical). The idea is to totally fool anyone who happens to come into the dressing room and pick up the ball. The very opposite of letting someone find the actual prop and discovering its secret.

So clearly he was thinking of a much bigger "frame" than just one trick at a time.
michaelpenkul
View Profile
New user
Toronto Canada
44 Posts

Profile of michaelpenkul
I used to occasionally get questions after Chicago Opener whether there is a missing card in the deck now after removing the odd backed card. These days I do a simple colour change like Erdnase to change the odd coloured card back, and then palm it off at some off-beat moment.
Nikodemus
View Profile
Loyal user
288 Posts

Profile of Nikodemus
That makes a lot of sense.
michaelpenkul
View Profile
New user
Toronto Canada
44 Posts

Profile of michaelpenkul
It's great because I will do it as people relax their attention, as if I'm just changing it back to reset the deck and move on. So sometimes only a few people in the group will see the colour change, and they will freak out explaining it to the others that didn't catch it; cool little moment and gets rid of the issue of there being one missing card in the deck now.
mightytimbo
View Profile
New user
33 Posts

Profile of mightytimbo
There are a lot of good performers out there that clean up this issue well. (Either purposefully or not). They'll do a trick like the Chicago opener, then focus the next trick or two on something than only focuses on a specific set of cards. Then maybe focus on a forced card that the spectator needs to sign. Then they'll do something like give the spectator the signed card as a souvenir and now because they no longer have a complete deck they set it aside and move to a new deck. This allows for a deck switch that the audience is not only aware of, but is a part of so they know the old one is burned.

There are a lot of variations on how this kind of thing is done in different routines, but it's a good way to resolve the issue you're talking about.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » New to magic? » » Continuity / consistency between effects (3 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.24 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