Im getting tired of seeing these flourishes.

Sep 20, 2008
1,112
3
A long time ago, Dan and Dave flourishes were the 'In thing'. Everyone did them in videos, everyone got tired. People screamed out for 'Creativity' and 'Make your own flourishes'. Nowadays, and im not quite sure if im the only one here- but all i see is random cuts that dont really Flow together.

For instance, Pandora has a theme. As with Jackson 5, same with WTHHTS, Andrei's Bullet, B4, Kate's Pyramid thing. They all have a set theme that they follow along.. To elaborate further, Pandora has this Popping out from the middle sorta thing going on. (with the same card being redundant at the middle throughout most of the flourish. etc.) and Jackson 5 has 4-5 packets on display at all times, with added flares, and a display at the end. (though some may disagree with the display at th end, and some think that the one card flare to the side on Pandora ruins it. but that's irrelevant.)

Now before i get bashed- what im merely noticing is, a lot of these flourishes are 6-8 packet cuts, which make no sense. its as if, they just did it, because they can. Sure its an awesome thing you invented.. And yeah, its cool that you made it, and can do it perfectly.. But do you honestly think that it was worth your time?

Im talking about Quality over quantity here. I really like Chris Hestnes' flourishes, as they flow- and sort of 'make sense' in a way. Such as this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ex64uivmdno

You dont see any 12 packet things going on. Just smooth flourishing. its pleasing to the eyes, not a lot of Card flares, but whatever. May not be his style.. Am i the only one who loves to see videos like these?

Who else still practices 'Mainstream' Flourishes just to master them like the pros? Im still doing Pandora when i can, two years on. Its still not as smooth as Dan's.

-Sin
 
Aug 6, 2008
103
1
flourishes

I get your point, and I really did like that video that you posted. You're talking about fancy flourishes and honestly I liked the flourishes I see in Dan and Dave better;such as the ones in Trilgoy. Also it does get repetitive i see them in almost every video on youtub. And it does look cool, it shows your card handling skills. Im mean im no one to say anything. I just got started learning some flourishes. All i can do is a couple swing cuts that i try to make look fancy. I cant even do a nice fan like in the videos. All im saying is that: Yeah I get why people do them. To look better. I want to learn them and look better. But just like before you can make a routine, you have to know the tricks. So You should learn the flourishes you can, and then try and put them together to Flow like you said. That video did look very Elegant.
 
Apr 6, 2010
256
0
I agree with you Sinful, but as i am a recent beginner to magic and flourishing i have this to say about your point:

Although they are overused, and as FlourishAce says, often encourage less creativty and moreover, just variations, i have found that they are essential to my progression in flourishing. When i first begun several months ago, i didnt know what was what and istarted with the basics like everyone does. As i progressed onto things like The Trilogy and Dangerous, i found that by learning the 'industry standard' cuts, such as Pandora, Jackson 5 and so on, it helped me understand and get a grip on the foundations of flourishing. But, and this is a big but, i have noticed that my transitions and fluidity between cuts, as you mentioned, has been seriously affected, and although i am still relatively a beginner, i can see now that my style would perhaps be smoother and flow better if i had taken a less conventional route.

My style, speed and fluidity will progress in time i am sure, but i cant help thinking that maybe i would have focused on being more creative from the very start, even if it may have hindered such a rapid improvement of my skills. I am at a stage now where even though i am miles away from getting any of the 'industry standard' flourishes perfect, i am now looking for more old school cuts and styles. This has brought me to The System, and although it is similar in ways to The Trilogy's content, i think it is actually much more creative and fluid in style, as the cuts are old school compared to most, and require you to think about creativity in transitions more, as they are shorter than those on The Trilogy.

People will always take the easier route, which requires less effort and thinking, because they are either too lazy or too incompetent to be creative.
 
Sep 20, 2008
1,112
3
No no, You all have misunderstood.

I have nothing againts people performing pandora, Jackson 5, and all the 'mainstream' Flourishes. Hell, majority of my flourishes are performing Dan and Dave's material. I have nothing againts those, im talking about people making their own flourishes that is literally just chaotic crap that looks crap, and it almost seems like they just flared it there cause they can, or split the packet into three because they can. Im thinking- did they HONESTLY look at that cut across that mirror and think 'Yeah, that was badass'.

I'd never EVER create a cut that i think looks crap. i can create like a 12 packet display, but it'd look messy, and wouldnt be appealing to the eyes. I'd rather stick with my five packet display.

... I dont think anyone is getting my point :)

Also, i enjoy variations of Originals. E.g. the Preqel variations were awesome :)

-Sin
 
Apr 6, 2010
256
0
Nah i understood you, i think i just didnt explain my response well (as i usual).

I like all the mainstream flourishes too, but like you say Sinful, 80% of the crap people come up with is very simple (and more often than not much easier) versions of the 'cool' looking parts of the mainstream flourishes. Like the tornado spin or the pandora 4 packet display. I know im kinda reproducing all youve just said, but bear with me.

The problem is that people dont have enough inspiration or motivation to start from scratch, it seems much easier to do a sybil cut and then branch off into some combination of tornado flourish and madonna or whatever. Fair enough, creation can be a b***h, and it can be hard to produce something original, but what people dont realise is that they will NEVER accomplish a prolific, original flourish if they dont try. The more they incorporate stuff from mainstream flourishes the more they restrict their ability to improve their inspiriation.

I just created my first flourish, and i am quite pleased with the result. When i was first thinking about what i could do, i decided i would make it very short and simple, because ive noticed a lot of people try and make really long complex flourishesv that equivalate to the Jackson 5. I find that fluidity and speed and also creativity is easier, better and more artistic with short, simple flourishes like many of the cuts and flourishes on The System. Because they are so short they are easier to combine and provide many more possibilities once you do.

To end i would like to say that even in my short time flourishing (4 months now) i have discovered the sheer, beautiful aesthetic that flourishing and cardistry provides, and the foundation for self expression, entertainment and creativity that it poses for any one, regardless of stereotypical classes - it is universal and accessible to anyone.
 
Aug 17, 2010
1
0
Uuh... looks like my old acc is gone with the new design of theory11...
Doesn't matter...
Now, lets come to the theme.
I got your point, and i have to agree.
As I started flourishing i learned just everything i was able to. I never created anything on my own.
Then i read something of "creativity", which brought me to the idea of creating my own stuff. Ans so I did. I created cuts with 6-10 packets, which should be as long as i was able to get them.
I thought, that was cool ;)
But then I logged into an cardistryforum of germany and met Sebastian Skowron there. (For those who don't know him: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oQdequWbVU4)
He once had a better video up there... Days end. But it vanished =(
Ok, back to topic. I saw this guy's flourishes and noticed, they look pretty good, and that, without using many displays with many packets.
That was, when i got to kinda like a turning point. It's like i started from a new beginning, learning to be creative...
So i think, you first have to go through this 10-12 packed displays, to learn that they look crappy. That needs some time, for sure, but afterwards you'll never do one of them again ;)
 
Sep 20, 2008
1,112
3
Yeah, i know that. I just see a video on Thecuso, and expect a high quality video- but expect a video full of random cuts which 'Flow' so to speak, but its pretty random.. Like i said earlier, they just seemed to do it, because they can sorta thing.

Ive done quite a few flourishes off my own- but they're variations of Cuts that have been already created. For instance, im working on this Flourish right now which combines the opening of Molecule four, transitions onto Kevin Ho's Sick and twisted wings of the moking bird, but Finishes in Thecuso's Nebula cut. I think, and that's not bragging- that's At LEAST being creative in bridging all three flourishes onto making a new one. Its not to say that i created it, No- by merely stating whom i got the moves from, im already crediting the creators. It flows, it has a theme (to me it looks good, and it doesnt look random. and each packet flare, swing and whatnot is justified.)
 
Jan 9, 2009
40
0
I agree strongly with what you've said here Sinful, and you've made your points extremely well.

I find that it tends to be the rush to find "something new" that brings about what are essentially just combinations, not a move. It's like flinging your body around madly, and calling it a dance. If you can replecate it, no one can judge you, but it's not exactly poetry in motion.

My output is extremely low in terms of creativity in new moves I've created, but I feel extremely happy with the few I've decided to hold onto, and I perform them all the time.

I still perform what are now being called 'classics', the Dan and Dave material from back in the day etc. Genesis is one of my most performed moves, it's useful in many different situations, hence the longievity it holds.

Jordan Lapping, for example, performs Dan and Dave material almost exclusively (this is regarding flourishes only) and yet he's still one of the most respected artists out there. Why? Because he does it better than anyone else, and he'll still say he's not happy with his performance of some moves, and damn me if he doesn't improve on it still, even though it looks superb already.

Difference in styles, opinions and moves will make it impossible to answer your question/point conclusively, but from my POV, I have to say there is too much focus on these short flashy moves, which by their nature do not, and will not, have the lifespan of anything Dan, Dave or anyone else of that caliber, have ever released.
 
Jun 10, 2010
1,360
1
It's not what you do, it's how you do it.

Take music, for example. There's only so many notes, and so many chords. It's how they're paired up, how they're grouped, how they're displayed. People don't complain that musicians keep playing the same notes over and over, do they?

Be creative. You might not be completely original, but you can be creative, at the very least.
 
Sep 20, 2008
1,112
3
Fair play. Its nice to see some people understand where im coming from. I'll walk away a happy bunny now.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results