Good point Slade, but even still with cards, there are some very simple things you can do to create a big impact. Try a very basic, "think of a card," and guess it, or peek it and produce it later, etc... type effect, and you will get amazing reactions. If you are a good salesman, people will buy it. If you are not a good salesman, use self-working tools that will help you, like depending on the power of the signed card!
A Pattern I Have Noticed
- Thread starter notsoltd
- Start date
I think that any time you borrow money from someone (a bill, not change) it is instantly personal. When you tear that bill...Wow their eyes are all on you and it is super personal
I can definately see wedding ring magic being super personal also!
EDIT: Then again, when David Blaine did that effect with the womans wedding ring and "accidentally" dropped it into the sewer...didn't seem so personal...she was kind of like "Oh. Wow. You dropped it....in that sewer...Uh oh.." I would have thought she would have freaked more or maybe started crying when he dropped it into the sewer!
I can definately see wedding ring magic being super personal also!
EDIT: Then again, when David Blaine did that effect with the womans wedding ring and "accidentally" dropped it into the sewer...didn't seem so personal...she was kind of like "Oh. Wow. You dropped it....in that sewer...Uh oh.." I would have thought she would have freaked more or maybe started crying when he dropped it into the sewer!
The idea is not just making the effect "personal" as in they add something from their pocket to the effect. In fact, I think "personal" is the wrong word. Trying to get the spectator "invested" in the trick should be our goal. Sometimes the easiest way to do this is with very well timed, well carried out eye-contact and silence.
Tricks utilizing a signed card, wedding ring, borrowed money are only going to be as hard-hitting, personal, spectator invested, as the magician makes it. Thinking that just choosing these effects alone will create the reactions that you want is far from reality. I have seen "textbook magicians" perform borrowed money tricks and signed card tricks, that got little to no reactions from the spectator. I have seen other magicians do something as simple as accidentally muscle passing a coin into a girls pocket, then proceeding to get her attention, do a wipe away vanish of another coin, and then asking the girl to get it out of her pocket for him, and have the biggest reactions I have ever seen.
Tricks utilizing a signed card, wedding ring, borrowed money are only going to be as hard-hitting, personal, spectator invested, as the magician makes it. Thinking that just choosing these effects alone will create the reactions that you want is far from reality. I have seen "textbook magicians" perform borrowed money tricks and signed card tricks, that got little to no reactions from the spectator. I have seen other magicians do something as simple as accidentally muscle passing a coin into a girls pocket, then proceeding to get her attention, do a wipe away vanish of another coin, and then asking the girl to get it out of her pocket for him, and have the biggest reactions I have ever seen.
Whoa, sorry Steer and Tokyo.. I guess I meant to say "Having a spectator sign a card is a GOOD way to make the effect personal"..
Of course you could do other things, but I find it easy to pull out a sharpie and say "Here, sign your name or draw a little picture on here". I'm not alone in this belief either, Darwin Ortiz goes into great detail, in all of the books I have from him, about having spectators sign the cards.
Sure conjuring up a 'thought of card' is hard hitting, but so is taking a signature off of one card and putting it on another. Also, Paul Harris' effect where his signature and the spectators join on to one card.
As for being 'invested' in the trick, to me that is tearing up someones $100 dollar bill.. then of course restoring it
Of course you could do other things, but I find it easy to pull out a sharpie and say "Here, sign your name or draw a little picture on here". I'm not alone in this belief either, Darwin Ortiz goes into great detail, in all of the books I have from him, about having spectators sign the cards.
Sure conjuring up a 'thought of card' is hard hitting, but so is taking a signature off of one card and putting it on another. Also, Paul Harris' effect where his signature and the spectators join on to one card.
As for being 'invested' in the trick, to me that is tearing up someones $100 dollar bill.. then of course restoring it
Also, how is it a self-working tool to have a card signed? That statement is, for lack of a better word, stupid.
Oh wow...Robert//Livingston...you mentioned telling them to sign the card OR draw a little picture on it...(btw this isn't a lash out at you) but I have learned NOT to have people draw pictures. If they are friends of mine, certain family members or any teen guy will draw vulgar images because for some reason they think it is funny
Audience control? I've never had anyone draw anything vulgar on a card, must be a maturity level of the people I perform for
Metaphors escape you I guess. The term self-working was used in this situation because a lot of magicians use basic principles in magic as a crutch to fall back onto when they are unable to comprehend other ideas. Some people get the mindset that "If I do this, it will be good" just because of the mere fact that it has been proven to work before. Tony Chang puts it nicely when he says, "just because it is sleight-of-hand, it doesn't mean it's invisible." In the same way, just because having a spectator sign a card works in terms of making the trick more personal, it does not mean this should be your go to method for creating a big impact. A lot of people fail to realize this.
Therefore, in a sense, they think that "hey, If I have someone sign the card, it will make the effect hit harder" which is ultimately untrue. That is why the idea of "have a card signed" = "self-working effect" is not far fetched, and for lack of a better word, not stupid.
I would have thought you would have been able to see past the basic denotation of the words and notice the connotation hidden within. I guess I was wrong to assume that you were, not for better word, not stupid.
Yeah I usually perform for teenagers and they have chosen a card and I tell them to sign or mark the card so it is recognizable and they take the sharpie and put the card on the table and before I can see what they have written or drawn, they have sloppily drawn a male body part on it (sloppy, but you can tell what it is)
Now I ALWAYS specifically tell them to sign the card or write their name across the entire face of the card
Now I ALWAYS specifically tell them to sign the card or write their name across the entire face of the card
Two of the best card to wallet effects I have seen don't have them sign the card at all. One is Michael Vincents brainwave my Way. They don't NEED to sign it, and the other is Jon Armstrongs My Opening Act. Both achieve similar things to making the routines connect with people and also avoid having to sign the card.
My idea was pretty easy and simple to do, If you aren't doing a standard pick a card trick. Having them pick a card that "calls out to them" or however you want to phrase, in a face up deck. Avoids them having to sign the card, or a bunch of other problems.
BTW, I took this idea from an effect in Scripting Magic. Which is a book most people should read.
My idea was pretty easy and simple to do, If you aren't doing a standard pick a card trick. Having them pick a card that "calls out to them" or however you want to phrase, in a face up deck. Avoids them having to sign the card, or a bunch of other problems.
BTW, I took this idea from an effect in Scripting Magic. Which is a book most people should read.
Here is a freebie. Use an impression device. Peek a spectator's choice of card written on a pad of paper. Have the spec lock that pad of paper in an envelope and keep it under lock and guard (well have them hold onto it for you). Do a regular routine with cards, not asking for their written card. In fact, do an ACR with a different card chosen from a different spectator. But during the ACR give that other spectator a few glances and make eye contact, and say simple things like, "I know what you are thinking"... continue the ACR, look over again to the first person and now say "I feel you, don't worry" and tap your breast pocket. When you finish the ACR with the other spectator, maybe in CTM or Braue pop up, go onto one last phase. Do Card to Wallet to Sealed envelope, and this time... there are two cards inside the sealed envelope. First pull out the ACR card for the 2nd spectator, and lastly, after having the original spectator open their envelope to reveal what card they wrote down, pull out the very same card from the same envelope as the other card.
No signatures, but one card is bent, and another card was written down and predicted. No signatures, no need. Adding signatures might just be a bit over the top actually.
What sells this is not the fact that you make a prediction. It is the subtle pauses you take during the ACR to give a bit of mysterious attention to the first spectator. You are of course still fully invested in making the ACR for the second spectator as much about them as possible, but you act as if your brain gets interrupted by the thoughts of the first person. You make your small gestures or remarks, shake it off, and pretend you are back in focus with the ACR.
These emotionally selling points are what make the effect big, not just the fact that you did something with two people.
No signatures, but one card is bent, and another card was written down and predicted. No signatures, no need. Adding signatures might just be a bit over the top actually.
What sells this is not the fact that you make a prediction. It is the subtle pauses you take during the ACR to give a bit of mysterious attention to the first spectator. You are of course still fully invested in making the ACR for the second spectator as much about them as possible, but you act as if your brain gets interrupted by the thoughts of the first person. You make your small gestures or remarks, shake it off, and pretend you are back in focus with the ACR.
These emotionally selling points are what make the effect big, not just the fact that you did something with two people.
Tokyo - To each his own my friend. I do not own, and do not have need for an impression device. I like to have the card signed when it's the right effect and the right audience, when I'm doing certain card effects. Of course, not every card effect uses, needs, or should have a signature. I understand there are other ways to create an 'emotional hook', and also use other ways. I was simply answering the OP's question on whether he should, or should not use effects that have the card signed/destroyed opposed to ones that don't.
If he were asking about non-card magic, then sure borrowing money/wedding ring/virginity.. is a great way to have a spectator invested.
As for all your other points, I agree! Not once in this thread did I disagree with any of you, I simply defended my opinion. As for metaphors, sarcasm, and anything of the like should be said in person, as most people can not pick it out in text.
If he were asking about non-card magic, then sure borrowing money/wedding ring/virginity.. is a great way to have a spectator invested.
As for all your other points, I agree! Not once in this thread did I disagree with any of you, I simply defended my opinion. As for metaphors, sarcasm, and anything of the like should be said in person, as most people can not pick it out in text.
While very true, both of those routines are killer (Scripting Magic is also a must read), neither of those tricks is a card to impossible location effect. The strength of Jon Armstrongs 'My Opener' is in that the spectator names any card and he then pulls it from his wallet (After revealing the card he stuck to his forehead...) the structure is of a prediction/premonition and not of impossible location. I've not seen Michael Vincent's Brainwave, My Way but I'm sure it's much the same.
Card to wallet usually lacks because the presentation is one of two things: "Hey look it vanished...and in my wallet it has reappeared!"
or
"I bet you money I can find your card..."
The second has, at a very small level, a semblance of reason for pulling your wallet out. If I merely had you pick a card and then say it was transferring through crazy wonkavision energy to the card box or wallet and it wasn't signed the audience would think 'okay, how did he make me pick that card?'
The two examples you give don't lead to that question because it was a thought of card, and even Jon Armstrong says that he sometimes does two cards by letting the spectator change their mind (in the case of choosing Ace of Spades or some other commonly named card)
I don't currently perform Card to Wallet, and what few effects I have a card signed I believe will actually strengthen the impact of the magic. As far as making it personal and getting someone invested into the trick itself, no magic trick or ruse will help you. You have to be interesting, and get people interested in YOU before they'll care anything about your magic. Even if it's as small as 'This guy isn't creepy, I'll watch his silly magic tricks.'
Last edited by a moderator:
The other thing is that most magicians also tend to rush it. I've seen most hurry up and do the reveal after they did the dirty work. I don't understand why they can't just do the dirty work, then simply continue with the presentation and THEN casually just pull out the wallet and reveal it.
Also I was thinking of a way to present it so that it can still seem impossible. You have a person pick a card, sign it (if you want.), then you proceed to either miss their card or whatnot. When they announce what their card was, You say that it can't be there card, because you removed one card last night to make sure nobody would choose it. Then just go on from there.
Also I was thinking of a way to present it so that it can still seem impossible. You have a person pick a card, sign it (if you want.), then you proceed to either miss their card or whatnot. When they announce what their card was, You say that it can't be there card, because you removed one card last night to make sure nobody would choose it. Then just go on from there.
Hey guys,
While this thread has been pretty co-constructive and productive so far, please remember there is no need for calling others' posts "stupid". We can all be professional here without name calling.
Aside from that, I remember a magician saying at a lecture how he does his card to wallet for weddings. I don't remember exactly who it was, but the ideology behind the trick was quite interesting.
When he was performing walk around magic at weddings, he would always use the card to wallet as his final trick with the Bride of the wedding. I don't know which method he used, but it was one of many methods in which the card ended up in a sealed envelope inside his wallet.
Now the trick, having the Bride's card inside an envelope, is hard hitting in itself, but I would argue that having it signed definitely makes the effect more personal for the Bride. As many of you have pointed out, signing the card isn't always the right choice, but in a situation like this it does add a bit of an impact, and an added layer of impossibility.
Though that wasn't what I found interesting. The magician first told the Bride that the card has vanished from the deck. He showed that the card had vanished, and explained how the card had traveled to the envelope in his wallet. He took out the envelope, held it up to the light to show there was a card inside. Then he told the Bride, that she had two options. She could either open it now, and show that the card had indeed travelled to the envelope, or... she could keep the envelope sealed. To maintain the mystery and wonder of the magic. Now this, in my opinion, is an extremely personal situation. The Bride might choose to keep that envelope for the rest of her life, holding onto the mystery until she ever decided to open it. Talk about personal.
Just an interesting little story I thought I'd share. Keep up the productivity guys, it's what we strive for.
~Zach
PS : JJ Abrams talks a bit about this mystery aspect as well in his TED Talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpjVgF5JDq8
While this thread has been pretty co-constructive and productive so far, please remember there is no need for calling others' posts "stupid". We can all be professional here without name calling.
Aside from that, I remember a magician saying at a lecture how he does his card to wallet for weddings. I don't remember exactly who it was, but the ideology behind the trick was quite interesting.
When he was performing walk around magic at weddings, he would always use the card to wallet as his final trick with the Bride of the wedding. I don't know which method he used, but it was one of many methods in which the card ended up in a sealed envelope inside his wallet.
Now the trick, having the Bride's card inside an envelope, is hard hitting in itself, but I would argue that having it signed definitely makes the effect more personal for the Bride. As many of you have pointed out, signing the card isn't always the right choice, but in a situation like this it does add a bit of an impact, and an added layer of impossibility.
Though that wasn't what I found interesting. The magician first told the Bride that the card has vanished from the deck. He showed that the card had vanished, and explained how the card had traveled to the envelope in his wallet. He took out the envelope, held it up to the light to show there was a card inside. Then he told the Bride, that she had two options. She could either open it now, and show that the card had indeed travelled to the envelope, or... she could keep the envelope sealed. To maintain the mystery and wonder of the magic. Now this, in my opinion, is an extremely personal situation. The Bride might choose to keep that envelope for the rest of her life, holding onto the mystery until she ever decided to open it. Talk about personal.
Just an interesting little story I thought I'd share. Keep up the productivity guys, it's what we strive for.
~Zach
PS : JJ Abrams talks a bit about this mystery aspect as well in his TED Talk: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vpjVgF5JDq8
How does signing a card make it any more personal?
It's still a card. But for a split second delay, any other card could just as easily have been "yours". And, if you so wished, I'm sure that most magicians would have exasperatedly traded you had you so wished.
In most cases, a signature should only be used for verification purposes. I think it's delusional to assume that signing a card automatically makes it personal, in the same way that signing your mate's girlfriend won't make her yours, either.
It's still a card. But for a split second delay, any other card could just as easily have been "yours". And, if you so wished, I'm sure that most magicians would have exasperatedly traded you had you so wished.
In most cases, a signature should only be used for verification purposes. I think it's delusional to assume that signing a card automatically makes it personal, in the same way that signing your mate's girlfriend won't make her yours, either.