Animation (My Newest Illusion)

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by Mystifier1, Nov 4, 2008.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Obviously there was a cut, and not a continuous shot. You're an illusion consultant...for who?
     
  2. it wasn't a cut. There was a tree there... why would you need a cut
     
  3. lol @ shadows
     
  4. I meant the part where he "teleports" to the other side of the screen behind the tree.
     
  5. JP Magic - It could have been continuous, maybe a body double. I didn't see a cut anyway.
     
  6. oh the tree one, yah cut i'd say
     
  7. It was video editing and it was a cut.

    In the shot where he moves from one tree to another, notice the shadows. Notice how the shadow of him behind the left tree, just disappears in a flash, no movement at all. Then the shadow appears behind the tree on the right in a manner that shows a cut was done.

    Also, for the part of putting the clothes on the chair, it was just fast forwarded. You can clearly see this by the shadows of the guy getting into the clothes (can see the shadows on the left) as they are moving insanely fast. He (the magician, supposedly) just stayed as still as possible, so that when it was sped up, it didn't seem like it was. He just seemed to forget there were shadows that could easily be seen.

    Basically this is not magic, well it is magic, it's video editing magic. Whoo! Peace!

    Tyler
     
  8. dude. seriously. you arent criss angel.
     
  9. ah the wonders of windows movie maker
     
  10. Guys (and gals), we know it's editing. He calls the effect Animation. Animation requires editing, after all.

    On a note towards the video, Lamont...who exactly are you a consultant for?

    -ThrallMind
     
  11. okay first the blackhole teleportation is not a camera edit its two illusion i combined together

    and second animation is a stage illusion i created which means i could have done it without the fast forward none of the illusions on my channel is a camera edit
     

  12. ug more like two clips you combine together. And as for animation, guys it can be done live. Duplicate clothes, hello? You just need a place for the guy to hide. But still the tree one sucks
     
  13. Ok, obviously you think you've tricked everyone here....sadly, this is not the case.

    If you really want us to believe that there aren't any camera tricks and that the effect has nothing to do with the tree, let's set up some test conditions and you can REPRODUCE the effect.

    1. Film the "effect" in an empty lot (without any trees or cars or conveniently placed hiding spots)

    2. Speak continuously while performing the "effect" (ala Daniel Madison's 2nd "Change" video)


    Pull that off and you might have SOME of us convinced.
     
  14. I second that.
     

  15. owned!
    -f
     
  16. whatever if you feel that way you will never know the secret

    and im no ones consultant my stage partner austin kirkbride is mine
     
  17. #18 praetoritevong, Nov 6, 2008
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 6, 2008
    Mate, you're only throwing yourself into the deep end there. Who cares if it's an illusion? I think the method has been made pretty obvious by now as pointed out by several posters above.

    You asked for anything to improve. We told you about the obviousness of the shadows.

    The fact that you lied about being a consultant, and have since edited out that part of the post, says something about your need to seem important. Who cares, honestly?

    "If you feel that way you will never know the secret."

    A) Why?
    B) Who cares?
    C) Congratulations?
    D) We pointed out the secret already.
    E) So let me get this straight. You're saying that asking you to prove that the method was not camera editing is somehow wrong, when you yourself said it's not? I don't see what the problem is. If it's not editing, it should be very easy to prove, no? All this proves is that you can't justify your answer, and I'm confused as to why it would matter. As Thrall said - it's just an illusion.

    It just sounds like you were posting this in the hopes of achieving more fame and good comments, and when someone realised what was happening, you got bitter. Your inability to defend yourself, or more importantly, your unnecessary attempt to defend yourself, speaks volumes about your insistence on attempting to deceive. Ultimately, you're only really deceiving yourself, if you think we buy your explanation (I still don't know why it matters to you - if you replicate a camera trick, so what? It's a camera trick. So what if it's not "real" magic, if there's not a cleverer solution?), and if you think we care how important your lie makes you seem, and if you think we're somehow offended or torn or upset at that poor excuse for a defence.

    I don't know what you're really trying to achieve here.
     
  18. Very, very well said.

    A phrase comes to mind...



    Owned.

    -Sam H
     
  19. pwned works just as well.
     
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

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