Signature transfer

Discussion in 'Magic Forum' started by leighelkins, Jun 26, 2015.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. So I have a great idea, I think... but before I spend too much time trying to make it work I wanted to know if there is already a method to achieve the same results under the same conditions.

    I want to have the face of a card signed.
    The card must be 100% genuine and can be freely selected from the deck and can be completely examined.
    The signature can be across the card at any angle, in any direction and any size.
    The signature or markings made will not be known beforehand.
    The exact signature appears on the face of a different 100% genuine card which can be completely examined.

    So basically, no transparent card cover or anything. No attempt at discreetly copying the signature. Card can not be gimmicked in anyway.

    Like I said, I *think* I have an idea for how to do this, but before I start is there already anything out there that will meet my demands?
  2. If you find a way to do this well, you will make a killing. There are many different attempts at this. The best I've seen has been Piff the magic dragon on Fool Us.
  3. Haha, thanks Justin, that will help me sleep tonight :p

    I love what Piff did on Fool Us, his method is genius and is my number 1 backup plan if I can't achieve what I want.
  4. Ask Loki Kross about this principle. I'm pretty sure he has a method for this. Jay Sankey has what he calls the wipe off principle for coins as well.
  5. Leighelkins,

    If you can pull this off with all your restrictions satisfied, I'm sure you'll be seen as a hero or something :D
    It will be mind blowing.

    Also, Josh do you mean FAX ? If yes, I'm sure it doesn't meet the conditions.
  6. Thanks Josh. I've just been reading about Loki's various products and whilst I may be wrong I'm not sure any meet the criteria, although it was just a quick look, I'll do some proper research once I have filled my belly.

    Thanks redundant, it is a big if but I'm hoping to give it a first go this week then will work from there to see if it is even going to be possible.
  7. Wish you luck leighelkins ! It would be awesome if you could keep me updated :)

    BTW how do you pronounce your name :p ?
  8. I've highlighted the portions of your criteria that only a magician would care about. The effect is a card is selected, it is identified and then the card changes into the another card. I know how to do that five different ways - none of which meet all of your criteria but all of which will leave the same impression on the audience. So my question is why do those conditions matter to your audience?
  9. While that is true, don't you think it would genuinely be amazing to pull that off ? Just for a bit of self satisfaction for us ?
  10. I completely get your point, why reinvent the wheel if it is just going to get me from A to B without any noticeable difference. There are a few different points that I want to make.

    1. I don't like to enforce too many conditions. For example, Piff the Magic Dragon and his signed card switch, BRILLIANT effect but there is one particular condition he has to enforce. To me, a condition is a weakness in your armour that could reveal the method. As such, a lot of my criteria is focused on ensuring there are minimal conditions and where there may be any they can be subtle.

    2. I perform for my niece and she is very suspicious, still believes in magic but also wants to examine everything, the same really as a lot of adults when they see something impossible.

    Really what it all comes down to is when the spectator is going through the thought process of "ah, that's how he did it" they're going to come up against an "oh no, it can't be because I/he/it did this/that/the other."
    For example, as a lay person, if I'm asked to sign the back I may think something is going on with the face. If I'm asked to make a particular mark then I may think something is going on with copying it or something. If I can't hold the card at the end then I think there is definitely something fishy with the card. The list goes on.

    But also as redundant says, personally I think it would just be kind of cool to do, whether anyone else thought it was or not.
  11. I agree that from an analytical and construction standpoint, it would be cool.

    I understand what you are saying about conditions, but I disagree about whether the audience would know about the conditions. The Out to Lunch Principle requires the use of a rubber band, but the audience doesn't know because the existance of the rubber band is justified. The Tossed Out Deck has a condition in how the spectator handles the cards, but again, it is justified in the effect. You only know the conditions if you are the magician.

    As for audience members who want to examine props, there are two issues. One of the issues is that whenever an audience member asks to examine a prop that means that the magician hasn't done their job in showing (not telling) the audience that the prop is exactly what the audience would expect. As a magician, you need to be in control of the audience. The second issue is that audience members ask to examine things and try to figure thing out when magic is presented as the "magic game" where the magician tries to fool the spectator and the spectator tries to figure it out. It also can be simply a "look what I can do" presentation which, without trying is peceived by spectators as "and see what you can't do." Again, that is a challenge to figure out how to do that. Often, even say-do-see patter (where the magician says what they are going to do, does it and tell the audience to see what happened) causes this result because when the presentation is about what you are doing, the audience's natural reaction is to wonder how you are doing it.

    I think your neice still believes in magic... as do I. However, I think that she sees what you do as tricks to be figured out. From your other post, I think you know that deep down. I'm guessing that your presentation is designed to have her ask the question of "how did you do that?" so you can respond "magic." Your idea is that if she can't figure it out, there is no other explanation but magic. The answer is that no matter what, spectators will think there is a method. The goal isn't to make it impossible for them to figure it out... but to make it so they don't want to figure it out.

    As magicians, we are like you neice. We want to believe in true magic. We chase the Holy Grail only to be disappointed time and again that there is a method. Once we know the method, we are no longer enamoured with the effect, because it is so obvious that there are so many conditions and the method is so apparant. The magic isn't in the trick, it is in the performer and their performance.
  12. I think we're getting away from the point of this thread. I had an idea for something and wanted to know if it has been done to save me the trial and error mad scientist hassle. This will likely be blasphemy here but right now I'm only interested in "can I get from A to E without having to go to B, C or D." Can this be achieved?

    Anyhow, thanks for your input David.
  13. Personally I think it isn't worth it to pursue that effect because the spectator will perceive a different effect to what you want it to be. You see a signature moving from one card to another while the spectator sees the IDENTITY of one card change to another, the signature is just "by the way, this really is your card".
  14. Personally I have a few ideas of routines where the effect would, in my opinion, work well so for me it is worth it. Each to their own. Thanks for your input.
  15. I didn't mean to derail the thread, just to give you something to think about.

    To answer your queston, as far as I know, there isn't anything exactly like that. Richard Sanders had an effect called Identity which meets some of those criteria. I also remember an effect in True Astonishment involving signatures which didn't even come close.
  16. There is a burned and restored signed card in Drawing Room Deceptions that from memory, technically meets your criteria. Almost only works for parlor though. Its very dual reality, but you could probably get it to work.
  17. Thanks, I'll look into the effects that you both mentioned.
  18. Sorry, just realised it requires a force, and upon further consideration of your criteria, does not meet many of them at all. It could make good inspiration for some sort of variation though.
  19. Thanks for that. I've looked into as much as I could in the time that I've had but haven't really found anything that comes close, although I have found some really cool effects thanks to everyone's suggestions.

    A little update now. I had some time to actually sit down and play with the idea today, and in it's crudest form it basically works. There's a lot of development to do because what I did together today couldn't even be considered version, but the basic principles seem pretty solid. I'm still not 100% convinced that I'll be able to get it to the level that I want, but for now at least it definitely seems worth pursuing.

    I'll update again after the next round of developments. Again, thanks everyone for your input.
    Justin.Morris likes this.
  20. So I managed to spend a good few hours on this crazy idea today. Lots of positives, some negatives. Managed to get a pretty legible second signature so I'm still happy that the basics of the idea works but a lot of improvements are needed. I have a good idea of where I need to go with this to get it working to a satisfactory level, but there are a few different options so may be a case of trial and error for a while.

    I'm not sure how much time I am going to have over the next few weeks to work on this, but updates will follow when I have them.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page

{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results