talkmagic.co.uk

Here's my two cents:

- There was a good two feet between the prediction stand and Derren's static TV, and Derren was on the other side of the TV.
- He bought himself (and quite possibly somebody else that was hidden from view) a lot of time by writing out the numbers after the fact on that board.
- The BBC's rights to air the results first was smoke and mirrors. There would be nothing to stop you from airing a prediction, which - unless Derren Brown successfully rigged the lottery and thus put himself at risk of being a bigger perjurer than Jeffrey Archer - would certainly point towards the distant prediction stand holding the key.
- If his standing repertoire is anything to go by, he won't be showing Joe Public how to do anything. I'm betting he reveals the method quite openly, and uses it as a lesson in probability - much like The System. He never said he'll show anyone how to predict the lottery numbers, he simply offered to show how he did "it". Which he may well do. It fits in with the trailer, at least - the trailers show everything going backwards, and he effectively did the effect in reverse; we saw the draw, then the prediction, which was the opposite to what I'm sure we all were expecting. That could be a key theme through all the stunts.
I couldn't tell you the precise method because I'm not a video editor (I suspect a professional video editor could hand you the method in a New York minute), but I mean, this is nothing new, we all know that. He's used this principle over and over again - whether "Joe Public" will link the principle back to his "guess how much change you've got" stunts is another question, but I'm betting the stunt itself will have a hidden, rational message. Just like everything else he does.

Blapsing_Beard wrote:14 million outcomes? over 365 days?

38,000 recordings per day

1,583 recordings per hour

26 recordings per minute

one revelation recorded every two seconds with no sleep or time for food for a whole year

............................

I won't even continue

I was entertained

Once again maths lets me down

Once again maths lets me down

Surely it's the other way round?

Mad villiany if you are saying that we are watching that reveal in reverse that is poppy c**k (if not appologies) bit I was swapping between the two channels whcih proved what was aired on bbc 1 was infact coming through at that exact moment. Hence it could nopt possibley be in reverse unless he is a time travelling mind reader.

Has Derren got tourettes?
Just a few thing i noticed yesterday that i havent noticed before.

jhmagic1 wrote:

Blapsing_Beard wrote:14 million outcomes? over 365 days?

38,000 recordings per day

1,583 recordings per hour

26 recordings per minute

one revelation recorded every two seconds with no sleep or time for food for a whole year

............................

I won't even continue

I was entertained

Once again maths lets me down

I Like this one! I wont try and work the maths out but as he was only going for 5 numbers how many would that take this down to? I know it seem like alot of hard work but remeber "the system"

jhmagic1 wrote:The idea of multiple endings shot with 14million different outcomes is an interesting one, and would explain why it took him a year to do.

This was my third theory, with the BBC feed being dropped in after the fact. It would work, but you'd need the time to create the films, and know which one to play in advance. So you'd need to predict the lottery...

kems wrote:

jhmagic1 wrote:

Blapsing_Beard wrote:14 million outcomes? over 365 days?

38,000 recordings per day

1,583 recordings per hour

26 recordings per minute

one revelation recorded every two seconds with no sleep or time for food for a whole year

............................

I won't even continue

I was entertained

Once again maths lets me down

I Like this one! I wont try and work the maths out but as he was only going for 5 numbers how many would that take this down to? I know it seem like alot of hard work but remeber "the system"

just watched again as he wrorte down the actual numbers he would need to cover all possibilities so dont look right now

The mention of the large distance between Derren and the stand has got my brain ticking about the possibility of a simple split screen effect. It's the kind of thing that allows actors to appear twice in a single frame. This can very easily be done live with the most basic of vision mixers.

Replacing the left-hand side of the frame with a prerecorded loop of the stand would give enough cover for the balls to be replaced after the results are announced.

Yes, camera tricks are cheating, but if he's genuinely going to explain how he did it, that's the kind of trick he'd expose.

Pete

Did anyone watch the gathering afterwards? It was a loooooong day for me so I was surprised that I noticed the big FORGETs on the walls.

I watched Derren on a C4 analogue broadcast and BBC analogue on a small portable, there was only a fraction of a second delay. I was also watching to see if the prediction stand went out of sight but it didn't. Check it all out on YouTube with a split screeen of BBC and C4HD side by side at
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lmxua_V1AcM

pcwells wrote:The mention of the large distance between Derren and the stand has got my brain ticking about the possibility of a simple split screen effect. It's the kind of thing that allows actors to appear twice in a single frame. This can very easily be done live with the most basic of vision mixers.

Replacing the left-hand side of the frame with a prerecorded loop of the stand would give enough cover for the balls to be replaced after the results are announced.

Yes, camera tricks are cheating, but if he's genuinely going to explain how he did it, that's the kind of trick he'd expose.

Pete

This is one of the more saner, logical ideas i've read.

Im glad someone else picked up on the absuridty of ' not being allowed to reveal the numbers ' when it was simply a prediction.

If he'd have showed us a bunch of numbers and said ' These are the numbers that will come out '.......now that would have been scary.

Scarily good of course.

kems wrote:

jhmagic1 wrote:

Blapsing_Beard wrote:14 million outcomes? over 365 days?

38,000 recordings per day

1,583 recordings per hour

26 recordings per minute

one revelation recorded every two seconds with no sleep or time for food for a whole year

............................

I won't even continue

I was entertained

Once again maths lets me down

I Like this one! I wont try and work the maths out but as he was only going for 5 numbers how many would that take this down to? I know it seem like alot of hard work but remeber "the system"

you're thinking wayyyyyyyyy outside the box here. Who in their right mind would spend a year filming that many predictions? You forget the methods he uses are much simpler, yet heavily disguised.

Watch the video again. All clues needed are in that short 10 minute time frame.

What I'm interested in however, is whether he gives a true explanation tomorow. I'm thinking no, as it probably wouldn't make good tv. With him there is always a twist, and I'm looking forward to seeing what this twist is

Chaps...he did say he was using misdirection.

I think it worked very well.

you need to think about what he said at the begining of the show, and what he took great pains to show you.

pcwells wrote:The mention of the large distance between Derren and the stand has got my brain ticking about the possibility of a simple split screen effect. It's the kind of thing that allows actors to appear twice in a single frame. This can very easily be done live with the most basic of vision mixers.

Replacing the left-hand side of the frame with a prerecorded loop of the stand would give enough cover for the balls to be replaced after the results are announced.

Yes, camera tricks are cheating, but if he's genuinely going to explain how he did it, that's the kind of trick he'd expose.

Pete

For this im sure the camera needs to be completly still? The camera was always slightly moving!