Q - Concept

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by thetrilogy-corE, Nov 9, 2009.

  1. #2 Jupiter, Nov 9, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 9, 2009
    You're either very good at holding a double or your "claims" are false
  2. Um...you can do a double lift...I don't think this is quite as epic as you tried to make it seem.
  3. Yeah Agreed.
    looks clean though.
  4. it was nice, however seriously, almost 50 seconds for an intro. its a 2 minute and 30 odd second video. think about your editing.
  5. Looks like you can do a double lift to accomplish the same thing, but really good idea. Won't mind learning this.
  6. This video is not about detecting a certain sleight to achive the effect given.

    You think it is a double lift?
    You think it is a one way forcing deck?
    You think it is cameratrickery or something like that?

    All of this is fine for me. If you think that way, I am not here to convince you that you are wrong.
    But If you watch the video carefully you should be able to answer those questions for yourself anyway before even asking them.

    The true intentions of this video however....are far beyond all of this.
    Q is not a sleight concept. Q is a concept of thinking.
    And I made this video because I hope to reach a few ones that WANT TO think about this to actually GET what I am trying to say with the Q-concept. :)

    If you try to explain what you see using methods you already know, you are on the wrong way to go.
    Not only because this video is not about understanding a Method behind the Illusion.
  7. I believe I understand it, maybe I don't as you really don't make a point openly. You need to explain better if you want people to understand you.

    I believe you are showing that this is how magic is done, perhaps the Q Concept is about being direct and showing nothing but what is actually there. Magic is not about moving cards in a fancy way, but to make it simple and show what magic would, what it should look like.

    I could be wrong because you are quite vague with everything you have done.
  8. That is a nice point to start with.
    Keep building up on this!

    I am sorry that I barely give information away and I would like you to understand that it is not my intention to gain advertence or anything.
    I´am just one out of a whole community of magicians, who wants to push the thinking in the art a step forward instead of keep posting videos of myself doing a trick or a sleight for showoff purposes.

    I will clearify all of this...soon. But my intention is to have some interested persons discussing about it first....and maybe new ways of thinking will open up through this.

    So the thing about that magic should look like nothing else but what is actually there is a great thing to start of with.

    But there is the next "Q"uestion: Why is that so?
  9. Wait a minute, rewind a bit.


    If that's tha case, then couldn't you have shown the card and put it in the deck without resting it on top first?


  10. The video does not claim that this principle is the perfect one.
    It just asks for it.
  11. "A journey to find the perfect AC technique..."

    Sounds pretty obvious to me. Claiming that your journey has led you to this video.


  12. Allright Morpheus I'll take the blue pill :)


    Sorry but Gus pretty much owned your whole post TC. I'm dead tired of Soap Operas and "mistery" posts. Just go to the point and let it be.

  13. Well...sorry...

    didn´t knew that it is necessary to "own" each other these days in our community.

    But okay...gratz to you Gus for successfully "owning" me on this one.
    Now everybody is able to live in peace again.

    So now I think this whole thing is free to get closed, right?

    I am really excited.
  14. I'm still confused as to why you're trying to demonstrate a double life as a "New way of thinking." It seems like you're trying to get a bit to intellectual.
  15. #16 Nino, Nov 12, 2009
    Last edited by a moderator: Nov 12, 2009
    Yess those are the words I was looking for....... just got tried of thinking.

    But its probably not a double lift because it looks so clean.
  16. This reminds me of a Daniel Madison Change, where everybody's imagination is put to the test.

    Am I close?
  17. Let me take a stab:

    "Everyone should make videos with a 50 second intro"

    Am I close?

    But on a serious level, I can appreciate that you're trying to stimulate some thinking. But your words say one thing, your video says another. Thought stimulation doesn't require a 50 second intro. If you want to provoke thought by making a point in a way that makes people think, fine, that's great, and it's probably not a bad thing. But use a roundabout way that is direct, if you get my meaning. I got too impatient at the intro to bother waiting for your concept of thinking.
    Ironically, even if you don't want to say your point directly, your alternative way of delivering your point still has to be direct.
  18. Yes, that would be "a journey to find" not "a journey that led me to", or "a journey on which i found". Sounds pretty obvious to me that he is not claiming to have the perfect technique. However this could be a matter of interpretation.

    RD - could you be anymore obnoxious with your posts. That was the most extreme waste of space i have ever seen. Instead of standing behind someone and yelling "ooooooh he got you". Why don't you make a constructive post and argue the point yourself. What you did makes you seem like you can't think on your own.
  19. I have a strong beef with the word "Perfect".

    There is a difference between asking for perfection and striving for it. Asking is meaningless, since it implies you're waiting for an answer. Striving means work, indulgence, dedication to something that is achievable. Do I think perfection is achievable? No, not the empty, esoteric perfection, which I think is a meaningless goal ( ever heard the "no one can perfect a sleight"? ... Its not about if you can or not, its about the mentality, this is just not how it works ).

    I go with the artistic perfection, which can still be taken in so many directions and ( ironically) can be improved upon. A Leonardo Da Vinci quote Vernon used often describes it: "Perfection has no details",it refers to the harmonious accumulation of details and generics to produce a seemingly unified beautiful product, like a well studied magic trick, and while it can be looked at as such, it can be still be improved over and over again, and even varied if it falls in the hands of a magician with different artistic choices. Ascanio's O&W vs Mike Skinner's. Peter Kane's original Jazz Aces vs John G. or Jack Parker. Its about reaching whatever artistic goals you strive for, which perfection is not one of them because its just a senseless goal with no clear objective. See performances of people like L.Green ,Temariz, Derren Brown, Darwin Ortiz or David Williamson,all "taste"differently. Its about artistic choices, goals, then striving to achieve them (resulting in an actual achievement ). When its beautiful, it becomes perfect in its own inherent way. ( On a side note: which can still be imperfect!) (I'm hoping I'm using the right words .. I'm not a native speaker, and I'm REALLY dizzy )

    Thats for the "Perfect" segment ..... Now for you're video. Don't care if the below hits your point of not. This is my opinion on whats going on.

    Perfect ACR phase. I personally think its the wrong way for looking at it.

    A) If you take it from a method-point of view, Thurston said that no method is perfect because there will be no satisfaction in performing it. One of the satisfactions in magic ( and one of its many unique points ) is covering the imperfection of the method with presentation ...etc. Plus, magicians often refer to good methods = look flawless+foolproof and so easy that it executes itself, obviously 99% this is not the case. This is the reason many people get disappointed if the method is so simple/bold/whatever. They wont try to cover the imperfections with things like misdirection,timing, showmanship, and at the end miss the point of art of magic. An extremely bold trick can fool a hundred or wont fool a single, depending on the one doing it.

    Why am I saying all this? You're mentioning the "perfect ACR technique". The criteria of what making it perfect ( and I'm making an educated guess ) are flawed. Each technique/principle has its own place and merits.

    B) If you're looking at it from an effect point of view, it yet achieves a worn-out ACR phase, with the added bonus of making it more convincing than the others. In the end, its just that. It falls as a stand-alone, it might go well as a first phase in ACR but then again, an ACR with cards jumping to the top bazillion times is nothing to be called "perfect", its simply boring.

    In other words, saying "perfect" in your video is flawed, because if its a technique, no technique is perfect, each has its own place. If its an effect as a clean ACR, its not perfect, just a good one. Why not perfect? see the previous paragraph.

    But regardless if its perfect or not, I think the whole idea of perfection in this vid is senseless, falling under the empty type of perfection I talked about in the beginning, which is why I explained my beef with "Perfection" in the beginning.

    S***, that took a long time to explain. If the above doesnt have anything to do with the vid, then I apologize for everyone for reading my none-sense.

    Off to sleep .............

Share This Page

{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results