A $1000 Dollar Routine

Shane,

I can't think of many examples of working pros offering up real world, audience tested materials at any price. I agree that most of the stuff on the market are untested, unfinished pipe dreams - which is why it is a rare gift when someone who has actually performed a piece for years decides to release it.

As for sales techiques such as 'only 100 left' I am not aware Paul is playing that game. In this case, I know he is sincere about the protections he has put into place. They are not marketing ruses - in this case. They are a sincere effort to control the use of and preserve the value of his work and other magician's investment.

Sure, magic pitchmen bombard us with this nonsense, but I would hope an informed readership would know the reputations of the people making the claim and know not to fall for it. Likewise, informed people should know that when a magician of experience is releasing something from his or her personal repertoire, that it has real value.

What I find most interesting is the magic community's response to those rare occasions when an artist releases an item from the working repertoire and choose to put a value on it commisserate with its value in the performance marketplace - the magic community expresses outrage, disgust, and disappointment. Rather than be thrilled that someone has chosen to share something of real value from their working repertoire - something many would be thrilled to present to their own audiences - they throw fits because they don't want to pay the price, they complain that something is overpriced, or that it's somehow wrong for an artist to be able to have some say, some control over how the product of their creativity and work is used.

Unreal.

Fair enough I see what your saying.
 
Dec 14, 2007
817
2
Shane, For the record, my 'unreal' comment was directed to the community at large and not your response specifically (and it seems like you understood that.) Your attitude seems to be one of slightly jaded skepticism, and for that no one can fault you
 
Ok, i understand the 1000 dollar thing. What i am trying to say is that material should only be looked at as inspiration anyways. Why copy another artists work, when you can create your own? this is not as easy to say about n00bs, but they dont much count, as this routine is aimed at the "professional". Wouldnt someone get much greater pleasure out of a routine they created, spent years on, and structured?


One mans vulgar is anothers picasso, and while you think that this man has good reason to market this, hes only doing it for one reason: money. If it wasnt raelly about the money, he would show it to a few trusted professionals, and noone else. But, he needed the money. Note: I AM NOT SAYING THAT THIS IS A BAD EFFECT. This may be pure mind reading, and it may be worth a whole big ol' pile of money, but you tell me what youd get more satisfaction out of: Creating your own, or bluelining a picasso?


And @randomwrath: Their may be DVDs, but artists are not dependant on them like magicians are.
 

j.bayme

ceo / theory11
Team member
Jul 23, 2007
2,848
352
New York City
Shane,

I can't think of many examples of working pros offering up real world, audience tested materials at any price. I agree that most of the stuff on the market are untested, unfinished pipe dreams - which is why it is a rare gift when someone who has actually performed a piece for years decides to release it.

As for sales techiques such as 'only 100 left' I am not aware Paul is playing that game. In this case, I know he is sincere about the protections he has put into place. They are not marketing ruses - in this case. They are a sincere effort to control the use of and preserve the value of his work and other magician's investment.

Sure, magic pitchmen bombard us with this nonsense, but I would hope an informed readership would know the reputations of the people making the claim and know not to fall for it. Likewise, informed people should know that when a magician of experience is releasing something from his or her personal repertoire, that it has real value.

What I find most interesting is the magic community's response to those rare occasions when an artist releases an item from the working repertoire and choose to put a value on it commisserate with its value in the performance marketplace - the magic community expresses outrage, disgust, and disappointment. Rather than be thrilled that someone has chosen to share something of real value from their working repertoire - something many would be thrilled to present to their own audiences - they throw fits because they don't want to pay the price, they complain that something is overpriced, or that it's somehow wrong for an artist to be able to have some say, some control over how the product of their creativity and work is used.

Unreal.

This is a great post and I agree 100% with your insight. At some point, I think those that raise pitchforks at the thought of a $1,000 trick are really bringing about a pointless battle. If $1,000 SOUNDS crazy for you to spend on a magic trick, it probably would be crazy for you to spend that. But maybe that particular effect isn't marketed towards the mainstream. As your post intimated, Vigil does not desire nor aspire for his effect to be the next top seller in magic - he is offering it as a professional-grade routine for the professional performer.

For the casual hobbyist, paying $1,000 for one trick would be absurd and WAY out of the ordinary. But effects like Vigil's and even CK's Superfly are not marketed or directed at the casual hobbyist - they're there for the professional, the worker, the performer who takes great pride in his shared passion and livelihood. There's a reason why Copperfield spends millions of dollars creating and improving his illusions - it counts. His career depends on it. One effect - Vigil's is a case in point - can make a reputation. That's invaluable to all of us, but to someone whose sole livelihood depends on their performances, it's very quantifiable. And it's worth a lot.
 
Feb 27, 2008
2,342
1
33
Grand prairie TX
Ok, i understand the 1000 dollar thing. What i am trying to say is that material should only be looked at as inspiration anyways. Why copy another artists work, when you can create your own? this is not as easy to say about n00bs, but they dont much count, as this routine is aimed at the "professional". Wouldnt someone get much greater pleasure out of a routine they created, spent years on, and structured?


.

So am I understanding that you dont buy any effects at all?


P.S. Brand henderson said it all,and JB wrapped it up nicely.
 

Justin.Morris

Elite Member
Aug 31, 2007
2,793
888
Canada
www.morrismagic.ca
Very well said JB.

In reference to someone's comment above about not using your own creations:
In my show I have one piece that I have developed and routined that I am very happy with and really enjoy performing, and I am currently working on a second piece. That said, I will be honest, I'm not an idea's man. I'm not nearly as creative as many out there, and I have not the decades of experience yet to be able to create lots of my own dynamic and innovative material. I do however make every effect my own by adding my own dialogue and tweaking structure here and there, but it would be a very valuable thing to me to read and learn a seasoned professionals piece of magic because not only if I add it to my show, will it be strong in effect and method, but I can learn a lot about the nuances of performance just from reading another professional's ideas (again not that I would need to copy the patter, but there would be a lot of thought that has gone into it).
That learning would make it worth the high price tag. Of course if you bought it and it was simply just a clever method for a tossed out deck routine with no insights on performance, then I'd be a tad ticked. But by the sounds of it there is a lot more that comes with it.

Still pondering....
 
So am I understanding that you dont buy any effects at all?


P.S. Brand henderson said it all,and JB wrapped it up nicely.

No if you would have listened, i had stated that effects are great inspiration, not to copy. I buy books, not so much on DVDs. For inspiration, mind you. There are about two or three effects i use that arnt mine, and even then, they ae just things I play around with. Derek Dingle's all backs routine, Tony Noice's ACR routine, and thats about it. The reason for these being that I have yet to come up with my own idea for either of the two.
 
Feb 27, 2008
2,342
1
33
Grand prairie TX
No if you would have listened, i had stated that effects are great inspiration, not to copy. I buy books, not so much on DVDs. For inspiration, mind you. There are about two or three effects i use that arnt mine, and even then, they ae just things I play around with. Derek Dingle's all backs routine, Tony Noice's ACR routine, and thats about it. The reason for these being that I have yet to come up with my own idea for either of the two.

Ok but what im seeing is that your trying to push your own ideals on everyone here as if they're way of buying/performing tricks is wrong when in fact is purely your opinion.
 
This is a great post and I agree 100% with your insight. At some point, I think those that raise pitchforks at the thought of a $1,000 trick are really bringing about a pointless battle. If $1,000 SOUNDS crazy for you to spend on a magic trick, it probably would be crazy for you to spend that. But maybe that particular effect isn't marketed towards the mainstream. As your post intimated, Vigil does not desire nor aspire for his effect to be the next top seller in magic - he is offering it as a professional-grade routine for the professional performer.

For the casual hobbyist, paying $1,000 for one trick would be absurd and WAY out of the ordinary. But effects like Vigil's and even CK's Superfly are not marketed or directed at the casual hobbyist - they're there for the professional, the worker, the performer who takes great pride in his shared passion and livelihood. There's a reason why Copperfield spends millions of dollars creating and improving his illusions - it counts. His career depends on it. One effect - Vigil's is a case in point - can make a reputation. That's invaluable to all of us, but to someone whose sole livelihood depends on their performances, it's very quantifiable. And it's worth a lot.

I agree with the hobbyist example being over amplified as an example and I understand the idealism behind material intended for certain individuals, I was in a shell shock over the price of a card trick not an illusion which in turn caused someone else to post this thread in the first place. I would say I myself have taken something from this topic which is the point of having these forums and for those of you that know me you know I'm the first to help the new and old alike and I have the highest respect for magicians but at the same time I feel it is my duty to question certain issues in hopes of maintaining an honest community. I myself have been taken for more money than I would like to admit in my beginnings in magic but as my colleages say all magic shops hate older magicians cause they look all day and don't buy a thing it's their skepticizm that keeps them careful to assure a good investment. Brad I understand your point and its well noted even I learn something new everyday and I'm not afraid to admit it. Thanks.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I don't know. Again, like cm, I don't make my living as a professional magician. But I do have at least two routines I know that I could, in time, perform as individual half hour shows, featuring just that one effect, for considerable money per show - If I committed myself to becoming a magician full time. So I can definitely understand if someone put up their hand and said, "Yeah, I'll pay that much for it". And if I were aiming to be professional mentalist, and I had the money, I'd consider it.

Also, from his three previous releases - I trust his material, which is very important.

I love your signature it made my day. False... but still made my day. Thanks.
 
Dec 14, 2007
817
2
Magicfreak, making a livin off your own material is a noble goal, but it raises several points. First, I don't think I can name a magicians whose repertoire is all original - even those that are highly original have material that one should rightfully attribute to another, but have been modified in some form. Where do we draw the line?

Second, I don't think van kliburn or josh bell have ever written a piece of music in their lives - but does that make them lesser artists?

If I go to a recital, is it not an artist playing? Are their choices of material not artistic one? The way they interpret them?

You do not need to create original material to be an artist. However, as a good human being, we should always respect the rights of other artists to dictate the use of their creations.

For me, this piece may fill a perfect need, serve a perfect purpose toward creating the feelingful response I desire my show to elicit. If so, then using it is an artistic choice. And as long as paul is ok with that, it's a good thing.

The problem comes when magicians decide they deserve to use other peoples ideas and take them, corrupt them, 'adapt them' without permission. The problem comes when magicians just do tricks without any thought as to what they intend to achieve with their art. The problem comes when magicians play monkey see and all end up presenting the same tricks roughly the same way. The problem comes when people feel they and others deserve access to everything and essentially steal the few good ideas of thoughtful artists by posting files on torrent sites, tipping methods on internet forums, and posting tutoruals and crappy performances on youtube.

The problem is not when an artist decides to allow a handful of other qualified artists to benefit from his work and thought.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results