talkmagic.co.uk

Advices and tips required...

There is a new method I developed using a normal deck, no roughing spray, non gaffed or gimmicked cards that could achieved a similar effect based on ID. Any normal playing cards will work. Normally with an ID effect works like this:
1) The deck is in its box, and the spec visualize and name that card out loud.
2) Magician takes out the deck, and search through it, there is a reversed card and that card is shown to be the spectators visualized card.

for the method that I developed with a normal playing card, to achieve the same method, have to go through a few series of steps or I would say a twist... of course, can show both side of the cards to the spectator that it is not a marked or gaffed or gimmicked deck of cards...

Take the card out from the box, ask the spectator to imagine a card...
1) Spectator visualize and say the card's name out loud
2) The magician does some cuts and telling the spectator that the magician will find the card with all the cards face down without looking at its face, the magician will try to guess which one is the spectators card...
3) with only One try, The findings proved to be wrong, then of course pretend to say something like "I am still not that good..need more practice" or any line to create an impression that the trick has gone wrong or not done properly.
4) Then the magician, put the deck back into the box, ask the spectator to hold the box with the deck inside it, and visualize the number and the shape and say it out loud again and hope this time the magic works.
5) Take the cards out of the box, and find a reversed card and it will be the spectators visualized card. The spectator can take the cards out of the box himself and do the searching of the reversed card as opposed to the "ID" which only the magician or performer can handle the deck or else the trick will be given away.

Tell me what you guys think of this method because I am afraid that too many steps will make the spectator to be less interested and less anticipation in that trick or effect.

regards,

Emmanuel.

From what I have read it sounds very good.

Just an idea... Have you got the ability to film it and put it in the file sharing bit? It would be really nice to see it.

Alex

ok, i will try to record it and post it in youtube.com. I will be back with the demo of the effect in a few days. By the way, the key of this effect lies on the "mistake" and "pattering" as a weapon of misdirection. So, before the deck is inserted into the box, the actual magic has been executed. And that means, the spectator can even take the deck and insert it into the box, visualize it, he/she open the box, take the deck out from the box and spread through the deck face up and will find a face down card which is his/her chosen/visualized card. The handling of the box can be given to the specators fully. The only thing that makes me worried is, the "mistake" in my effect can make the spectator to be less interested. ANyway, I will try to post the video soon.

I'm no expert in the psychology of magic but according to what I know 'magician in trouble' is a very good premise to draw people in. In other words, people love to watch magicians mess up. And from personal experience that certainly does seem to be the case. And when you fix the mistake you just get that much of a better reaction.

Assuming that this effect is done the way that I think it is the only caution I have is that you don't look like you're doing anything with the deck during the cuts as that would provide an effective 'backtracking' method with the reveal. You might want to try some linguistic subtleties (I think this is the type of stuff Kenton Knepper goes into but I don't have his stuff) by saying something along the lines of, "Now, I don't want to touch the cards at all so I'm going to give you the pack and ask you to put the cards back into the case...".

</ramble>

Kati

I can second that.

The same psychology is presented on Andy Nymans dvd, 'Get Nyman'. Basically, if a magician fudges up, it creates an uncomfortable feeling, and makes the audience block that part of the performance out of their mind. To fully make use this premise, I recommend not taking too long on the phase before. If you were to draw it out into a large spectacle they are more likely to remember it.

Perhaps if you had a short interlude thing before the second reveal? Im thinking along the lines of Stigmata?
Here's how it would play-

Card is named
Revelation fails
-pause-
' Forget that then, lets try this. Can you still remember the card? Good. Id like you to hold onto my wrist. In fact, squeeze it. Hard....'
-Good reaction-
'Tell you what, lets go back to the cards. Picture your card turning over'

etc.


I'm not suggesting you should go out and buy Stigmata, but merely take what Ive said into mind. Shorten the failure, make sure they recognize it is a failure, perhaps a very short interlude piece (using the same card), and build up the effect the second time.

Ouch-Kabibble

Emmanuel... are the cards not gimmicked in *any* way?! I'm thinking m****d, surely...

or fanned face up???

katrielalex wrote:I'm no expert in the psychology of magic but according to what I know 'magician in trouble' is a very good premise to draw people in. In other words, people love to watch magicians mess up. And from personal experience that certainly does seem to be the case. And when you fix the mistake you just get that much of a better reaction.

two words.
biddle trick

yeah i agree with the "magician in trouble" factor. it pulls the spectators in the trick even more when you "screw up"

in this effect...the spectator can spread the cards face up or face down... then there will be obviously a reversed card...

Farlsborough wrote:Emmanuel... are the cards not gimmicked in *any* way?! I'm thinking m****d, surely...

hahaha! ok...u got me... yes...at least to spectators eyes or even some magicians eyes who does not know about MD, it looks like a normal, well shuffled deck. With MD and some sleights added to the flavor, I manage to creat a similar ID effect. Oh no! Now everyone knows about MD.

Emmanuel wrote:Tell me what you guys think of this method because I am afraid that too many steps will make the spectator to be less interested and less anticipation in that trick or effect.

Personally I think it sounds like too many steps although it may work dependant on your performing style. There are already ungaffed ID routines out there which wouldn't require all that handling, etc.

Having said that if you want to play the "magician in trouble" bit it could be OK. I wouldn't personally rebox the deck (unless you have to for method), I'd do something that fails, set the deck down and ask "may I try again?", pause for a moment and then have a moment of revelation snap your fingers (or whatever suits you to create a moment of magic), "if I just do this - name your card?", etc.

Best wishes,

Andy

Zero000 wrote:two words.
biddle trick

Won't a face-up search for the card, break above, Hermann Pass, half pass the bottom card and then an extra cut work ?

If this is the case of exposure of something, I can and will edit this.