Tell me what you think/critique me. Please?

Sep 26, 2007
591
5
Tokyo, Japan
However, I will defend my choice of methods. First, it shouldn't matter the method, as it's all in what the spectator sees.

I completely disagree. The method should be the most logical and the cleanest of the various options you have to choose from. It is not only our job to make the impossible look possible, but to do it in a matter that looks as simple and as clean as possible.

For example, read these two posts by Tony Chang on his blog:
http://www.doublefacers.com/2008/07/what-is-a-perfect-method/

and

http://www.doublefacers.com/2008/07/is-there-such-a-thing-as-a-perfect-method/

Lastly, the reason I suggested not using the Braue addon is because, the way you shuffled and cut the deck wasn't actually that clean. That being said, you have two sketchy parts to the first phase, 1: You count off the four aces as you turn them face down, but there is an unnatural pause on the last one, and you don't actually show the Ace as you put it into the middle, 2: The shuffling action does not follow what you say "1 shuffle and 1 cut,".

Therefore, I thought you would be able to at least clean up 1 part of that by showing the four aces as you put them into four different parts of the deck. If you then actually go and practice a clean push through jog and strip, it will look just as clean as any other shuffle.

If you are able to do this, the method would be an improvement on your current video performance.

If you upload a new video however when your nerves are settled and do a stand out job at it, then you will have me convinced your choice of method is ok, but until then, there are superior methods, and as a magician, I believe it is your job to search for those methods, and not just settle with mediocrity.
 
Jan 5, 2010
658
2
Alabama
I completely disagree. The method should be the most logical and the cleanest of the various options you have to choose from. It is not only our job to make the impossible look possible, but to do it in a matter that looks as simple and as clean as possible.

If you upload a new video however when your nerves are settled and do a stand out job at it, then you will have me convinced your choice of method is ok, but until then, there are superior methods, and as a magician, I believe it is your job to search for those methods, and not just settle with mediocrity.

*sigh* tokyo - Thank you for your input, but did you read my original or any other post I made? It clearly states this was a "one and done" video. So, I will go though some stuff that might be enlightening to you.

Whatever you may think, I'm actually not mediocre. I've been studying and performing for about a year and half. There were no 'nerves' in that video. No shaking of the hands, no cracking of the voice. So now that's out of the way, have you read Darwin Ortiz's "Strong Magic" and "Designing Miracles"? If yes, then you wouldn't be defending this point like you are. He clearly states that different methods to the same effect offer different perspectives to the audience.

About your links, what really makes the way you describe your effect better than the way I want to do it? Personal preference. I want my spectators to see one thing, and you want them to see a different one. Could the add-on have been done better? Yes. Did I put this up for the public to view? No, because I knew I didn't put the proper time in making it the best I could.

Show/tell me a method that does EXACTLY what I intend to do with my method. Which is show the 4 aces, distribute them in the deck, push everything flush, do a shuffle and cut and have them arrive at the top. Oh, and with a regular deck no strippers.

I could do another video with a better performance and everything, but for what? To prove my opinion to you?
 
Sep 26, 2007
591
5
Tokyo, Japan
So, you shoot a video, post it, and then ask for opinions and critiques. You then get critiques, and your most commonly used retort to those critiques is in the escape of, "it was a one and done shoot," and "of course I can do better, but it was a one take deal," bla bla bla.

You do realize that people only have that one and done video of yours to form an idea on your skill level and ability to handle a deck of cards. You set yourself up for this from the beginning.

TBH: As Prae said, I saw someone who was not smooth with a deck of cards, and therefore, based off of that performance, your chosen method (the braue addon), does not seem like the best fit. It is absolutely true what Darwin Ortiz says in his books about how different methods can give different perspectives. However, you the magician need to understand that those words do not apply for EVERYTHING. Just because you CAN, does not always mean you should. Some sleights were designed to do certain things under certain environments. The Braue addon is a GREAT move, but when utilized the right way. It is designed so that you the magician, can be as simple as possible with your placement of the "cards" or "selection of cards" into the deck (in a seemingly fair and simple way). However, when you use the sleight, you remove all credibility by butchering your shuffle (as other members have mentioned).

In a sense, you are doing an ACR with 4 selcections instead of 1. And, in an ACR, when you take their selection and put it into the middle, you want the card to come back to the top of the deck in the cleanest manner possible. If you were to shuffle the cards every time, it would become quite obvious that you are just controlling the shuffle to bring the card back to the top. SO, if you wouldn't do this in an ACR, then why do it in your 4 aces routine?

I am not questioning the use of the Braue addon, I am questioning the structuring of the routine and saying that as it is now, you are not properly utilizing it. For one, you turn over the first three aces onto the deck in a different manner that you do the last ace. All this does is add a hole to your routine, something that can be scrutinized. In addition, there is WAY too much time between doing the addon and when you actually place the cards into the middle of the deck. Again, if you are doing the addon, why keep the last ace to yourself? where is the justification in that? Why don't you just stick that "into the middle as well," but put it 4th from the top so it is loaded already.

Next, you mention, "I will give one riffle shuffle and one cut," and from this line it seems like you are going to give a performance on how to handle and control cards (like in a poker demonstration). However, right afterwards, you say, "hopefully something good will happen," indicating it is more of a "magical effect". And you will probably claim that again it was just a one shot deal, and that it wasn't scripted bla bla, but that is no excuse, as you are asking for critiques on how to make it better.

If you are going for more of a skill demonstration and your ability to control cards, then the Braue addon is not the way to go, as it is designed for simplicity or perhaps to be one step ahead (and btw, Darwin Ortiz uses it not just to control the four aces, he uses it to help him with his riffle stacking demonstration where he controls a 4 of a kind in ONE shuffle).

If you are going for a more magical demonstration, then the braue addon is definitely ok, but you have too much time between the addon, the insertion of the cards, and the reveal.




Lastly, I understand it is hard to get critiques when you put time and effort into a new routine, but you need to learn that just because you created it, doesn't mean it will always be good. You also like to give quotes from books, but you really need to understand those quotes before you spew them out.

Learning different techniques / sleights/ methods is a must and great practice when it comes to routining a set, but you have to learn to understand the sleights and what they were made for and what and why they accomplish certain things, before you defend yourself and their use.

For my final retort, don't spit out your years in magic. Some of the people on here trying to give you the advice and critiques that YOU asked for have been doing magic for way longer than you and know what we are talking about. 1 1/2 years is mediocre to people who have been doing this for 10 years and for people who get PAID to do this.

Put your *sighs* and arrogance away until you earn the right to dish it out.
 
May 31, 2010
1
0
I like the idea of the routine, but I have to agree with earlier posts in saying that the method is over complicated. I haven't been doing magic for nearly as long as some people (only 2 1/2 years) but I've found that using simpler methods for simple effects is much more effective. It's not so much the technically demanding aspect of it that seems over done, it's the small details. For example, why do you need to shuffle and cut the cards when they've already been lost in the deck? Why do you need to count the aces twice? Why did you leave the last ace out when it was going to be lost in the deck anyway?

Contrary to popular belief, Lay people aren't stupid, these questions (or ones like them) will pop into their heads. The best reactions happen when the audience is unaware that something is happening, but these simple questions can (and probably will) alert some (admittedly not all) spectators that something is taking place...
 
Nov 20, 2007
4,410
6
Sydney, Australia
It is near the his lighter effect, but if I backtrack a paragraph or two he says this: "There are a few effects that I have performed for years, and feel that I would be able to continue to do so effectively, even if my brain were removed by a nurse."

He then goes on to say : "I am convinced that it is too easy to perform old tricks in the old ways without any reappraisal of their emotional impact, the meaning they convey, and what they say about you as a performer."

What I am interpreting here is that he wants us, as magicians, to use bold techniques (such as the pass, or tenkai palm) to give rejuvenation to an effect is easy to accomplish with little or know handling. It makes it more exciting for the performer and the spectator.

Doing one method will look one way to a spectator, and switching the method with something like a pass could make the effect look totally different to them!

This is, of course, how I interpret the passage.

What I got from that was this: As I said - I see his "bold techniques" meaning psychological forcing, entertaining ploys, that sort of thing - NOT handling. I think this is the primary difference in our interpretations. I interpret that as him saying that people are too slow to adapt - they are weighed down by handling, and sleight of hand, and are unable to take risks.

For me, this makes sense for him to then go onto talk about psychological effects. It would be just as tempting for a magician to pull out an invisible deck in case he misses, or to pull out a deck and all, and pass the card to the top.

But the risk of psychological forcing for example - the risk of relying on instinct, and jazzing, which Derren admits to often doing on The Devil's Picturebook - can often have a greater effect, when magic is taken out of the context of pure sleight of hand - and because of the risk, makes it more interesting for the performer and for the spectator also.

This then makes sense for him to then talk about the lighter effect, which is of course as bold as you can get - no backup, no safety net. And then, back to the original passage you quoted - "...but think nothing of over-handling effects" - this, in my opinion, is a criticism of a tendency he sees amongst magicians.
 
Jan 5, 2010
658
2
Alabama
I am not questioning the use of the Braue addon, I am questioning the structuring of the routine and saying that as it is now, you are not properly utilizing it.

This is the part of your post that I am most interested in, because the rest of your post switches from "you should use a jog and strip because Tony Chang and perfect methods etc etc", to being somewhat helpful (if you read past the somewhat personal attacks being made.)

You last two posts were about completely getting rid of the Braue add-on and switching to learning a push through jog and strip, because you felt it was a better method. Now you're saying the Braue add-on is fine as long as I 'clean it up' and actually give good reasons instead of just trying to pound a different method into me.

Also, me telling you how long I've been doing magic wasn't trying to impress you.. it was just trying to inform you that I'm not an expert, but I'm not a beginner either and have had time learn and grow.

Lastly, all of this could have been done with a simple "The Braue add-on would be good if you cleaned up the handling and made it more presentable with some subleties. However, I would suggest that you learn *whatever*, because this could be a good method to accomplish the same thing"

So, that being said. I will thank you for all of your advice and being a good sport about it.
 
Jan 5, 2010
658
2
Alabama
What I got from that was this: As I said - I see his "bold techniques" meaning psychological forcing, entertaining ploys, that sort of thing - NOT handling. I think this is the primary difference in our interpretations. I interpret that as him saying that people are too slow to adapt - they are weighed down by handling, and sleight of hand, and are unable to take risks.

For me, this makes sense for him to then go onto talk about psychological effects. It would be just as tempting for a magician to pull out an invisible deck in case he misses, or to pull out a deck and all, and pass the card to the top.

But the risk of psychological forcing for example - the risk of relying on instinct, and jazzing, which Derren admits to often doing on The Devil's Picturebook - can often have a greater effect, when magic is taken out of the context of pure sleight of hand - and because of the risk, makes it more interesting for the performer and for the spectator also.

This then makes sense for him to then talk about the lighter effect, which is of course as bold as you can get - no backup, no safety net. And then, back to the original passage you quoted - "...but think nothing of over-handling effects" - this, in my opinion, is a criticism of a tendency he sees amongst magicians.

Prae - I agree with you on all counts.

I just can't help but go back to the paragraph where he talks about a full-time table-hopper that performs the same effect over and over. Thus, making the effect more boring to the performer which hinders the performance for the spectators. He says the problem is 'over-familarity'.

Now, before he talks about the psychological ruses, he takes an example of 'Cigarette through Coin'. To get rid of the suspicion or a coin switch he 'boldly' puts the gaff in someones hand as he askes to borrow a cigarette! He doesn't really go too much into cards in this chapter.

So, I do love quoting haha:

"The safe and solid methods that we once needed to perform an effect with confidence may now not leave us room to apply our years of experience and skill that we have amassed as good magicians."

Other than psychological stuff, he goes into some very difficult card sleights.

So, I'm agreeing with you Prae. I'm just trying to show you where I'm coming from.
 
Searching...
{[{ searchResultsCount }]} Results