Camera tricks are okay to use in magic

[Josh Burch]

I'm currently taking a class in French Cinema at the local university and a clip that we watched really interested me so I thought I'd share.

For those of you who have watched the film Hugo you know about George Melie. He was a magician who turned film director right as the technology was developing. He filmed the very popular film "A Trip to the Moon". He was a pioneer in special effects and we still use some of his methods.

The clip that I wanted to share is his version of the "Vanishing Lady" or "De Culta Chair". When we watch this film we disregard it as a camera trick. At the time though it was a legitimate method. Pay attention to how he puts a newspaper down on the floor to prove the absence of trap doors, how he bangs the chair on the ground to prove it is solid and how the lady moves to prove that she is real as well.

We look at this and say "What a dumb camera trick", on the contraryI believe that in the past this was probably a magician fooler.

[video=youtube;K4MnFACzKfQ]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K4MnFACzKfQ[/video]

 

[Jebzy]

I can't believe that this is shot in 1896. That's 100 years before I was born. Amazing, but I don't think that this can fool somebody. Is this the first camera trick ever?

 

[formula]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

 

[PurpleMustache]

camera tricks may have been able to fool people in the 1800's. but back then it probably took some skill to get a good camera trick. these days however, almost anyone could do it with no skill at all.

 

[KeoSilver]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

But back then, when this film was made, these camera tricks were magical to audience because of how difficult it was to pull off the transitions, under exposures, set designs, etc. It was legitamtely more tedious to do magical editing than it was to do it through practical means. Thanks Goater for the refresher of filmography.

 

[Justin.Morris]

Good post. And what constitutes a camera trick? Splicing? What about turning the camera upside down? What about doing important things outside the camera frame? This was me playing with the angle of the camera, and gravity. The board is actually perpendicular to the floor, and there's a magnet under the mat to hold the coin http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kPktWqA7IyI.

And when are camera tricks okay? How about al these TV magicians? Is it okay for them to mix methods and use camera tricks sometimes? Like in real life they must direct attention to where they want it and away from other things.

Interesting topic. Similar to the stooge discussions.

 

[Josh Burch]

But back then, when this film was made, these camera tricks were magical to audience because of how difficult it was to pull off the transitions, under exposures, set designs, etc. It was legitamtely more tedious to do magical editing than it was to do it through practical means. Thanks Goater for the refresher of filmography.

This is my point for the most part. I don't believe camera tricks to be good methods for today but when this film was made I think many magicians would have thought the method to be ingenious although it is common knowledge now.

At the time I am sure that this fooled magician and layman alike. I remember when I was young and my dad made a stop motion movie for a class he was taking. It used the same methods that Melie used and fooled me at the time. Of course this is common knowledge now but back then it was unheard of. Movies were used as scientific exhibitions and had rarely been manipulated.

 

[Josh Burch]

Is this the first camera trick ever?

No, I don't believe so. The Lumiere brothers experimented with some camera tricks, most famously The Dancing Skeleton. They use the black art principle to hide a marionette's strings on film. That could be considered a camera trick I guess.

 

[KeoSilver]

I was just about to say if you want to see the closest thing to live camera editing, look up black art. Omar Pasha does amazing things based off of one simple principle.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ENAOt-QidpA

 

[Austin Fields]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

Like Justin said, would doing something out of frame constitute a "camera trick"? Or are you referring specifically to editing?

Sometimes I feel it's justified; because you're not trying to create a legitimate effect for an audience, you're trying to create an effect for a camera.

 

[JButterfield]

"Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic" - Arthur C. Clarke.

I'm sure that at the time, this must have been pretty amazing.

 

[Justin.Morris]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

And the implication is that cheating is wrong? Correct? When we cheat the audience using an unseen gimmick that's okay, but when someone fools us (or others) with a camera trick or stooge, as magicians (myself included) our hair stands on end.

 

[JButterfield]

And the implication is that cheating is wrong? Correct? When we cheat the audience using an unseen gimmick that's okay, but when someone fools us (or others) with a camera trick or stooge, as magicians (myself included) our hair stands on end.

I think that the thing being objected to is a belief that magic can be performed live just as it appears on camera, free of "that kind" of trickery.

Similarly, bluffing is fine in poker - implying that you have made your hand (and even saying so before the showdown) is okay. Lying about how much you put in the pot, or passing off a diamond as a heart to complete a flush is not.

I feel that the dividing line is not "cheating vs. not cheating" but "can it be performed before a live audience?"

 

[Shea]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

But does magic require an audience? What is magic? Is it a performance for people? Yes, but does it have to be live? I personally think of magic as an experience and if I can portray that experience through a camera trick what does it matter?

 

[Mike.Hankins]

My opinion is that magician's use camera tricks because they don't have the skill, budget or knowledge to create the desired effect in a legitimate way in front of an audience. It is cheating at cheating.

I will have to respectfully disagree. Blaine used camera tricks in his specials to benefit effects that normally could not be performed on national TV without a camera cutting away...There is nothing wrong with that.

 

[XabierL]

Is Marco Tempest's online magic video series magic? I mean, he uses camera tricks without editing... And I wouldn't consider that cheating.

 

[JButterfield]

I personally think of magic as an experience and if I can portray that experience through a camera trick what does it matter?

Is it magic when Harry Potter flies on a broomstick in a motion picture? If not, what makes it different?

 

[NlightN]

If the spectator knows it's editing that makes it possible then it isn't really magic is it?

A Norwegian magician that has a web series on a news site did a trick where he switched the panties of 2 girls. Basically it was 2 celebrity girls and they were obviously in on it and everything. Everything was shot continuously until moments before "the switch". Then it was edited quickly to another view and then back again to the "continuous view". Now it is clear to anyone what happened. Is that magic? Really?
Magic is when the audience goes "how the hell does he do that?".

 

[Mike.Hankins]

If the spectator knows it's editing that makes it possible then it isn't really magic is it?

A Norwegian magician that has a web series on a news site did a trick where he switched the panties of 2 girls. Basically it was 2 celebrity girls and they were obviously in on it and everything. Everything was shot continuously until moments before "the switch". Then it was edited quickly to another view and then back again to the "continuous view". Now it is clear to anyone what happened. Is that magic? Really?
Magic is when the audience goes "how the hell does he do that?".

If the camera tricks are used CORRECTLY, ala Blaine...then nothing is wrong with using said prop to intensify the magic...

Same thing with stooges...

 

[Josh Burch]

If the spectator knows it's editing that makes it possible then it isn't really magic is it?

A Norwegian magician that has a web series on a news site did a trick where he switched the panties of 2 girls. Basically it was 2 celebrity girls and they were obviously in on it and everything. Everything was shot continuously until moments before "the switch". Then it was edited quickly to another view and then back again to the "continuous view". Now it is clear to anyone what happened. Is that magic? Really?
Magic is when the audience goes "how the hell does he do that?".

Hahaha that is an effect created by David Williamson and as far as I understand it is owned by David Copperfield. He performs it live on stage with two members of the audience. Looks like you saw a cheap imitation of the real thing :/