Magnolene by Telmo Trenado

Discussion in 'The Marketplace' started by TelmoTrenadoTv, Apr 11, 2013.

  1. Magnolene is a super visual rubber band vanish from a mobile phone, deck of cards or something similar.

    [video=youtube;WHbdl3x9SMY]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WHbdl3x9SMY&hd=1[/video]

    Take your deck of cards or ask for the mobile phone of one of the spectectators.
    After, take a rubber band off your wrist and you place it around the object.
    With a wave of your hand the band vanishes instantly and you can show it very clearly.
    Finally, you return the object to the spectator.

    CREATED BY ME
     
  2. [video=youtube;N9_L-2k2zxA]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N9_L-2k2zxA[/video]

    That level of drama did not justify the 5 seconds of actual effect we got to see. I'm not even going to comment on how bad some of the framing was.

    For the effect itself, it's a neat little one-off, but I'm wondering if this might be the same method Jay Sankey uses for an effect in his Anytime, Anywhere DVD.
     
  3. How are you? The clown of the forum?

    Are you sure that this effect was created before? Honestrly, I think not.
     
  4. Think about this for a second. Is this really an argument you want to pick with me? Do you really believe you'll come out on top?

    You did not address the actual DVD I referenced, indicating you do not own it, so for the time being I'm going to be operating under the assumption that it is the same method or at least similar until you prove otherwise.

    I am not here to do your research for you, guy. But I am trying to help you. You really need to do the research before you start marketing an effect. On no less than three occasions I thought I'd come up with something original only to find it in The Jinx. I seriously doubt you're at the level where you're already innovating.
     
  5. This method has been used a million times. It's a concept similar to one used by Calen Morelli in his whatsitcalled DVD, also in Ping by Jamie Daws. And I am also sure that Steerpike's reference to Jay Sankey would have to be correct.

    Part of being an artist is realizing that not everything you create is the holy grail of creativity. It's not about the arrival to your destination, but about the journey. I've had some BRILLIANT effects up my sleeve that I've spent years developing. I've even recently gained some interest from a reputable company on an effect, only to have to swallow my pride to see that it's been done. It happens. All the time. As a performer this shouldn't hinder your performance because you can still perform such an effect, only difference is that now, you can perform it better due to having proper references and teaching. Different ideas. Stay alert, stay alive. Always study.
     
  6. #6 Pav, Apr 12, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 12, 2013
    Asher beat me to it. This exact trick was on Calen Morelli's Function 9 DVD. You don't come across as a respectable artist when you receive criticisms so negatively. Everything that's been said is completely true. Your video is too dramatic; the effects are just ridiculous. I really don't like "tricked out" videos for lack of a better term. It looks like a girl that keeps overdoing her make-up. It isn't supposed to drastically change the appearance; it's supposed to fix the flaws that were already there. Anything more is distracting.
     
  7. HAHHAHAHA "This exact trick was on Calen Morelli's Function 9 DVD" Are you talking about the trick called "TRANS(port)? I have that DVD and I assure that it is not the same.
     
  8. Yes, I know that this effect is very similar to TRANS(port) by Calen Morelli, the concept is the same, but not the exact trick.
     
  9. Okay, so you took the vanish from TRANS(port) and called it a standalone trick. Either way, it's clearly been done before.
     
  10. For one, stop completely dismissing comments by people who are trying to help you.
    Secondly, what's the difference 'I wrap the rubber band differently and use a different routine' it's tit for tat really. The methods look exactly the same, maybe with a small variant.
     
  11. Okay dude, you want to know why you're not the golden boy of the Wire right now? Because you're nowhere near as original as you think you are and you suck at taking feedback.

    I don't even have the Function 9 DVD, but even I could tell this had been done before. I just saw it in a different source. Doesn't that tell you anything? You have a bunch of guys telling you the same thing, but all you want to do is make excuses.

    I'm going to level with you: you sound like you're trying to publish these effects just to publish them. You want the prestige (and possibly the money) but you don't have the patience needed to actually become a real innovator. You want something that you have not yet earned and everyone can tell.
     
  12. I can not believe... I have seen again the TRANS(port) by Calen Morelli and I can say you now that the 2 methods are completely differents. If I tell you, why do not you believe me? I KNOW THE 2 METHODS. YOU? NO!
     
  13. Ok, according to what you say, what's the difference " I vanish/palm a coin differently and use a different routine" it's tit for tat really. The methods look exactly the same, maybe with a small variant.

    I'm wrong? That's your philosophy?
     
  14. #14 TelmoTrenadoTv, Apr 13, 2013
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 13, 2013
    Yes yes, ok. But I do not agree when they say "it's exactly the same that TRANS(port) by Calen Morelli. Please, no.

    And about the money...are you kidding me? That little money will I make with a 0.99$ effect? that's not the reason.

    I only want that when I create something, that they recognize my creation, no more. If the effect was created before, no problem, I accept.
     
  15. If the bunch of us are telling you this, what in god's name makes you think the potential buyers on the Wire won't think it themselves?

    Too bad. That's the reaction you're getting from your potential market, which is the only reaction that matters. I've told you this before kid: the world doesn't owe you a goddamn thing.

    If it's been created before, it's not your effect! Get over your entitlement complex, get out there and perform, and actually try earning some recognition instead of demanding it.
     
  16. Hang on, why do you even want to release your effects? What makes a magician original is his own effects - the underground effects of which no one knows about, so no one can perform/copy.

    You want recognition - why not try and publish it in a magazine - if that's what you want.

    Secondly, if you do want to release your effect for money, you need to work on it for along time, enough to know it inside out and back to front. People like to buy knowing the effect has been tested and worked on.

    Anyway, I suggest you include live performances and add less drama to the whole ensemble.
     
  17. Yes, that is what I'm saying.
     
  18. You're really quite irritating. Do you think I would claim to know the method to a trick that I don't have? Of course I own Calen's DVD. You don't need to be a genius to see that you're doing the same vanish.
    Also, when I used the term "exact same trick," I assumed you wouldn't take it so literally. It clearly isn't the SAME trick; I meant it may as well be.
    You really aren't good at making new potential buyers. Everything that we're saying is true and you're insisting on arguing us down for whatever reason. Seriously, why ARE you here? You still haven't given us a good reason.

    We aren't going to GIVE you something for nothing in the same sense that you don't want to make something for nothing. What have you done that hasn't already been done?
     
  19. You guys seem to really know what you are talking about.
    I'd appreciate it if you took a look at my recently rejected effect and tell me if you think it has been done before, or any other reasons as to why you think it has been rejected.
    Here is the link to the thread I made for it:
    http://forums.theory11.com/showthread.php?38914-Search-by-Dom-Whitlock
    Thanks, I promise I'll take your feedback and criticism a lot better.
     
  20. Honestly, the method is extremely noticeable in the trailer, therefore - spectators will notice it as well.
    I don't really know a lot about ACAAN effects, as I don't perform them regularly, but in your performance you need to give a reason as to why you didn't just count out how many cards they said, you give them 10, then 2. Even a false action of the cards slipping in your hand would give enough excuse as to doing to move.

    Also, the method wouldn't work if they named a large number, as they will be able to see that you are just giving them the tenth card.

    All in all, well done for the live performance - maybe the trailer could be touched up a tad more for your next effect.
    But kudos for creating something. (Sorry if I don't know the effects originality).

    P.S - Did theory11 not provide a reason for the rejection in the reviewers notes?
     

Share This Page

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