talkmagic.co.uk

kolm wrote:

Craig Browning wrote:FINALLY! Someone that understands where I've been coming from for so many years.

Craig Browning's sig wrote:NOW AVAILABLE @ Lulu.com The Complete PSYCHIC TECHNOLOGIES in Print & eBook formats

Forgive me

The difference is I have nearly 40 years to back up my work vs. those with 2-5 years trying to come off as "experts" -- too, most of my books were sold in print form long before we moved to the eBook format.

Yes, I do understand that it was a bit of irony but I've never denied the fact that my brain don't work sometimes.

As I just mentioned on another thread, it is exceptionally difficult to come up with "New" magic especially when you are "New" to the craft and inexperienced when it comes to what does and does not work in the real world for real world working pros. Part of this is due to the lack of resource but most of it is due to lack of decorum on the part of the "innovators" -- their inability (and unwillingness) to slow down, do the footwork to investigate their idea so as to insure that it's unique and thus, worthy of release. Just because you have a "twist" to something does not make it "new" or "yours" for that matter.

I have the original Swami Spirit Altar from Lebanon Circle and from it and nearly two years of correspondence with Dan, a new and far superior version has been created (being released this spring). Now I could have run out and simply replicated Dan's idea but claimed it to be different because of the improvements I made on it over the original. But that's not only arrogant, it's very disrespectful of someone I consider to be a friend and trusted associate; someone that I want to support and where I can, help develop more unique systems that fit the niche Dan is filling. That's been my role in magic for decades.

As I said, I could just take my ideas and run with them; I have many friends who have done so that see me as a fool for not doing it myself.... they are bloody rich and I"m flat broke (and they say "crime" don't pay). The thing is, I'm in the position to exercise my creative side by working with the folks that inspire me via their contributions. Sometimes that's a hands on exercise but more frequently it's publishing (with their permission) my spin WITHIN AN ARTICLE where I'm not profiting from their work in any way other than credit via copyright.

This is something I and numerous others have written on and kabitched about for decades; a circumstance that's gotten far worse since the introduction of the Home Computer and Internet.

Ditto.

Craig Browning wrote:This is something I and numerous others have written on and kabitched about for decades; a circumstance that's gotten far worse since the introduction of the Home Computer and Internet.

I'm trying my hardest not to be a troll now, so apologies if you see it like this. Sure, my last post was in jest but this last line struck a chord with me

But surely the Internet allowing people to publish their ideas is a good thing? Why should those those with publishers or loads of money be the only people allowed to share their enthusiasm and talents? Surely it's the fresh eyes that will see new ways of doing things; with their (relatively) innocent take on the industry?

Tomo wrote an interesting article for Online Visions where he described the current magic situation as being like the punk era of music. People were making their own records or starting their own labels, and not waiting around for someone to sign them.

I think that's a workable analogy.

However, in reality, a vast chunk of the 'new' 'gold dust' material that's been released through the wonderful medium of the internet is either not new or is fool's gold.

We've all seen the one-trick DVDs selling for half the price (or more) of a good book. People with more money than sense (or, more charitably, without the discerning eye to spot these rehashes) pay mountebanks for the privilege of learning something that is often already in the public domain. Or, worse still, an 'improvement' on someone else's work that is often neither an improvement nor offered with the original creator's blessing.

On other occasions, the 'fresh perspective' is little more than a set of half-formed notes on effects that might work. If there's an 'r' in the month. And the light's just right.

If all you want to do is share ideas, there are forums like this one. Where the objection (arguably) lies is that some people get paid for these unworkable/hacked effects.

Or, to put it another way, kolm, do you believe that any Tom, Dick or Harry publishing any old drivel and quite possibly charging other people good money for the privilege is always a good thing?

EDIT: Maybe it'd be good to put the point in.

The argument is not that people shouldn't use the internet to sell their wares, or that it can't be a good medium for allowing new people access to a wider audience and/or experienced magicians. The issue is that people shouldn't be flogging half-baked, unworkable effects disguised as some wonderful new creation. Snake oil salesmen for the 21st century, as it were.

Part-Timer wrote:people shouldn't be flogging half-baked, unworkable effects disguised as some wonderful new creation.

They have been doing that since way before the internet came along.

At least now I can read reviews where someone tells me that *insert name of product, but let's use The Raven as a modern example...* is "a complete waste of time and only looks good on a YouTube video where the angles are exactly right and a sound track covers up the noise made by the gimmick."

Just think back to the days of the old catalogues. Unless you were a member of a magic club, there was no way you could find any advice. And if you were a member (as I was), those two dozen people in Cornwall with whom you met once a month would have nowhere like the buying experience of the hundreds that post to forums such as this one. So they wouldn't know that Ian Adair's latax budgie was complete rubbish.

Information is rarely a bad thing. And if people (like the 10 year old me) refuse to see through obviously dreadful sales pitches then more fool them, particularly if they ignore previous victims who are willing to share their bad experiences.

queen of clubs wrote:

moodini wrote:

queen of clubs wrote:....And it's not like you'll be paying for your copy.

Does one assume from that that you are giving some form of TM promo discount/offer when it goes out?

I have a list of people who can have a free copy and Lenny is near the top of it. Come to think of it, he's also near the bottom of it

Not to derail this thread too much (come on, it was just a rant in the first place ), but the whole "promo copy" thing with regard to magic annoys me somewhat. Sure, I'd accept a free copy of something - who wouldn't - but actually, I'd prefer they weren't offered. With magic more than many other things, one of the big issues at hand is how good value something is, how versatile, how much material, how much bang for your buck.

I get sick of reviews from people who've received free items giving stuff 5 stars, 10/10 etc. and saying "definitely worth £30..." - yes, but you didn't pay that, did you! You are in pretty much no position to comment about how it actually feels to have swapped thirty English pounds (for which you can buy a week's food, 2/3rds of a tank of petrol or a great night out up North) for the item in question.

Creators and distributors should offer a small trusted sub-set of people the opportunity to be the first to buy it, at a discounted rate at the most. Then we'll hear whether it's really worth it or not.

Part-Timer wrote:Or, to put it another way, kolm, do you believe that any Tom, Dick or Harry publishing any old drivel and quite possibly charging other people good money for the privilege is always a good thing?

Not always, no. Which is where forums like this comes into play and people can say "Check out this ebook, it's rather quite cool". Or even better, the ebooks should be free (in my opinion, of course) so these "half formed notes" can be freely shared and improved upon. But then, I'm sure similar things were said when the printing press came along

But of course, I live in a utopia world where there's cute fluffy bunnie wabbits skipping along and everybody is skipping and singing in the beautiful summers day where birds are chirping along

Farlsborough wrote:Not to derail this thread too much (come on, it was just a rant in the first place ), but the whole "promo copy" thing with regard to magic annoys me somewhat. Sure, I'd accept a free copy of something - who wouldn't - but actually, I'd prefer they weren't offered. With magic more than many other things, one of the big issues at hand is how good value something is, how versatile, how much material, how much bang for your buck.

Welcome to writing . Take your seat at the back, make sure you have your obligatory brown coat and hat with a card saying 'press' on the rim, and don't forget to snoop around dark corners with pencil and notebook in hand

Seriously, happens in all industries... I guess in magic it's just more open

farlsey - you do have a notion as to how the whole sales thing works dont you? it sounds like someone is living in the land of chocolate and bunnies!

music promos...white labels, dvds with gift bags....everyone gets something...just to get word out...

also, its about sharing it with people who's opinions you trust FIRST...as to whether you should release it at all...or if its been done to death already...

thats the other side - you expect your friends to be honest with you, offer you advice, the other side of the coin...its hard enough having the b*lls or other genitalia to release any ideas out there as it is!

imagine if you released your very best card magic in a book - only for a dozen or so angry customers and creators saying "hey! thats not 'your' work! its been done before! CHEAT!"

and dont forget, if someone put's their name to a review - they are being tarred by the same brush just a little too - so they're not just doing it by being a mate...they're saying nice things cos maybe they're just being honest?

I understand where you're coming from, Farlsborough, but I'm not going to be giving any "advance" copies of my book out at all (except to IAIN, who is reviewing my work in progress so it's inevitable). I merely have a very short list of people I intend to give a free copy to once it's available to buy, and not before.

You make a good point about promo copies being a cynical attempt to get good reviews, so I will ask the 5 or so people I will be giving a free copy to not write reviews on it, or if they do to specify they didn't buy it.

Iain, I understand that, don't worry! In fact I've been to many a free gig writing for the student paper's music section. The thing is, with things like music or film, the aim is really to assess the artistic merit of something regardless of price.

With magic, the price is much more integral (I think, anyway) to how the product is rated - I think this is largely because magic suffers more than many other things from snake oil sellers You don't often get film or music reviews saying "good, but not really worth £5".

Someone could come up with a clever new peek - that peek is, objectively, as good as it is now and ever more shall be. If he's selling it at a modest price, perhaps as an instant download, it's possibly a really good deal. If he's hyping it beyond recognition and selling it as a full mentalism system for £100, it's a totally different kettle of fish. And I don't believe you can judge that fairly unless you've paid close enough to what the paying punter will be shelling out.

Of course, I have no problem with someone sending out works-in-progress to trusted people for private feedback and improvements. What I'm on about is having no intention to change the thing, and sending it to however many people for free so that they can review it. I think your idea is good Queenie - asking people to state whether they bought it or not, so people can decide how much to trust their judgement in terms of value.

"Freebies" cause a lot of problems - there are whole organisations set up in the world of medicine to campaign against doctors getting freebies from drug companies because of the proven effect it has in terms of sub-consciously wanting to reciprocate in a positive manner. But enough of that, I'm knackered.

Ah, but then when you've bought the thing (especially if you've invested a large amount of money into said item), you're likely to suffer post-purchase rationalisation; to quote Wiki:

Post-purchase rationalization is a common phenomenon after people have invested a lot of time, money, or effort in something to convince themselves that it must have been worth it. Many decisions are made emotionally, and so are often rationalized retrospectively in an attempt to justify the choice.

Which means a different kind of bias is introduced...

My last post was a bit arsey and condescending... I was trying to be humorous but in hindsight I wasn't very funny. Sorry about that

Farlsborough wrote:With magic, the price is much more integral (I think, anyway) to how the product is rated - I think this is largely because magic suffers more than many other things from snake oil sellers You don't often get film or music reviews saying "good, but not really worth £5".

I understand what you're saying here, but personally I don't see it a problem in magic. I guess we'll just agree to disagree with each other in this point

"Freebies" cause a lot of problems - there are whole organisations set up in the world of medicine to campaign against doctors getting freebies from drug companies because of the proven effect it has in terms of sub-consciously wanting to reciprocate in a positive manner. But enough of that, I'm knackered.

Yeah, I agree with that. When it comes to things like drugs (thinking of a particular Scrubs episode here) freebies shouldn't be happening

I'm grateful that Iain replied to Farlsborough first...

Being someone that receives and even solicits those complimentary copies on products I will tell you up-front that just because you send me something does not mean you get a top rating or even mention in my various columns. I literally threw away what in retail dollars would be thousands of dollars worth of JUNK people have sent me in hope of getting a quote or some kind of kudo, the majority sent to me unsolicited even though there have been a few of those requested items that peaked my curiosity, that proved to be even worse GARBAGE' than some of the stuff I've seen come from newbies... one particular over-priced clipboard comes to mind.

An honest reviewer/reporter/critic is not going to allow "gifting" to overly influence his/her decision. In many an instance the exact opposite happens, the unsolicited gifting turns them against you (and then I've had one or two (literally) product developers think the exact opposite, seeing a request for sample as being some sort of "barter"... fortunately this is rare and common only to certain types of personality groups).

I have several friends that retain prominent position in the industry that do reviews and critique. I deliberately send them rough drafts on things so they can tear it apart or, if so inspired, give it kudos. To me and my way of thinking, it's a filtering process; one that our newbies that feel it their "right" to waste band width with their incomplete dribble, not only don't take, they refuse to take it in that they know that what they have to offer is in fact, incomplete, incoherent and general rubbish... which brings us back to the gist of this thread.

GENUINE Information is a thing of value, not the ramblings of mad-men and fools! And yes, there is a plethora of such stupidity that's been on the market for decades prior to the Internet era, I don't deny that. However, 90% of such drek came to market via independent (self) publishing (out of pocket) not to be taken up by a "legit" publisher until the second or third printing. In those cases where the opposite is true, I can assure you that family connections and influence are at the root of said "achievement".

At 14 and 15 I was seeing accolades from many of my peers in this business, for being a fertile, creative mind and yet, I didn't publish (and wasn't encouraged to do so) for another decade down the road; after I'd proven myself on the battle front, as they say. Conversely, we now have individuals of the same age group who, at most, have done fewer than a dozen paid shows to-date, that feel it their "right" to share their two-cents worth as if it were a thing of value. They do so without asking for guidance or in-put from those with more experience and even when that is weighed, their egos frequently override common sense.

In the four decades I've been around Magic and actually working I've encountered fewer than a dozen teenagers that actually had a novel way of looking at things; Looch, Kennedy, Luke Jermay, Daniel Young and Joshua Jay being within that handful (I've known most of these guys since they were 16-17 years old). Even within the Magic Castle Junior's group fewer than two out of every core group (of 24 kids I believe it is) prove to be "exceptional" and typically, fewer than 30% of each "class" group ever follow through with their professional aspirations once reality sets in and it becomes a "job". Yet, you will not see ANY of these kids who have access to the largest library on the planet dealing with magic and uncanny access to living legends... you won't find them publishing their two-cents worth on line and most especially, as an eBook. They've been trained to understand the value of decorum and constraint when it comes to ego-stroking.

When I hear people scream the "right to self-expression" and all that other CRAPOLA I can't help but ponder what dimension they come from where such Utopian delusions prove practical??? Though it is true, the Internet is the new public Soap Box, it is just as true that what you say and do on that Soap Box can paint you as that rare bird of true inspiration or (in the majority of cases) as the restless, ill-educated fool akin to those sporting signs about the End of Time. Sadly, we forget that what is said on the Internet Says on the Internet e.g. like a diet soda, there is a lingering funk that can last for years, leaving a horrid taste in the mouths of others.

There's a young man from the Chicago area that's tossed out over a dozen books in the past five years, selling himself as an expert on a number of Mentalism related subjects. He toured with a side show for a year and wrote about book as an "expert" to the venue; he did a season of college shows and again, composed a book claiming to know more than noted award winners like Banachek and Eagles on the topic... the list goes on and on, the lads ego being at the fore while nearly every pro in the industry is laughing their butts off when it comes to the kids incompetence and inexperience and how that is revealed through his books and related audacity. The moral of the story being more akin to a question, "Is this the kind of image you want to paint for yourself?"

It not STOP producing (or even considering) poor quality eBooks just because you can. Take your time, get feedback, be patient, take some genuine pride in what you are creating and make certain you aren't just selling pipe dreams -- get it field tested! Put your theories and ideas through a baptism of fire by actually doing it in the field, on a steady basis for a year or two so that your final product is refined. This is the kind of thing that will lend value to what you release and in turn, give you the kind of recognition your ego believes your presently deserve.

Just some food for thought.

Ted wrote:They have been doing that since way before the internet came along.

Of course. The point was that the internet has made it a lot easier. Which it has. So, if it was wrong before, and it just got easier...

Unless you're saying that it was always a good thing to publish cr@p and con someone into buying it, which I don't think you are.

I was responding to kolm's post:

kolm wrote:But surely the Internet allowing people to publish their ideas is a good thing? Why should those those with publishers or loads of money be the only people allowed to share their enthusiasm and talents? Surely it's the fresh eyes that will see new ways of doing things; with their (relatively) innocent take on the industry?

The question was not whether the internet is good or bad for magic, but specifically whether ease of publication is a good thing. I am hugely glad that the internet has made it easier to check up on whether an item is good or not, for the reasons you gave, Ted.

kolm wrote:Not always, no. Which is where forums like this comes into play and people can say "Check out this ebook, it's rather quite cool". Or even better, the ebooks should be free (in my opinion, of course) so these "half formed notes" can be freely shared and improved upon. But then, I'm sure similar things were said when the printing press came along

Probably not, bearing in mind how much paper used to cost.

Seriously, though, you've hit the nail on the head. Sharing ideas is fine, and a very good use of the technology. I don't think many people have a problem with that (as long as the ideas are not trampling on someone else's work, of course).

If you are determined to publish then, as Iain said, use the medium to get views from people whose opinions you trust. And then have the guts to take heed of those opinions.