theory11 — Magic Tricks & the World's Finest Playing Cards

"Bottomless" New Trick

I think it looks absolutely identical to "On The Rocks' by Danny Garcia. If it is, that really is not cool, particularly because t11 sell the DVD that you can learn the original from right here, and its wrong anyway.

If it is different, very nice work!
 
WyattSB said:
I think it looks absolutely identical to "On The Rocks' by Danny Garcia.
Click to expand...

I agree. I made a thread in the Wire section of the forums asking if anyone in the know when it comes to the method of DG's effect has bought this effect and/or knows the method to this effect and can confirm or deny whether or not it's original.

Daniel Garcia: "On The Rocks" - Project #6
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D0vCFrIpkI0
 
yea , the first think i said to myself after watching the trailer is that it is similar to Danny's effect . probably Vladislav isn't aware of it as he didn't include Danny's name in the 'Special Thanks' section in the wire :D
 
Hey there,
Thanks for supplying me with the information. I really was not aware of Garcia's effect up to this moment. But it seems to me that the methods are different; and by the way, it was checked by The Wire team, so I guess my effect is original.
Vlad
 
moooozzz said:
(...) it was checked by The Wire team, so I guess my effect is original.
Click to expand...

There's been several cases of blatantly unoriginal effects being released. Just because it was approved, does not mean it is 100% original.
A kid released an effect of snapping and restoring a rubberband - yes it's EXACTLY how you think it is, we all know that effect - and it was approved.

I'm not trying be a ****, I'm just wanting clarification that this is in fact a different method from DG's. Although I cannot see how, I would be gladly proved wrong (no, I'm not going to spend 5 dollars for that cause). If it IS different, hats off to you, I'm genuinely impressed.
But I doubt it.
 
Curious myself. Visually they are the same. Of course, behind the scenes could be totally different. I'd like to hear from someone that has both.

You wouldn't be the first to accidentally release an already marketed trick. It's more a hit on T11's checking process than anything. Can't be very thorough if they are letting a copy of something they sell through.
 
Yea, actually it is both's fault, but anyway, it ain't that serious, it should have been free or removed from the Wire. Just my taught tough, no hard feelings.
 
Dear Community,
Thank you for noticing the effect's unoriginality. I am awfully sorry beacause I sincerely thought it's something new and original. The even more sad part is that I've been working on it for a very long time and I've also been doing research... I have spent months on it and now... But indeed it's partly my fault. All in all, negative experience is also an experience anyway! The only thing I hope now is that this misunderstanding won't have impact on my future reputation ( and also that Daniel Garcia isn't very angry ( :)

Vlad
 
moooozzz said:
Dear Community,
Thank you for noticing the effect's unoriginality. I am awfully sorry beacause I sincerely thought it's something new and original. The even more sad part is that I've been working on it for a very long time and I've also been doing research... I have spent months on it and now... But indeed it's partly my fault. All in all, negative experience is also an experience anyway! The only thing I hope now is that this misunderstanding won't have impact on my future reputation ( and also that Daniel Garcia isn't very angry ( :)

Vlad
Click to expand...

UNDERSTAND, this is something even veteran effect developers have happen. Ken Whitaker and I had a beautiful big illusion idea and as we and a mutual friend of ours dug into it, slowly building mock-ups, we found that versions of the same effect could be traced back into the early 19th century. Granted, we were using different materials and of course improved methodologies, but much of what we were seeing as "original" wasn't. . . it's very hard to develop effects & systems that are genuinely original.

I did buy your trick, it's cute but sadly, too angle sensitive for me to use in that the public looks down towards me when I work (I'm seated) which creates a whole new dynamic when it comes to angle issues. But keep it up!

Franz Harary once pointed out that he only succeeds about 10% of the time when it comes to new effects and certain types of projects. I've heard similar from other noted developers like Alan Wakeling, Jim Stinemeyer and of course our brain-trust @ Creative. Every magician worth their salt has boxes and file cabinets filled with notebooks with diagrams and ideas, few of which ever see the light of day and many (don't life) seem to become repeated entries over the years, because we forget about the first time we thought it to be a good idea. . . and from personal experience, I've shared some of those notes; after seeing someone do their show and pull off a trick that blew my mind, I find out that it was "my" trick. . . but that's when you know you're getting old.

Just keep working at it, you'll get there.
 
IsakAndreassen said:
Yea, actually it is both's fault, but anyway, it ain't that serious, it should have been free or removed from the Wire. Just my taught tough, no hard feelings.
Click to expand...

Free? If it's someone else's trick it should not be given away. It should be removed from publication entirely.

People re-invent tricks all the time. Particularly these days when anyone can publish anything on their own without the filter of a publishing company. The 'creator' needs to do the research to find out if a trick has been put out already. Part of that research should include showing the trick to a variety of knowledgeable people and asking, "Have you seen this?" Clearly this trick was not shown to enough knowledgeable people. Oops, know better next time, not a huge deal.

I see two real problems exampled by this event. First, the Wire team should have caught this. Seriously. It's a trick they sell, they should probably have pointed that out. Even if the methods are different enough to warrant a separate release, they should have pointed out that the tricks are visually identical and therefore should have a note added on there. I thought this sort of thing would start happening when T11 announced the Wire. There's bound to be too many submissions for a small team like T11 to keep up with proper filtering. Coupled with T11's promise of 72 hours, I'm sure this sort of thing will continue to happen which will only further lower the reputation of things released on the Wire.

The second is magic cultures obsession with publishing. This could well be just my own bias, but it seems like magicians these days no longer look to be famous via great performances, but instead aim to be famous amongst magicians for publishing effects. This encourages people to just pump out tricks without really fully researching.

Understand, I'm not slamming on moooozzz. This is my commentary on this sort of thing in general.
 
ChristopherT said:
The second is magic cultures obsession with publishing. This could well be just my own bias, but it seems like magicians these days no longer look to be famous via great performances, but instead aim to be famous amongst magicians for publishing effects. This encourages people to just pump out tricks without really fully researching.
Click to expand...

This sums up magic now-a-days perfectly I'm afraid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.