Performing for the Camera

[MohanaMisra]

What are the pros vs cons of performing magic for camera? (I am aware of some of them, but I wanted a definite list of pros, so that I can exploit all of them. )

Secondly, what is acceptable and not acceptable in performing magic for the camera, as in what's considered fair-game and what's considered cheating?

I ask that because (I know this is old but bear with me) in the entire Jibrizy fiasco, whenever the debate comes up and somebody says that ''Well, Jibrizy's target audience was the audience at home and he just had to create magic for them, not the real-life spectators," I don't know what to reply. Because inherently I know that what he did is wrong, but I can't explain it. Am I wrong and maybe what he did is acceptable in a way?

Please reply! I think learning the ethics of magic is sometimes even more important than learning the sleights.

 

[Sleck]

The biggest pro is that you don't have to upload the video if you messed up!

I'd say anything but video editing or limited angle shots are fair-game. The problem I have with most TV/video magic is that they only let you see their tricks from the angles that they want you to see. Even for shows like Fool Us does this at times, they do way too many cuts and give you the bad camera angles so you can't crack the trick. The ones that I appreciate the most are the ones that do one continuous shot and let you see them from all angles.

I'd say optical illusions are also great, they can be really impressive and mind blowing when executed well.

Just my two cents.

 

[MohanaMisra]

I'd say anything but video editing or limited angle shots are fair-game.

I understand video editing but limited angle shots aren't fair?
But if I perform for spectators in real life, I try to keep my angles secure (and limited if the move is angly) as well.

 

[jakee5]

Well my opinion is limited angles are needed so people can't easily figure out how it was done.

I think a lot of cuts from trick to trick looks hinky.
If its a street performance ID like to see the people that are like nope don't want to see it that would make it feel more real I think.

Take into account what you're filming for also, if your filming just learn from then you want all the raw reactions
if its just to show off to friends and stuff then who cares if you ask people to react a certain way as long as you tell them that its just show off vid for friends
if filming to market yourself then you first need to figure out the kind of people you're marketing to

 

[jakee5]

As far as morality goes remember you're a magician by default you're a lier and a cheat.

Telling people how you want them to react in my mind isn't wrong per say but it isn't tasteful either it seems like people are trying too hard or trying to move too fast and some people it ego driving them to do it

Me personally would never sacrifice the people in front of me for x number people that might see the vid the one person I'm performing to up close is just as if not more important than the x number seeing the vid

 

[Arconik]

I've seen this a few times on Instagram and hate it, where someone uses a duplicates for a force. I watched this guys dribble force and DMed him because I re-watched it again and again and it was too clean for my liking. When I dmed him he told me that in fact he did use a duplicate and the first card was really lost in the deck and he just turned over the second duplicate.
Please never do this I hate it, if your showing off a move - show off that move, its not a magic trick you aren't supposed to be fooling - (well you are to laymen but you get what I mean)

 

[JoshL8]

Some tricks aren’t great for; camera, stage, parlor etc. Like card to mouth is a trick you often see videos of that omit the card to mouth part. But those videos are more about the participants reaction or the interaction between the magician and participant rather than the trick itself. I don’t think limiting angles or omitting action is necessarily a bad thing. While that is fun for a promo reel or hidden camera magic shows it’s probably not the best material if someone was looking to perform magic for cameras....if I understand the end goal correctly.


A definite list of pros and cons is quite the task! There is probably some good resources on this already mulling about. For instance Paul Draper recently released a download on how to make a home studio for under 200 dollars and discusses things like selecting effects for zoom type shows etc.

I would think this is also a topic in the realm of creating magic for tv. I would look into information from magicians like; Marcus Eddie, Josh Janousky, Daniel Garcia....They’ve been pretty successful in their contributions in this area. I know I’m missing bunches of people.

Like Calen Morelli, his new release here at T11 looks interesting and certainly is pushing some boundaries as to what you can get away with or what’s “fair game”.

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

New As far as morality goes remember you're a magician by default you're a liar and a cheat.

Of all the mentalities I wish would go away, this is one of the biggest.

What are the pros vs cons of performing magic for camera?

A definitive list is probably never going to happen, but I just so happened to read something yesterday that pertains to your question. The Darkest Corners by Neil Kelso and Ben Hart. In it they talk about how Ben uses a camera during his stage show, and that this is not something that is commonly done.

A very brief paraphrase of the section is that using a camera on stage allows you to take a smaller act (any 'prop' smaller than a human is not going to be visible to the people in the back of a large auditorium) and allow the whole audience to experience it. You can also use camera movements (Pans, tilts, zooms) to allow you to hide certain 'dirty' actions like ditches, switches, palms, etc. The key is not to focus solely on either the in-person interactions or the video interactions, but to combine both to be an engaging narrative either way.

Another example of this is Penn & Teller. They have a piece where they bring an audience member up on stage, give him a camera, and project what that camera sees to a screen. They do it as a sort of expo on misdirection and controlling the frame and it's really entertaining. Sort of a Paper Balls Over The Head on steroids - the bulk of the audience experiences one thing, the volunteer on stage experiences something totally different due to the restricted perspective.

When you're performing for a camera you have something you rarely have elsewhere - total control of the perspective. Some people are going to say it's not 'real' magic if you're just using that frame, but I personally disagree. Magic has always been about controlling perspectives and magicians have always been using technology as much as possible to do what they do. Not to mention, magic and video have been tightly interwoven from the very beginnings of video recording. See:

My personal opinion is that anything that utilizes the restriction of perception is fair game, but you should be able to reproduce the experience live whenever possible. Meaning - editing the video with special effects or cuts is 'cheating', because that means you can't allow an audience to experience the same thing if they were there live. But ditching off camera, using gimmicks, using a limited frame, etc. are all fair because you can do those things live. Jibrizy's sin wasn't that he used camera 'tricks' but that he fabricated the whole experience. What the people in the video were experiencing was 100% fake and unable to be reproduced live. Same thing happened when Criss Angel's videos were exposed - it's not that he was deceiving people, it's that he was deceiving people in a way they had not agreed to.

The biggest 'con' I would say is the scrutiny. People can't rewind a live performance, but they can and will re-watch videos. All the popular magic videos have at least a few comments like, "I got it on the third watching" or "slowed down to .25 and it's obvious" or whatever. Whatever method you use has to stand up to not one, but repeated viewings and probably at different speeds. I think this is why so many social media videos are just displays of skill, or basically just executing the method of a gimmick and calling it "visual magic". While this can be a way to build a presence in the magic industry, I am fairly certain that it has little traction with laymen and what they end up remembering are the videos that engage them with a narrative.

One last thing - flashing. There is absolutely no excuse for uploading a video that flashes the method. None. I don't care if someone has done a hundred takes and what ends up online is 'the best one'. I can't stand how many videos I've seen that have flashes in them. This is pure, unadulterated laziness. If one cannot execute the method well enough to hide it from a camera, one has no business publishing that performance. Delete the video and do it again until it's right.

I lied, here's another last thing - The internet is forever. It's a good idea to always keep in mind that any previous upload could, some day, come back up.

 

[MohanaMisra]

As far as morality goes remember you're a magician by default you're a lier and a cheat.

I think whether a magician is lying or not, depends on what he claims to do.

A definite list of pros and cons is quite the task! There is probably some good resources on this already mulling about. For instance Paul Draper recently released a download on how to make a home studio for under 200 dollars and discusses things like selecting effects for zoom type shows etc.

Thanks a lot! I get it, a definite list would be pretty difficult to compile, haha. Again, thank you for teh sources though.

I've seen this a few times on Instagram and hate it, where someone uses a duplicates for a force. I watched this guys dribble force and DMed him because I re-watched it again and again and it was too clean for my liking. When I dmed him he told me that in fact he did use a duplicate and the first card was really lost in the deck and he just turned over the second duplicate.

But can't one replicate this exact effect with this exact method in real life too?

A very brief paraphrase of the section is that using a camera on stage allows you to take a smaller act (any 'prop' smaller than a human is not going to be visible to the people in the back of a large auditorium) and allow the whole audience to experience it. You can also use camera movements (Pans, tilts, zooms) to allow you to hide certain 'dirty' actions like ditches, switches, palms, etc. The key is not to focus solely on either the in-person interactions or the video interactions, but to combine both to be an engaging narrative either way.

Thanks a lot! I'll check it out. Also, using camera movements really is a nice idea!

it's not that he was deceiving people, it's that he was deceiving people in a way they had not agreed to.

Ah. Thanks. This is an argument I was looking for.

*Proceeds to copy and paste this in the You Tube comment section on suitable videos*

I am fairly certain that it has little traction with laymen and what they end up remembering are the videos that engage them with a narrative.

So are magic videos only fascinate the magic community in general?

Also, an add-on question, how many of the AMAZING magic effects designed to look best on camera and the AMAZING magic effects that make the audience speechless in real life, overlap?

I'm asking this because the sweetest things one can do on video seems to be colour changes (some of the best are difficult, hence multiple takes help. Also, they can be angly), vanishes and producing objects (the most impossible ones are almost invariably angly). Of course, any performer with sufficient practice can recreate these in real life but usually in real life magicians do different effects.

Or is the reason shorter online attention-span instead of angle-sensitivity?

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

So are magic videos only fascinate the magic community in general?

It does seem, to me, that most of what's produced in the magic world is aimed at other magicians rather than laymen. At least, most of what you actually hear about. The folks doing stuff that is truly laymen-oriented aren't posting on forums or releasing products, they're just doing gigs.

I would also not be surprised in the least to find that almost all views of videos where someone's just demonstrating sleight of hand with no real narrative or presentation other than, "watch this thing I can do", are from magicians. Many of whom are just waiting for a chance to say, "I know how he did that".

how many of the AMAZING magic effects designed to look best on camera and the AMAZING magic effects that make the audience speechless in real life, overlap?

No idea. I generally don't pay much attention to things that are clearly designed for cameras. That being said, these are two different mediums (video vs. live performance) and each one has challenges to consider. I think going just for 'visual' magic is a cop out. Pure visuals rarely have any emotional engagement and people don't care if they're not engaged. What they don't care about, they don't remember.

Or is the reason shorter online attention-span instead of angle-sensitivity?

I don't buy the "people have shorter attention spans" argument from magicians. Most of my routines are 5-10 minutes long and have people engaged the whole time. I've also done story telling gigs where I did nothing but tell local ghost stories and creepy history, as well as popular myths, for two hours and people loved it.

I think what is really happening is that audiences now have many more options as far as where to spend their money and time, and have little patience for poor performances. It's not that they lack attention span, it's that they know they can get quality performances and thus don't have to politely sit through someone's ego trip on stage.

 

[Arconik]

But can't one replicate this exact effect with this exact method in real life too?

Exactly what the person above put, magic videos are more aimed at magicians, thus showing off a force. If he continued to do multiple it might be considered to be an ACR aimed at laymen but this is very unlikely on most video platforms (Unless your big enough for laymen to watch you in video form by choice - in which case, I look up to you. )
This is my opinion, but before I was into magic I rarely saw any magic videos and if I did I skipped right past it.

 

[MohanaMisra]

It does seem, to me, that most of what's produced in the magic world is aimed at other magicians rather than laymen. At least, most of what you actually hear about. The folks doing stuff that is truly laymen-oriented aren't posting on forums or releasing products, they're just doing gigs.

That really is true. What a cruel reality check however!


How do you then advise the magic community to hold its own in the 21st century? Being on social media and having performance videos have become a necessity, and sometimes (especially now-a-days) we can't record our performance to real people and that's where the requirement of magic for camera seems to come in.

I don't buy the "people have shorter attention spans" argument from magicians.

I think you misunderstood. I meant specifically shorter online-attention spans.

Exactly what the person above put, magic videos are more aimed at magicians, thus showing off a force.

What you're saying is true in a way, but unless he explicitly stated that he is going to use the dribble force, I think using other aids instead of just sleight of hand is a pretty sweet idea. Even if he did state he's going to use that force, well, it was still clever.

Case in point, there was a video on ScamNation some time back, where they talk about how easily we can just glue or tape a coin to our fingers and do a fair palm. I think both mechanical and manipulative methods have their place.

This is my opinion, but before I was into magic I rarely saw any magic videos and if I did I skipped right past it.

There's a person I know (online) who is not a magician and actively prevents himself from learning magic, but watches a lot of magic, just because he likes it. I didn't think people like him existed either, but the 7.8 billion people on the Earth keep surprising me!

 

[WitchDocIsIn]

Being on social media and having performance videos have become a necessity,

A very common misconception. Having videos that show your act is good, but it's not remotely necessary to have a big online presence. I can assure you I've never been hired for a gig due to videos I've posted online - all my gigs come from direct contact with venues, and a little bit of of mouth. I've never once been hired because someone stumbled across a video of me.

Again - the reason so many people think videos online is necessary is because other people who built their reputation on the back of videos they posted online tell them that. Fact of the matter is there's quite a few people making bank at gigs who hardly ever post videos - once again, they're too busy doing the gigs to worry about building an online presence.

I meant specifically shorter online-attention spans.

Not a thing. Hafthor Bjornsson puts up 15-30 minute videos of basically him lifting weights/training that get over a hundred thousand videos within days. My wife's been binging 20 minute videos on home remodeling lately. I've watched dozens of videos that were 15-25 minutes long that just picked apart the framing and blocking of various shots from famous movies.

It's not the length of the video - it's whether it's rewarding to watch.

Again - it's not that people have shorter attention spans, it's that they don't have to settle for something that isn't interesting or engaging. There are options now, and they are easily accessible. The reason I emphasize this is that taking on the assumption that people have short attention span is a limiting belief. It will prevent someone from exploring options that are available to them simply because they have already convinced themselves it would fail.

 

[Scodischarge]

I think what is really happening is that audiences now have many more options as far as where to spend their money and time, and have little patience for poor performances. It's not that they lack attention span, it's that they know they can get quality performances and thus don't have to politely sit through someone's ego trip on stage.

I like the phrase you once used: "People have better BS filters these days."

How do you then advise the magic community to hold its own in the 21st century? Being on social media and having performance videos have become a necessity, and sometimes (especially now-a-days) we can't record our performance to real people and that's where the requirement of magic for camera seems to come in.

Check out Vanishing Inc.'s ShareMagic:Live download (it's free). Caroline Ravn talked specifically about the issue of building a social media presence as a magician.

 

[MohanaMisra]

Check out Vanishing Inc.'s ShareMagic:Live download (it's free). Caroline Ravn talked specifically about the issue of building a social media presence as a magician.

Thanks a lot!

A very common misconception. Having videos that show your act is good, but it's not remotely necessary to have a big online presence. I can assure you I've never been hired for a gig due to videos I've posted online - all my gigs come from direct contact with venues, and a little bit of of mouth. I've never once been hired because someone stumbled across a video of me.

I understand now. Thanks!