YouTube Rant (Moderator Note: Strong Language)

[CWhite]

(Moderator Note: Hi guys, this is Josh Burch. I just want to step in and let our younger or more sensitive forum members know that this video contains some strong language (Lots of F-bombs and S-bombs). If this offends you please don't watch the video. I feel like the content is still worth discussing for those of you who care to do so.)

I'm not sure if any of you saw this, but I'm curious as to your thoughts on it. He brings up points that directly relate to the 'Paul Gordon' issue one of our members had in a previous thread.
I'm kind of from both sides of the spectrum...a one-time theif and pirate to trying to protect and preserve the art of magic.

Note...The video is almost 15 minutes long and has some course language...discretion is advised.

 

[TylerMakabe]

I'm with you, I respect both sides of this argument. Personally, I don't create magic at the moment, nor do I create tutorials, but I started learning magic from youtube.

Sometimes it hurts when people just search a certain magic trick that they just saw, but it can't be helped :')

As long as there's always new methods and new magic, I don't encourage, nor do I find it super wrong for magicians to expose certain magic tricks.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Sometimes it hurts when people just search a certain magic trick that they just saw

Has that happened to you?

I ask, because it seems to be a common worry among magicians, but I only know of one or two first-person stories of this. Meaning, only one or two people who actually said that someone in their show Googled a trick they had performed, instead of hearing of someone else who had it happen and relaying the story.

but it can't be helped :')

Can't it?

One simple way: Don't perform tricks the way they are taught. The easiest way to create a clear path to figuring out your trick is to perform it in a way that will be easy to link to the trick. Make your material unique and they won't even be able to link what you did with the method they see online.

Second way: Don't perform the tricks that everyone else is doing. Most times when someone exposes something, it's because lots of people are performing it. Avoid those routines.

Third way: Don't challenge your audience to figure out your tricks. This is one of the biggest things I see - magicians perform in such a way that they are basically saying, "I can do this, and you can't figure it out." So the dynamic is that the audience perceives this as a challenge to puzzle out the method.

Forth way: Engage your audience, make them like you, make the show interesting and fun. If the audience likes you and they're enjoying the show, they won't want to know how you do the tricks. It will be more rewarding for them to watch and enjoy than it would be to know the method.

 

[DominusDolorum]

I've actually had someone research a trick after I had performed it.

I was asked to do a few card tricks so I went with the best one I knew at the time which was Out of This World. The trick went over exceedingly well and everybody loved it. But one of my friends is the type of person who HATES not knowing how something is done. Especially when it was in her own hands.

After I left, she Googled the trick and learned how it was done and then spoiled it for everyone else there. Needless to say I was pretty upset about it. I don't do magic for that group anymore except for one of them when it's one on one.

 

[William Draven]

Anyone can do a trick. Very few people perform magic. Exposure is really about ethics. Did you create that effect? No? Ain't yours to expose. Unless it's public domain, but since the majority of exposure videos are from kids, what kid understands public domain? I digress.

If you did create an effect then by all means. Do with it as you will.

As for people googling effects etc. That doesn't harm the art of magic as much as it does the personal ego.

I know of a very famous magician who created a brand new show called "Clearly Impossible" after the whole Masked Magician fiasco of the late 90's, and did classic illusions with clear plastic boxes and absolutely KILLED the audience. Why? Because they were forced out of the comfort zone and motivated to give the Masked Magician a giant middle finger salute.

I know of another magician who, again because of the exposure of the Masked Magician, would book specific illusions for their shows BECAUSE the client saw it on TV, knew how it was done, and still wanted the trick anyways.

So does exposure really hurt the art of magic? Or does it just hurt the ego?

Exposure is ethically wrong, but is it legally wrong?

I just prefer to not engage in it and avoid the subject all together. It's a very sticky one.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I've actually had someone research a trick after I had performed it.

I was asked to do a few card tricks so I went with the best one I knew at the time which was Out of This World. The trick went over exceedingly well and everybody loved it. But one of my friends is the type of person who HATES not knowing how something is done. Especially when it was in her own hands.

After I left, she Googled the trick and learned how it was done and then spoiled it for everyone else there. Needless to say I was pretty upset about it. I don't do magic for that group anymore except for one of them when it's one on one.

Ok. So let's take a step back and look at this scenario. You did a trick which is very easy to identify via Google. Type in "card trick separate black red" - the basic explanation of what happened, and you are given the link to the Wikipedia article on it.

You performed this trick for someone you know will take it as a challenge to figure out the method.

So the question becomes: Did you do anything to account for those issues?

 

[TylerMakabe]

Yeah it's happened before, and what I mean by that it can't be helped is that I can literally google whatever they want any time I want. Google/Youtube will always be here in our generation.

 

[William Draven]

Really? The spectator has to know what they are googling. So unless you're telling them what the effect is really called then how are they finding it?

Christopher is right. You have to account for issues with explanation and either accept that it will happen, mitigate response when it does, or build things into your act to make a routine harder to simply search for online.

For example: The trick that can not be explained by Vernon. Good luck trying to google that, because unless you know what it is you won't find it.

 

[DominusDolorum]

Ok. So let's take a step back and look at this scenario. You did a trick which is very easy to identify via Google. Type in "card trick separate black red" - the basic explanation of what happened, and you are given the link to the Wikipedia article on it.

You performed this trick for someone you know will take it as a challenge to figure out the method.

So the question becomes: Did you do anything to account for those issues?

I was addressing this to you actually because of this question you asked (I was on my phone so I couldn't reply to the specific section):

Has that happened to you?

I ask, because it seems to be a common worry among magicians, but I only know of one or two first-person stories of this. Meaning, only one or two people who actually said that someone in their show Googled a trick they had performed, instead of hearing of someone else who had it happen and relaying the story.

I just wanted to point out that there are instances where people do try and found out methods via Google or YouTube. But this is the ONLY time it ever happened to me.

Also, and there was no way for you to know this prior, this was a relatively new group of friends that I was hanging around with and I really only knew one person there. It was this friend's sister who wanted to see a trick so I went with what I knew best. It was because of this experience and just learning about her personality through other meetups, that she is the type of person who needs to know everything.

I couldn't account for that before going into the trick and because OOTW is a trick where the spectator "does the magic." There was no possible way for me to present it in a challenging way.

But let's say I wanted to present something to her again, or somebody else that has this personality type, what would recommend I do?

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Ah, fair enough. It sounded like you knew these people so that's what I based my thoughts on. With a group you don't know well it's always a bit more work to tailor the performance to them.

As I said, OOTW is something that is incredibly easy to track down if you simply describe what happens in the usual performance. It's worse if you use the patter that's normally taught with it. On top of that, it's also one that so many people do (including famous folks like Blaine) that it's just super easy to find.

Break it down to what it is - a collection of items is separated into two stacks of defining characteristics, sight unseen.

Do those need to be playing cards? Nope. Pictures work great and that's not nearly as easy to Google (as in it actually takes effort and not just looking at the first link on Google from typing in what happened). You could use almost exactly the same method with anything that's vaguely card shaped, though.

Change up the presentation - Colorblind by Luke Jermay is a color separation effect with a totally different method and presentation. But essentially, the same thing happens.

Get them more interested in what's happening than how it's happening. One way to do this is to give a plausible explanation as to what is happening. Another is just to make it more like a story they are interacting with.

When I say you created a challenge situation on purpose. What I mean is, if you're not careful then a magic performance becomes "I can do this, and you can't figure out how I do it" - that's a challenge.

Yeah it's happened before, and what I mean by that it can't be helped is that I can literally google whatever they want any time I want. Google/Youtube will always be here in our generation.

Yes they can do that. But only if they have key words that can help, and they will only bother to do that if figuring out your method is more rewarding to them than enjoying your performance is.

A ton of what I do in my professional shows is derived from stuff anyone could learn online. The stories and history I use are all researched online, even a lot of the techniques I use are readily available to anyone who wants to do the amount of work I've done in learning and practicing those skills. The only thing I do is make it my own in presentation, and entertain the audience. No one has ever come up to me and said, "Yeah, I figured out how you do that on Google." What I do get at almost every single show is, "So how did you figure out how to project energy like that?" or other similar questions.

 

[TylerMakabe]

The people I showed it to were just friends, and I didn't tell them what the trick was called or anything haha.
They said they would "just google it" but I don't know if they actually found it or not. For some tricks, I doubt they found it because it was a trick that I purchased. Not something found on YouTube. Its g lol

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

I do often do what I call a "Google test". I simply put a very basic description of a routine into Google and see what comes up.

My previous example in this thread was "card trick separate red black" - That's just a description of what happened. And it comes up with: https://www.google.com/search?q=card+trick+separate+red+black&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8 - First result is Wikipedia explaining the history, second result exposes the method. Just checked and it also brings up those same results with "card trick separate".

If the basic description of what happened leads Google to the correct method within the first page, I change up the routine until it no longer works. Most people don't care enough to put actual work into finding a method, unless you really challenge them to do so. Since my performance style is very non-challenging (It's mostly showing people how awesome they are) no one wants to spoil things for themselves.

 

[Rev]

Really? The spectator has to know what they are googling. So unless you're telling them what the effect is really called then how are they finding it?

I was actually thinking about this today, and I don't actually think it's true.

I think it was Vernon who said that every 'good' magic trick can be described in a single sentence. The flip side of this, is that it does actually make some really good magic tricks really easy to find with a Google search.

Out of this World has already been mentioned, so I'll use it as an example. If you type 'separate red and bl' into Google, one of the suggestions you get is 'separate red and black card trick'. Click on it and lo and behold, you get a Wikipedia entry for Out of This World, which includes a brief description of the method. Type the same thing into Youtube and there are countless 'Tutorials' (if you can call them that) of the trick.

Point is, an easily described effect is easy to Google. If I said to you 'unlinking rubber bands trick', you know what I am talking about. Same with 'kissing card trick'. You get the idea.

Not that I am suggesting that we should start doing really convoluted magic just to make it hard to remember what actually happened, we just have to live with it.

I have actually had a work colleague come up to me a few days after I performed 'Out of This World' and tell me that they Googled it. The same with Crazyman's Handcuffs. My reaction when they tell me they now know how it's done?

'Well, yeah, it's not real...'

I simply don't care. I'm still going to do those tricks.

In a way it's flattering that it made such an impact on them that they we're still thinking about it a few days later, and cared enough to bother looking it up. I quite like that. It's also worth noting the fact that they didn't go bragging to everyone in the office that they knew, just told me quietly on the side. It's part of the fun for them, being 'in on it' and they didn't have any intention of spoiling it for everyone else or making me look stupid.

Rev

 

[Rev]

I probably should have read the whole thread properly first to see I have basically made exactly the same point (with exactly the same example!) as Christopher...

...My bad!

Rev

 

[RealityOne]

A couple of thoughts.

Wow, 15 minutes of a self-absorbed idiot inartfully justifying exposing magic using explicatives as well as faulty logic. I'm still trying to figure out how repeatedly using explicatives makes you sound more intelligent. What a tool. What a waste of my time listening to his idiotic ramblings.

However, exposure it isn't that big of a deal.

I remember watching the Masked Magician on television revealing how he changed the color of a silk. My wife, who also was watching, asked me, "is that how you do it?" I lied and told her, "No, of course not." I then went into my magic closet, pulled out a silk and changed the color of the silk. My wife commented that my way of doing it was so much better because I didn't have to use a gimmick. I smiled and agreed, because my wife is always right.

I once had a spectator come up to me who had a magic set as a kid and comment about how the linking rings in their set had a cut out section of the ring and how they knew that magicians really didn't do it that way. I smiled and agreed because spectators are always right.

On OOTW - Roberto Giobbi has a great effect in Card College Light called T.N.T. that shows a shuffled deck and has the spectator mix it up even more before going into an Out of this World type routine. Pefroming it that way disproves the method that is revealed on the internet. Also John Armstrong's Out of this Blah Blah Blah, Giobbi's Intuition and Euguene Burger's version are good presentations.

Ultimately, my advice will echo what @ChristopherT and @William Draven said. When you take a trick and perform it, make it your own. Study different methods of accomplishing the same thing. Add convincers and other elements that disprove certain methods (even if those are the methods you are using). Most importantly, dress it up. Do OOTW using post cards or ESP cards or Star Wars Cards ("use the force"). Use quality props (see above comment on linking rings). Give the impression that your performance is something different based on how you present yourself. By taking tricks and making them performance pieces, your audience won't want to know how you did it.

Finally, get a book. I just found a great routine in Scarne on Card Tricks that does a great poker deal from a brand new unopened (really unopened) deck - no sleight of hand involved. Just looking at my shelf -- Lavand, Hilliard, Gardner, Bossi, Carpenter, Regal, Bloomberg, Blum, Bannon (John, not Steven), Jennings, Harris, Giobbi, Tamariz, Steinmeyer. How about magazines - Apocalypse, Hirophant, Almanac, Jinx, Tailsman and Genii. Most YouTube noobs will never crack open a book so you are really safe.

 

[Rev]

Ultimately, my advice will echo what @ChristopherT and @William Draven said. When you take a trick and perform it, make it your own. Study different methods of accomplishing the same thing. Add convincers and other elements that disprove certain methods (even if those are the methods you are using). Most importantly, dress it up. Do OOTW using post cards or ESP cards or Star Wars Cards ("use the force"). Use quality props (see above comment on linking rings). Give the impression that your performance is something different based on how you present yourself. By taking tricks and making them performance pieces, your audience won't want to know how you did it.

Love the Star Wars cards idea!

I'm sure everyone knows this, but Derren Brown did a version of OOTW on his tv show where the spectator separated pictures of people that we're either living or dead. I also saw Rob Zabrecky at a convention a few years back and he did a version where the spectator separated pictures of Houdini and Bess.

In these cases, it's not so much about finding a variety of methods for a certain effect, but finding a variety of 'effects' for the same method. To use one of my own routines, my Roy(al) Walton routine essentially uses Royal Walton's Oil & Water methodology to (apparently) demonstrate card cheating. By never using the words 'Oil and Water', I don't run any risk of a spectator finding the method online, and a search for 'card cheating' is likely to bring up a bunch of totally unrelated stuff!

Finally, get a book. I just found a great routine in Scarne on Card Tricks that does a great poker deal from a brand new unopened (really unopened) deck - no sleight of hand involved. Just looking at my shelf -- Lavand, Hilliard, Gardner, Bossi, Carpenter, Regal, Bloomberg, Blum, Bannon (John, not Steven), Jennings, Harris, Giobbi, Tamariz, Steinmeyer. How about magazines - Apocalypse, Hirophant, Almanac, Jinx, Tailsman and Genii. Most YouTube noobs will never crack open a book so you are really safe.

This is so true. Magic, like everything else, has the 'things' that are just cool to own/do. Anything Theory11 or Ellusionist releases is likely to become a best seller. Unfortunately, the more people that buy it, the more likely there is to be some Joker who decides to reveal it on Youtube because it's pretty much guaranteed 'views' for him.

The same can be said of anything David Blaine performs on TV. This is why I never understand people who jump on to forums after a Blaine special and ask 'where can I learn blah blah that David Blaine did?' Why bother? There's going to be exposure videos all over Youtube within a couple of days anyway. I'd much rather root through old magic books and find long lost treasures no one else is doing. Yes, some of the tricks may be old fashioned, but a bit creativity and you can update them. Then you really will be doing something no one else is doing, which makes you pretty much 'Google proof'!

Heck, you might even fool a magician or two! I know I've fooled a couple of magicians with the first phase of my 'Royal Oil' routine*, and yet I got it from one of Karl Fulves 'Self Working Card Tricks' books which can be found on Amazon for a couple of pounds! I also found the same method hiding in a Harry Lorayne book, credited to George Sands. You've got to search to find the really good stuff!

Great discussion guys!

Rev

*Note: I swear, I do actually do more tricks than just Oil and Water!

 

[Josh Burch]

Sometimes it hurts when people just search a certain magic trick that they just saw, but it can't be helped :')

I have had this happen to me I don't think they found anything but it is obnoxious.

Michael Ammar talks about how he has has it happen to him a few times as well. He related the story on his At the Table Lecture. He said that he was performing Crazy Man's Handcuffs and someone at the table searched "Rubber-band Magic Trick". They told him that they found it while he was at the table, he verified it and admitted that he didn't really know what to do besides say "Yep, that's it" and move on.

My point in bringing this up is that if Michael Ammar can fall prey to this than any of us can.

Does this hurt magic? Yeah, I think it does. I think a good portion of the public thinks magicians are hacks (I think many are as well). You as a magician might be the only exposure to magic they get. If they determine that you are a hack, "This guy probably just learned all his tricks on You Tube", or "I could do what he does, I just need Google" there is the possibility that they characterize all magicians like this. People do this all the time with specific fastfood franchises, "I don't go to McDonalds, they have crappy service" or "I went to Popeyes once, they were really slow". I don't think its unusual for it to happen to magic.

All of that said, I vividly remember creating my own trick and having a coworker insist that he was going to Google it. I invited him to and of course he came up dry. It was a trick that I had created by myself, with a newish method and and original effect and presentation. After that he couldn't shut up about the trick. He told everyone about it and it set me apart as a magician.

 

[ParkinT]

I'm still trying to figure out how repeatedly using explicatives makes you sound more intelligent.

I liked Chris Ramsay and always thought he was a decent, humble guy trying to "give back". I was a subscriber to his channel (I will get back to the WAS in a moment) and thought the first "Watching Bad Magic" was a cute idea. Never a fan of criticizing others or watching people embarrass themselves or through a mistake inflict pain on themselves, I was completely appalled and disenchanted with the most recent (third) of these videos. In one [attempted] levitation effect the poor female 'assistant' must have injured herself when she fell off the broom and this guy was enjoying it.
In addition, I am not 'prudish' but use of a completely meaningless word (it can represent a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, etc) is offensive in itself and becomes quite annoying.
I took offense to the most recent video (on several levels) and UNSubscribed from his channel.

n these cases, it's not so much about finding a variety of methods for a certain effect, but finding a variety of 'effects' for the same method.

Amen to that !!

 

[TylerScottIllusionist]

I liked Chris Ramsay and always thought he was a decent, humble guy trying to "give back". I was a subscriber to his channel (I will get back to the WAS in a moment) and thought the first "Watching Bad Magic" was a cute idea. Never a fan of criticizing others or watching people embarrass themselves or through a mistake inflict pain on themselves, I was completely appalled and disenchanted with the most recent (third) of these videos. In one [attempted] levitation effect the poor female 'assistant' must have injured herself when she fell off the broom and this guy was enjoying it.
In addition, I am not 'prudish' but use of a completely meaningless word (it can represent a verb, noun, adjective, adverb, etc) is offensive in itself and becomes quite annoying.
I took offense to the most recent video (on several levels) and UNSubscribed from his channel.


Amen to that !!

I definitely agree with you on that. I'm still currently subscribed to his channel but I realize that I'm not his target demographic. I see his "Reacting To Bad Magic" series as shameful and almost a form of online bullying. He is a big YouTube success and yet he still has to build his channel up by picking on all these smaller channels by ridiculing them and he doesn't even have the decency to at least hide their usernames.

But that's the kind of content to expect when your channel is catered to 12-17 year olds. His crowd is more of the kid sees a shiny new trailer with no live performances and uses their parents credit card to buy a camera trick. They do this and think they are some sort of elite performer by uploading Instagram clips and getting dozens of likes. They then go to his channel and see him ridiculing people actually making an attempt at performing and now they think they have the right to ridicule since they got a bunch of likes on Instagram. These are also the same demographic of people that will watch DisturbReality and think that it alone will make them a great performer (thus why he's been putting up so many tutorials lately, he's trying to capitalize on that void).

Let's not forget that he literally just tried to justify teaching other people's works just because other people are doing it. That is a highly unethical and shameful practice to me. I'm sort of glad he left Murphy's because his personality does not fit the ethics of that company at all.

I'm not trying to hate on Chris Ramsay or anything because I do enjoy his live street magic performances. I am just very disappointed with the direction he has been taking his content lately.

 

[Tower of Lunatic Meat]

I've tried to give Chris Ramsay a chance. Watched a few of his videos; I can't get onboard. Between the petty and mean spirited approach to his 'bad magic' videos and this thing.

If magic tutorials in YouTube were, you know, any good and were error free. You know, the type of quality that you'd pay for. YouTube tutorials wouldn't be such a polarized subject.

But since YouTube is an open platform, Johnny Chuckwagon can practice a move for 10 minutes upon learning it and make a 'tutorial' (if that) for (unfortunately) everyone to see. People who are interested in magic will come across Johnny Chuckwagon's 'tutorial' and treat is as gospel. This is why dodging YouTube tutorials in in the best interest of virtually everyone. Anyone can be a 'pro' on YouTube. And that's dangerous.

In his video, Ramsay seems to be embracing a mentality that we need to abandon the respect of the art.
He states that 'no one has time to go to a library' anymore and 'everything is moving so fast'. Put things up on YouTube because...people are lazy?

No.

Yes, things today work pretty fast. That doesn't mean we need to 'dumb it down'. If one truly has respect for the art and really wants to be a magician, they will get books, they will practice, they will do their research.

I was amused when he asked 'why isn't anybody doing this already?!'

Because advocating for piracy and a generation of lazy magicians will do this to credibility.

Magic is extremely popular and is not in short supply of new recruits. It's or job to better ourselves and further our knowledge in our individual pursuits as well as helping out others.

It's not our job to dumb magic down and make it more accessible. Similar to how Freemasons aren't going to make it so that EVERYONE can join.