I can't figure out what the gimmick is...wait, actually, I can.
What I'm thinking is this is going to be really hard to pull off with a larger phone.
What I'm thinking is this is going to be really hard to pull off with a larger phone.
Coming soon.
- Thread starter XabierL
- Start date
I don't think the gimmick is intricate at all. The trick is very easy. It looks great. It is great.
I really think the cellphone through pocket trick is a great idea and cant wait for it to be released!
Last edited by a moderator:
There is no "gimmick" as such and no, it can't be done with large phones....unless you have large hands. I hope he has done research on different kinds of trousers, pocket shapes, phone sizes and phone shapes because all of those are very important.
@magicollie - I don't particularly like Inverse Triumph 2.0. There are much better triumph routines out there and I find your version a bit confusing. It would be nice to see how people react to it though....
Hey guys, actually there is a very simple gimmick involved which can be applied to many popular phones out now. I do state in the description (whenever it goes up) that there are certain limits to what you can use. For example, if you have a calculator sized phone, then it would be very challenging to pull this off well. However I do go over some helpful tips in the video that cover most situations. And as for the phone illuminating question, no. Haha, I was referring to the patter. However you can in fact perform it while the phone is ringing, playing music, etc. Hope this helped!
Like I said, there is no "gimmick" as such. A folding coin or a tt is a gimmick, this doesn't use an abnormal object. If it does use an elaborate gimmick, there is an easier method. I don't blame you (barely anyone reads properly these days) but I think you took what I said too literally and didn't take a second to recognise the emphasis on "gimmick" and disregarded "as such".Oh, what did he say? There was a gimmick? Oh that's right.
First off Formula, I was kidding. Hence the smiley face at the end of my post. Maybe I did misread your post. And maybe you were a little unclear on the "AS SUCH" part. All I said was the trick used a gimmick. I never specified what type: Elaborate, not elaborate, etc.
I really don't appreciate being called out like that.
Vanish45: Nice trick man nice trick.
I really don't appreciate being called out like that.
Vanish45: Nice trick man nice trick.
Hey Guys, I completely understand the excitement as members are posting potential Wire effects. Please remain professional even if you dislike something. Sometimes it is hard to get the "humor" or sarcasm in a typed message so keep that in mind as well. The other thing I want to address is there is no need to try and call someone out on an effect even if you know how they performed it.
Thanks. I'm looking forward to seeing what our members have to offer soon.
Thanks. I'm looking forward to seeing what our members have to offer soon.
I never saw anyone say they didn't like his trick. Also, I didn't know speculation was calling someone out on a trick. I say this with all the respect in the world but I don't how this shenanigan happened. I'm assuming this was my fault. But as I stated, I liked the trick a lot. Never said a bad thing about it. Also, all I did was merely suggest there was a gimmick at play. My bad.
Hey guys, for anyone who is wondering, "Signal" will be released TONIGHT at 9:00 pm. I hope you enjoy the effect as much as I do, thanks!
-Brad
-Brad
I'm about to buy it, but then I just realized that if my guess for the method is correct, then the angles for this effect would be horrible. Do you preform this in the real world? If so, how many people do you preform it for?