REF4M by Blake Vogt?

Discussion in 'General Discussion' started by fridoliina, Apr 30, 2011.

  1. #21 MarkH, Apr 30, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2011
    Hmmm.. something that bothers me is the fact that the tearing process isn't actually angle proof and is never taught to be performed surrounded in the release (of course you can tweek it yourself like I did but I guess the only logical way to go would've been to teach how to actually do it surrounded and not leaving that gap).

    Other than that, $16.95 is a bit over-prized for an effect that ends with an anti-climax, and definitely for an effect magicians can figure out by watching the trailer. But no matter how you look at it, destroying the card at the end is and will always be anti-climatic and there is no presentation that could make a climax out of it. Of course it has been overly hyped so the price is quite logical, but still..

    Nonetheless, this will fool laymen and beginner magicians who didn't get a hold of this yet. The only problem is that I've been asked by spectators before to hold the card at the corner in the end of the restoration, and thankfully the TNR I usually perform enables me to do so, but in some TNRs you can't and 'REF4M' won't make any difference to that either. I nowadays think that that'd be the least convincer of a TNR in case you can't hand out the card in the end.

    All in all, a good TNR concept and a overly-hyped release with a gap as for doing the tearing in surrounded performances. I personally wouldn't have released this nor even thought of that if I were Blake or T11, but obviously I'm not..
     
  2. If you present the ending as a way to prove the card's restoration, it is mind-blowing. They can hear and see the card being torn.
     
  3. In my opinion, this is an awesome release. I'm super impressed that T11 releases effects that actually make me think.
     
  4. Why would you do this for other reasons that it is "new"? There are so many great versions of the TnR card that looks so much cleaner and can be handed out in the end. Some have angel problems but most are manegable.
     
  5. #25 MarkH, Apr 30, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2011
    I agree 100%. Let's not forget that there are semi-clean TNRs out there that actually enable you to hand out the card in the end. You can either choose to destroy one card on the spot with 'REF4M' and not hand out the card as a whole, or destroy one more card on the spot and be able to hand it out in the end.

    I have to add that I find it somewhat funny that you see so many magicians (99.5%) doing a TNR holding the card up high while they could reverse everything and hold it down to create an angle proof TNR too. In surrounded performances that's what I do if neccesary.
     
  6. I agree the ending is kind of flimsy, but I love effects like this. It forces you to fill in gaps if you really want to perform it and have the result you want.

    John
     
  7. This is a hard effect for me to comment on because I like parts of it and other parts are terrible. Whilst it is clever I don't know who it should be performed for. I have effects that I only perform for magicians or very clued in spectators. Whilst the method is quite good and it is nice for impromptu t&r. To laymen tearing one card wrecks the whole deck, so as far as an impromptu t&r so wrecking two cards verses one does not mean much to the spectators as either way the deck is wrecked.

    We all agree it's the little things that make the big differences not just in magic but in all aspects of life and especially art. Blake's t&r sacrifices these to give it the one card impromptu conditions. The t&r plot needs to have clear separation between the pieces otherwise there is that doubt that the card is completely ripped. Another thing that has been mentioned is the inability to hand back the card. Personally I like the presentational idea of tearing the card at the end, however it needs to atleast be examined by by the spectators even if for a second.

    In Maximum Entertainment Ken Weber talks about the different levels mystery with an effect. With this effect it can never reach the highest levels because the audience needs te effect to sink in and the audience cannot even get too good of a look at the card let alone touch it. Not to mention the lack of separation causes the effect to look suspicious and the tearing is very suspect.
     
  8. WOW... not in a good way!

    Yeah, wouldn't usually comment on things like this and don't mean to sound tooooo negative and don't claim to be a creator of magic myself and would never 'hate' for the sake of 'hating', but come on!!!!!!!!!!!! Not tearing it apart completely with fishy handling and not displaying each piece separately after being torn, then having to rip up to destroy the evidence after... don't care how you package this with patter, presentation etc...... you'd have to be crazy to want to learn this surely!?!?! and if you can't figure out what's going on then you deserve to pay an overpriced 16bucks... just my 2 cents
     
  9. #29 MarkH, Apr 30, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2011
    I actually thought about it and tried something else, a combination of Paul Harris' 'Ultimate Rip-off' (one card, clean, impromptu and angle proof too) with 'REF4M' just for the final phase and then after you restored the complete card, you tear off the final quarter so that the spectator would never forget you restoring a card which once was torn into four pieces. It somewhat adds a bit to the original 'Ultimate Rip-off' too as you restore the whole card before you rip just one quarter off of it. :)
     
  10. Still, whether ot not it can be handed out in the end, it still looks cool. So gonna buy it
     
  11. spectators will not give a crap if it's ripped at the end. they'll be thinking how the hell did he restore it. magicians think too much in my opinion
     
  12. Magicians think to little in my opinion. But hey, everyone is different.

    When i performe magic my goal for every effect is that there should be no doubt in the spectators minds that what they just witnessed was impossible. I think this whole effect looks a bit fishy and can leave the specators with a feeling that something just was not quite right. The tearing process, the display of the pieces and then the display of the restored card and the part where you rip it apart before they can look at it.

    I am not saying that its the worst thing ever, but when i watched the trailer for this effect one question popped into my mind.

    Why? Why would you do this version?

    There are so many other versions of TnR that looks way better and in the end you can hand out the card for them to examinate. There are even versions where the spectators can hold the pieces and hand them back to you as you restore them.

    Yes, you can use a borrowed deck but then again, how many spectators will hand you or borrow you a deck that they will allow you to destroy? Not many. So you will probably use your own deck. So why not use a better version?


    Seriously, i need to start to release magic dvds if you can sell effects like this. I come upp with ideas like this all the time, but most of the time i put them in the category "Cool idea" in my notebook.
     
  13. Well said, Wallmott.

    I can tell that many spectators will think "how the hell did he make it look like it was restored" instead of "how the hell did he restore it" once you rip the card apart. As a magician, I wouldn't want to leave that first impression. Instead, I'd want the miracle to be lasting and to have it look like a miracle rather than an illusion.

    But to each their own. ;)
     
  14. The thing that people have to realize is that magicians and laypeople dont think in the sam way when it comes to being "fooled".

    When we, the magicians sees an effect we are most of the time only looking at methods and sleights.

    For example say that a magician is performing an ACR routine for you. The magician does some odd looking control that brings the card back to the top. You have no idea how it is done, so you feel fooled! You know that the magician controled the card but not how he controled the card so you feel fooled because you have no idea how it works.

    A spectator does not know anything about sleights, but if they even the slightest suspects that you did something that was not quite right, they are not fooled.

    I dont remember who said it but i like the quote.

    "If a spectator knows that you did SOMETHING, its just as bad as them knowing HOW you did it!"

    Because if they know you did something, even if they dont know what, they are not fooled.
     
  15. "what did you expected ? real miracle or what ?"
    Tommy Wonder
     
  16. I once did a TnR which ended with a rip along one fourth of the card, with the rest of it being folded. Needless to say, the guy was fooled. To clean it up, I just folded it back again and switched it with a finger-palmed duplicate that was folded in the same manner.

    Now, let's read your first post again:

    A couple of thoughts. One, you seem hell-bent on the fact that this TnR has to be done the way it's shown and taught, I.E. with a signature and ending with 4 torn-up pieces to hand out as souvenirs. I once did a TnR which ended with a rip along one fourth of the card, with the rest of it being folded. Needless to say, the guy was fooled. To clean it up, I just folded it back again and switched it with a finger-palmed duplicate that was folded in the same manner. The card that I actually "tore up" was only torn once right in front of their eyes, but a couple of added subtleties made it seem like it was completely restored. You don't NEED to have the entire miracle done right in front of them. I agree with whoever called you close-minded.

    My next thought is somewhat related, but most magicians who give out souvenirs like pieces of cards and cards they signed don't realize that it's a sentimental value. 99.9% of the people you give something like that to will just toss it out the next day. I find it pointless. Also, with a TnR, if you're doing it cleanly in front of them, it doesn't matter whether it has a signature or not.

    That being said, this is a beautiful TnR. Has anyone here considered not doing it with a signature, but with a dupe and forcing a card on the spectator? All it would take is to fold it up, switch it while giving it a wiggle, and you can hand it out right then and there.

    My final thought is that this entire discussion is somewhat lame, to be honest. It took me 5 minutes to type up all of the above, and if I ever felt like doing a TnR, I just ended up tailoring it to my situation. If you can't take 5 minutes out of your day to modify it for your needs rather than do it as-explained, you don't have much business starting a thread to complain about it's faults.

    And... I also apologize if the above came out in a rude manner. I wasn't quite sure how to put it.
     
  17. This trick is great, I don't know why your guys don't like it. I mean use patter to rip the pieces back up. Katie is completely right, it is about that magic moment. Every trick was a positive and a negative, I mean most have more negative than positives. Just enjoys what is good, and good can over come the bad.
     
  18. #38 Justin.Morris, Apr 30, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Apr 30, 2011
    You can't see it, but I'm giving you a the standing ovation for the thought in that post. I had the same idea about the dupe. Perhaps I don't see this as cynically because I actually use Hoodwinked (same method, but just rips the card in two). It gets great reactions. It's a great effect. There is a reason T11 put this out. It works in the real world. People who have tried it would know. Tempest did a great review and addresses some of the concerns. I agree with his review that this would not replace my favorite tnr, but it sure is nice to have a great impromptu one.
     
  19. Hey katie! Glad to see you posting again. And I do agree. I believe this is an awesome and amazing torn and restored effect. Especailly if it got all of you guys when Blake first showed it to you guys. Glad to hear your input in this! =)
     
  20. All in all I feel that if you don't like it, don't buy it and just stop complaining. No one is forcing anyone to buy it so there's no reason to argue about anything. =P
     

Share This Page

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