A new idea

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by YRAMagicMan, Oct 28, 2012.

  1. for the Wire? (The method is probably too transparent.) I've genuinely never seen anyone present a card trick this way before. I looked on Youtube before I began working on this and no one had done anything close. (I know, Youtube is a comprehensive list of every magic trick ever invented... NOT! :) ).

    [video=youtube;bTgjENcQk14]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bTgjENcQk14[/video]
     
  2. First I thought it was a lame trick, but then I got the idea after reading the description.
     
  3. It seems lame, yes, but it blows people away. Try it! Plus, I'm horrible on video. I do so much better with people to interact with.
     
  4. Yeah not gonna lie I got really bored watching the video, good trick but perhaps work on the patter or like you said you would interact with the audience member.
     
  5. Im glad you work better with an audience. Even so, I would recommend condensing the entire thing a bit, and maybe using a different force at the end. Classic would be best as it matches the way the selection was originally made. As for the Wire, you haven't really used any original moves or anything, and its always been a bit questionable to release new effects with old methods, you could try it out though.
     
  6. It's a nice idea, although it's pretty obvious how it's done.
     
  7. With an audience it works much better. I still haven't figured out the best way to do videos. I've looked at various people known for their videos, Gnarlycardz in particular and tried to mimic them in some ways. I guess it hasn't worked. As far as the classic force goes, I would like to use that, but I feel it would be too obvious, too easy to deduce the method. I use this force to take the deck out of my hands and hopefully hide the method. PM me if you have any suggestions.

    I did mention that in the short blurb above. I was aware of that when I posted it.
     
  8. The effect is a good one. Your patter is decent. You have so many moves though... It isn't necessary. If you look at your trick, step by step, and consider exactly what each sleight is accomplishing, and how it looks to your audience, I think you will be able to remove nearly half of the sleights you performed.
     
  9. How? I used a control and a force, and that's it. My control may not have been simple enough, I'll admit that, but I think some of it is necessary. If I used a Center Double, for instance and eliminated the shuffle, the method may be more transparent to laymen. I feel there's some subtle psychological thing with shuffling that convinces laymen that the card was lost, especially when the controls are done well. The rest of what you see is mostly playing with the deck. Would you like me to do another video with just the meat and potatoes of the trick?
     
  10. Hi dear there are all shared very best idea and i think i have no idea to share my ideas here after read out thsi thread's informaiton but i can share my informaiton or opinioins about this thread here anyways thanks for this and have a good day...
     
  11. Your location info indicates you are in the USA, which leads me to believe english is your first language. Your use of the english languages indicates that you don't know english very well. No punctuation at all, one typo, and some strange sentence structure and word use,. Please, if you know english, use it properly. If not, I understand and can give you grace, but please do your best to use english properly.
     
  12. Amarion is a spambot.

    Don't like it. For one, it's way too long. I don't know if that's just because, as you put it, you're bad at videos, or if it's just that you talk too much without knowing what to say during tricks. The whole time it seemed like you were just fumbling and trying to come up with a script on the spot. For what you're doing, you either need to have a much more robust script or you need to make it much, much shorter.

    Another problem I have is that it is distinctly not a card trick in reverse. It is, in fact, exactly what you say it isn't. A card is selected (By you, instead of by the spectator), lost in the deck, and found (by the spectator, instead of you). So, a card is selected, lost in the deck and found. How is that in reverse?
     
  13. It is too long on video, but in performance it actually works to set up the trick similar to what I've done there.

    (With your second point you are thinking like a magician and seeing the trick from that point of view. I'm going to play along with that just for the sake of having some fun. If you think about a card trick from the eyes of the audience, this is what you get when a card trick is done backwards.)

    I had a specific trick in mind that I wanted to reverse. The cliché card trick that every beginner does terribly, usually involving a key card. What I've proposed is the reverse of that as far as the presentation is concerned. I would like to see if you can come up with something that you would call a backwards card trick. That is the best I have at the moment, and believe it or not, it works.

    The issue with your idea of reversing a card trick that involves a selection is that you end up with a nonsense trick because the spectator has no clue what's going on or why. Also, all card tricks involving a selection done backwards would appear to have the magician select a card, lose it in the deck by some strange procedure or another, and then the spectator would find it. Take Now You See It (Chapter 7 of Royal Road to Card Magic) for instance. Done backwards from the ideal outcome it would begin with a card face up on the table amongst 3 others. The cards would be gathered in reverse order of what is described in the book, replaced in the deck, the deck would then be shuffled, and a card would be chosen. You have to get the cards on the table somehow in order to start the process of reversing the trick. That's going to look like the magician selecting the cards, unless you have a way to make them just appear there.

    Lets assume you can make them appear, how then do you hold the spectators attention and have the trick make sense to them? You have to set the trick up some how. If you present it with your patter read from the bottom up instead of the top down, it makes no sense and looks something like this.... (You'll have to imagine the other side of the conversation and the corresponding actions.)

    "That's your card? Awesome"
    "Turn over the card you touched"
    "Touch a card please"
    "It looks like I haven't found your card. I'll just do a different trick."
    "Are either of these your card?"
    "Is this your card?"
    "Is this your card?"
    "I'll take the deck back please... Thanks. I'm now going to attempt to find your card...the boring way. I have to look through the deck. To make matters worse, it takes me 4 tries."
    "Please replace your card in the deck and shuffle the cards"
    "Pick a card"

    That's nonsense unless you read it in the right order, from the bottom up. With the trick I've presented, however boring and poorly done it was, I took a simple trick that everyone is familiar with, a chosen card is found in the deck, and did the actions and presentation of the most simple version of that plot backwards. You can't really reverse an ACR, unless you count having the card jump to the bottom instead of the top as reversing the trick. Beginning an ACR with the card jumping is not going to hold anyones attention because they have nothing invested in the trick, and if it does hold their attention because they're amazed at what's happening, when you have them pick the card, they're probably going to want you to do something with it, although they may be amazed that they chose the card that was the card that was jumping.

    I've already written an essay, so I will cover transposition tricks and assembly effects with two or three sentences. I've attempted to reverse a transpo, it's confusing because you have to somehow make the audience think that the cards aren't where they're supposed to be, then show that they are. An assembly done backwards is mildly anti-climactic and worse than when done forwards.

    That's my 2 cents, even though I wrote more than 2 cents worth.
     
  14. Ok. But I only have what the video shows to go off of. That's why I said that it could well be that the video just doesn't showcase the concept well.

    If I'd seen this trick before I started magic, I would have been just as bored and just as skeptical. I'm not thinking on a technique level, I'm thinking on the level of "Is this interesting?" Sorry, but the video is not.

    Of course it works. Just like most "pick a card - find it" routines work when presented competently. But how about this? Have you ever asked your audience what they thought was going on? Did they remember it as a card trick in reverse? If so, was it just because you said it was reversed? Can they find any difference between a 'forward' card trick and your 'reversed' card trick?

    Your challenge to me just sounds defensive. "I'd like to see you do better!" doesn't make it good. I couldn't build a car, but that doesn't make the Pinto a good car. Honestly, I've never tried to do a reversed card trick because I don't particularly like the concept. It looks too much like a forward card trick.

    Exactly. It's not a strong concept to me.

    Listen, if you don't think I know what I'm talking about then why bother wasting energy on me? If the trick is working for you and satisfying to perform, then there's no need to prove it to me? Who am I to you? No one. Unless, of course, deep down inside you agree with me and also worry that it's a weak trick. Then my pointing it out would only reenforce that worry. Conundrum.
     
  15. Valid points. Thanks. :)
     
  16. No it isn't. Not to the spectator. I can tell by your join date that you are probably new to magic, but comments like this are really disrespectful.
     
  17. ...because I joined a forum recently means I'm new to magic? What kind of logic is that? I said it was obvious to me, and probably most other people who are familiar with cards. I never said a spectator wouldn't be fooled.
     

Share This Page

Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results