Has anyone bought this? If so, without tipping the effect, I really am curious as to how practical it is for the strolling performer. How much set up is there, how much reset, etc? Does it require a certain kind of clothing (many will understand, I hope), etc.?

Penguin has it and has a video demo that is, to my way of thinking, less than perfect for seeing the effect as the angles are not from the spectator's side, but shot over his right shoulder, making it difficult to see what is going on.

Lee Darrow, C.H.

It is a direct rip-off from David Harkey in his book, "Simply Harkey"

Avoid it like the plague!

Don't support the ripping-off of classic effects.

I just saw the video. Daegs is right. This is a direct rip-off of a Harkey effect. How do these guys get away with this?

Is everyone so starving for new effects that they just go an steal anything they can get their hands on?

Does anyone know how to contact Harkey and tell him? I'm hoping that maybe Harkey allowed it, but there's nothing to show he did.

Greg

Jeez, as you can see from my number of posts I am a newcomer to the Café. 90% of all the old posts I have read that involve penguinmagic are about them ripping a magician's effect off. Is this a common occurrence with this company?

Also, are they not breaking intellectual copyrights by doing this, and if so why are the original magi not suing the *** off them?

Sizzle is a rip off of Harkey's. I believe he did it with the wrapper still on.

Yes, this is in the book, "Simply Harkey" by David Harkey and it's a trick called "Spotweld."

The video at Penguin Magic appears to be exactly the same trick.

Looks completely obvious from the video as to the method. Oz has fallen short on this one.

"are they not breaking intellectual copyrights "

Sadly magic effects fall into a loophole, because you cannot copyright an idea. You can only copyright the instructions, video, pictures, artwork, ect.

Once someone else reads it, they can put it in their own words and sell as much as they want(legally, not ethically).


If it is a mechanical trick, such as some large illusions or something like..."Impossible Casset Prediction" or "Sudden Deck" you *may* be able to purchase a patent on the effect, but then the method is visible to everyone on the internet, and sometimes patents can be gotten around or changed "just enough".


Hopefully, in the semi-near future copyright law is going to get re-done due to the internet and such, and perhaps they will redefine what you can copyright.


The closest thing right now, would be to form your own corporation, and then you could have "trade secrets" and your own methods, but again as soon as you release them to the public, I believe they are fair game.


It's a sad thing when laws don't support ethics.

I just noticed I didn't answer the question that was asked.

You have to set up each wrapped straw that you use in advance. It only takes a minute or two to set up each straw although you would need some privacy to do that, so it’s better done well in advance of a performance. This could be done for restaurant work, but you’d want to prepare many of these.

You'd have to somehow switch in your straw for the borrowed straw, or plant your straw just before you take it.

Hi all

I was reading through the posts and I really haven't found a positive coment on a single instant dowload so far I believe. I won't spend very long on it because I have mixed feelings about them myself but I was reading that they give no credit etc. and to go and tell Mr. Harkly but I would just like to quite their product discription:

Manufacturer Says
Credit for this effect goes to David Harkey. The method taught by Oz is unique and was independently conceived, but the basic effect is the same. You can learn more David Harkey magic in his book, Simply Harkey.

It can be found here:

http://www.penguinmagic.com/product.php?ID=919

This is not written in small letters at all. It is clearly visible so I don't quite think that all the comments above are all fair.(no offence ofcourse)
If the instant downloads are good etc.. I don't know. I don't know this effect either but they do give the credits in this case,

I just wanted to say that.

Thanks for reading Pepijn

Pepjin, they added that very recently...AFTER the complaints were put in. Apparently some "knowledgable pros" were asked about this before it was released. The pros inevitably weren't very well read. Before placing products on the market it should be thoroughly researched. This was not. Furthermore, I would be curious to hear if they actually asked Harkey to sell what is basically his (just out of business courtesy).

There's this rosin type material called artificial smoke, or some such name. It has a distinctive smell that could be presumed to be burning plastic. If this was on the magician’s fingers and they snapped their fingers as they pulled away from the straw, what appears to be smoke will emanate from their fingers. This could add to the effect considerably.

I have not tried this yet, but I’m going to.

Thanks for the feedback on this, guys. From viewing the video on their site again (and it really should be shot from a better angle, for my money), I think I have pretty well figured out the effect and it's not really for me.

Much appreciated though - you folks are the BEST!

Lee Darrow, C.H.

Hmm, does this trick rock at all. It doesn't melt where the girl is pointing and it takes way to long time, to much messing around and to many movements. Any spoon bend is way better.

As for OZ, he has a great instant download for "the ultimate ace assembly" and I think his card work is in great style/technique.

And yes Penguinmagic has promoted to many copies of old tricks since they introduced the instant downloads and stopped selling L&L tapes. I think they realised lots of profit from the downloads and decided to milk the cow.

It seems so easy now a days to say "I've actually got the idea without knowing it existed already" and then to claim you invented an effect. All you have to do is change the patter and the ending (or intro) a bit, then almost nobody can stop you.

I actually invented "Dr. Jacob Daley's last trick" by myself in a smoother version playing around with the DL. I was mighty proud, also when I realised later that it was an old classic. However, I don't believe it gives me the right to promote a slightly different version. But, hey, different people looks different upon business ethics.

I think most of us can tell a story of reinventing and old trick - just to discover it was already there.

Ultimate ace assembly has got to be one of the most impractical assemblies out there. plus this seems very similar to Copperfield's grandpa aces. riiiippppp oooofffff....

David, I have Gran Fathers Legacy, and if that's the one you are referring to, then I have to disagree.

First of all the method is different. Moreover, in the Ultimate Ace Assembly the cards can be shown face up all the way through the effect (not a lot of card matrixes can accomplish that most of them are face down) and it is so much more clean and visual in the handling. Are you sure that Grandpa's aces are face up all through the handling?? - as I remember it is face down. If it's face down then this is an absolute improvement to the Copperfield version of Grandfathers Legacy or Granpa Aces and then by no means a rip off.

There are 100 of ace assemblies out there. We could accuse any of them to be a ripp off except for the original, since they try to accomplish the same with different methods. I love Dai Vernons especially, but you have to give it to OZ the "Ultimate ace Assembly" is utterly visual all the way through.

Vraagaard, it was not grandfather's legacy...I think that is based on macdonald's aces. I'm not sure which one I am thinking about but the primary method with the gimmick and the color change is not original in an ace assembly. Regardless, this assembly is totally impractical for real world conditions. Do you use this when being paid performing? The method will give itself away easily unless you are working in a noisy bar. And nothing can be examined.

David,

To do the Ultimate Ace Assembly (UAA), you need first to have established your skills as a card magician, and then use it as a closer - at least in your card section. I've done it in a short period with quite good results. Yes, you can do it "noice less", if you just patter at the critical moments. I can tell you, when the spectator lifts his finger in the end and see the 4 aces, that's a great one.

"and nothing can be examined", Well, you're right, but not all effects needs to be examined. that's why we do the deck switch after having established our card skills. Sometimes you put in a killer, that cannot be examined. E.g. Your Peek Wallet most likely cannot be examined, so you make sure it doesn't.

Well, in essence The UAA is the exact same principle as Dean Dills "The tonight show matrix" (Dean's as you probably know is with coins and not with cards). I prefers Dean Dills coin matrix, because I can achieve the same magical moments, everything is examinable before and after(in my version) and I only need one matrix, so I stick to Deans.

Otherwise, The UAA is really good, but give yourself 4-5 feet space from your table to the audience. And good advice is to show 2 amazing card tricks prior to this effect and then end the card section with this one (do a deck switch prior to this, and afterwords you can deck switch back if you prefer).

Before I became interested in mentalism, I excelled in cards and coin matrixes for a long time and UAA strucked me because it was all cards face up. But hey, I don't do it anymore, I'm in love with "The Tonight Show Matrix" I can't help it - it's a master piece.

In issues such as this, intent is to be considered. Are we to believe that Oz had this idea, on his own, without seeing the Copperfield piece? I find that hard too believe, based on the similarity between the "appearance" of the effects and his track record. If the Copperfield piece was his inspiration and he was trying to come up with a different method for it ("how different" is thin line of opinion) then the "right" thing to do would be to contact the person whose work inspired him and ask permission since 1) that person is still performing that effect in their shows 2)that person is very much alive and 3)the unique elements which has made OZ want to "adapt" the routine transcend the standard handling (which would be very much public domain. In other words, doing an Ace Assembly is public domain inspiration - assuming he was inspired by a book and not another performer's show. Book???? Book? Magic books?!? What are those?!? Doing moves and using concepts which were brought to attention through the work of one performer's TV show - even if with different handlings- is like transposing a song into a different key and calling it your own. WRONG!).

But the key words in that paragraph are "'right' thing to do."

We are, after all, talking about Penguin.

Independently developed means that Oz has read the Harkey book and came up with a similiar method of accomplishing the effect.
This isn't like publishing your handling for a Coins Across routine. This is attempting to capitalize on someone else's work.
I abhor Penguin Magic and Oz Pearlman. He is just as guilty as penguin is for offering this S***.