On Apr 30, 2025, MadisonH wrote:
The counting of one packet, the possibility that the packets are equal and having to have them change certain cards to make it even.

Madison

On Apr 30, 2025, MadisonH wrote:
Read my review and I think you’ll see for yourself:

www.magicreview.org

But the biggest difference is the deck is in the spectator’s hands and they deal the deck into two piles themselves and one card is always purposely “incorrect.”

Madison

On May 1, 2025, Wravyn wrote:
How does this compare to John Armstrong's Out of This Blah Blah Blah?

On May 1, 2025, Mr. Mindbender wrote:

Quote:

On May 1, 2025, Wravyn wrote:
How does this compare to John Armstrong's Out of This Blah Blah Blah?

It's quite different. About the only similarity is that when you begin, in both versions, the deck is set up in the same way. With OOTBBB, when you deal the cards, one pile goes to the table, the other goes into your other hand. With OOTD, the participant is the one to deal the cards, and both piles go to the table. There's some counting and memory work (not hard, but you still have to do it) for OOTBBB. Memory work for OOTD is super minimal, practically nothing. There are other differences I won't go into, but bottom line is that if you perform OOTBBB and are worried you're buying the same effect with the same methodology with OOTD, you're not at all.

I like OOTBBB, I've performed it often for a period of about a year (until I switched to Separation Anxiety), and "favorites" are completely subjective, but as far as methods goes, I really like OOTD.

On Apr 30, 2025, PatrickGregoire wrote:
Bought it. It's good. But again, he's missing a credit like in Hacked where he basically reinvented something from someone else. Look up Cosmos Duo by Greg Rostami.

And to be clear, like with Hacked, I'm not suggesting it was stolen.

On Apr 30, 2025, MadisonH wrote:
I just posted my full review. This will become my go-to method. If you have the product, send me a DM on Instagram (@themagicreview) with the password to Kaleb’s video tutorial from the book, and I’ll send you a few of my small touches that really elevate this IMO.

https://www.magicreview.org/out-of-this-darkness

Madison

On May 1, 2025, syphon101 wrote:
Will OOTD be included in his upcoming book?

On May 1, 2025, Kaleb Wade wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 30, 2025, PatrickGregoire wrote:
Bought it. It's good. But again, he's missing a credit like in Hacked where he basically reinvented something from someone else. Look up Cosmos Duo by Greg Rostami.

And to be clear, like with Hacked, I'm not suggesting it was stolen.

Hey Patrick,

Firstly, thank you for ordering Out of This Darkness. I’m so happy you like it.

Also, Thank you for bringing Greg Rostami’s Cosmos to my attention. Out of This Darkness is an independent creation. I’m not a ‘card guy,' so before I released this, I had plenty of knowledgeable card magicians look it over and ask if it had been done before, Greg’s handling wasn’t mentioned in their feedback. If it had been, I would have reached out to Greg.

I would NEVER use someone else’s ideas and omit crediting on any of my releases. I have had my ideas stolen before; it is not a nice feeling.

Thanks again for pointing this out. I am looking into this and have reached out to Greg. Obviously, if a credit is due, I will add this to all future eBooks.

Cheers,
Kaleb

On May 1, 2025, ArtIn wrote:

Quote:

On May 1, 2025, Mr. Mindbender wrote:

Quote:

On May 1, 2025, Wravyn wrote:
How does this compare to John Armstrong's Out of This Blah Blah Blah?

It's quite different. About the only similarity is that when you begin, in both versions, the deck is set up in the same way. With OOTBBB, when you deal the cards, one pile goes to the table, the other goes into your other hand. With OOTD, the participant is the one to deal the cards, and both piles go to the table. There's some counting and memory work (not hard, but you still have to do it) for OOTBBB. Memory work for OOTD is super minimal, practically nothing. There are other differences I won't go into, but bottom line is that if you perform OOTBBB and are worried you're buying the same effect with the same methodology with OOTD, you're not at all.

I like OOTBBB, I've performed it often for a period of about a year (until I switched to Separation Anxiety), and "favorites" are completely subjective, but as far as methods goes, I really like OOTD.

Would you switch from Separation Anxiety now to OOTD?

On May 1, 2025, PatrickGregoire wrote:

Quote:

On May 1, 2025, Kaleb Wade wrote:

Quote:

On Apr 30, 2025, PatrickGregoire wrote:
Bought it. It's good. But again, he's missing a credit like in Hacked where he basically reinvented something from someone else. Look up Cosmos Duo by Greg Rostami.

And to be clear, like with Hacked, I'm not suggesting it was stolen.

Hey Patrick,

Firstly, thank you for ordering Out of This Darkness. I’m so happy you like it.

Also, Thank you for bringing Greg Rostami’s Cosmos to my attention. Out of This Darkness is an independent creation. I’m not a ‘card guy,' so before I released this, I had plenty of knowledgeable card magicians look it over and ask if it had been done before, Greg’s handling wasn’t mentioned in their feedback. If it had been, I would have reached out to Greg.

I would NEVER use someone else’s ideas and omit crediting on any of my releases. I have had my ideas stolen before; it is not a nice feeling.

Thanks again for pointing this out. I am looking into this and have reached out to Greg. Obviously, if a credit is due, I will add this to all future eBooks.

Cheers,
Kaleb

I believe you, that was never my suggestion. But did you add a credit to Hacked (Duos Exitum) for Ken Dyne's E1 Prediction/Predictagram? Did you at least look into that one? I understand it's a limited printed run but you could add the credit on the website copy.

On May 2, 2025, Kaleb Wade wrote:

Hi Patrick,

Can I ask why you are bringing up a Hacked question from 18 months ago in the Out of This Darkness thread? It seems a little strange.

But to answer your question, yes! Of course I looked into it. It has a similar premise regarding the performer pre-predicting a word written by audience members, but Duos Exitum uses a different method to E1 prediction.

As far as I am aware, credit should be given if you are inspired by another creator's routine or use another creator's method. Since I wasn’t inspired by Ken’s routine and discovered Duos Exitum doesn't use Ken’s method, I didn’t reach out to Ken. I have always credited all my work to the best of my knowledge, received help with crediting from knowledgeable performers and reached out to other performers where I felt necessary.

Back to Out of This Darkness, thank you again for bringing Greg’s release to my attention. I have sent him an email and will hopefully hear back soon.

Cheers,
Kaleb

On May 2, 2025, PatrickGregoire wrote:

Quote:

On May 2, 2025, Kaleb Wade wrote:

Hi Patrick,

Can I ask why you are bringing up a Hacked question from 18 months ago in the Out of This Darkness thread? It seems a little strange.

But to answer your question, yes! Of course I looked into it. It has a similar premise regarding the performer pre-predicting a word written by audience members, but Duos Exitum uses a different method to E1 prediction.

As far as I am aware, credit should be given if you are inspired by another creator's routine or use another creator's method. Since I wasn’t inspired by Ken’s routine and discovered Duos Exitum doesn't use Ken’s method, I didn’t reach out to Ken. I have always credited all my work to the best of my knowledge, received help with crediting from knowledgeable performers and reached out to other performers where I felt necessary.

Back to Out of This Darkness, thank you again for bringing Greg’s release to my attention. I have sent him an email and will hopefully hear back soon.

Cheers,
Kaleb

I don't mean to derail the thread, I brought it up because you straight up ignored me for 18 months about the credit and it was weird. Even through PM. Yet still posting reviews of your book online. I had to just let it go, but now here we are, 18 months later, the same thing comes up so I point it out.

I've never heard of a credit only being if you were inspired by something. I've always heard of a credit as something that already exists and you are giving them credit for coming up with it, out of respect. Obviously if you don't know about it, you can't credit them. But if it comes up afterwards, you don't just ignore it - you retroactively credit them for having come up with the thing first (whether it's a significant aspect of a trick or the trick itself).

I don't see what's different about E1 and Duos Exitum. Both use the same core method/concept to reveal the prediction, your effect just uses a different method to swap out the options. Regardless, there is more than enough similar there to credit him.

If you truly believe that independent creation doesn't require credit, why in the dark world would you be looking into Cosmos Duo? And why would you have to ask others for help with crediting if all you have to credit is what you've personally seen yourself that influenced your creation?

Feel free to PM me, I'm not trying to derail your thread.

On May 2, 2025, ArtIn wrote:
So it uses the same method as Cosmos Duo?