talkmagic.co.uk

by **Beardy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:38

Eshly wrote:1. I have asked if it is a marketed effect. It is not.

With your "speed-reading" you obviously missed my post telling you that it is a marketed effect

I answered your question, we have given you advice

over and out

by **Lenoir** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:39

To be fair Chris, I'm pretty certain the method used by Blaine wasn't marketed, but hey.

Your post before that was spot on.

by **Eshly** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:40

Beardy wrote:
Eshly wrote:I've always laughed at them because of the simplicity of the methods; a good method should combine within itself four or five methods, plus "misdirections" as to how you are doing it. The prediction effects in Thirteen Steps have always seemed so much "weaker" and "easier to understand" than anything else I've ever seen

no no no no no no no no no no no no no NO NO!

Jeeeeez!

complex does not mean good! Simple does not mean bad! That is not to say complicated stuff is always bad and simple stuff is always good, but oh my "dunford-on-a-christ-deck"!

Are you saying that you would never use an ID because it is "too simple" and doesnt employ every other method under the sun? What about a billet switch - too simple? Impression pad...card force...instant stooging...dual reality...

all of these are one method and can create some of the most baffling effects to a lay audience. Stop thinking like a magician, and start thinking like a layperson! It doesnt matter if the method you use is "simple"...they dont know it!

also:

I admit I do suffer from a bad case of CUPS; however I also am an excellent speed reader, and currently have read all my Mentalism books at least twice. I am currently trying to put together a stage show, and I think its roughly one third complete (material wise); but I refuse to add anything to it that is not "strong".

This is alll wrong. Wrong, wrong, wrong. Speed read mentalism books? You can't physically do that and take everything in. I have had 13 steps and annamenn for coming on 4 years now, and every time i read it, I find another 30-40 effects that I have completely forgotten about.

Re-read 13 steps. Read karl furves.

and bloody read alchemical tools...you might learn a lot about methods and presentation in that!

Here is a transcript of a conversation that changed my life, 2 years ago, with a fellow mentalist:

me: "I want to learn some genine psychological effects...not to just use billet switches and sleight of hand"

him: "why?"

There you have it. Why do you want it to be complex? I've been working on my show now for the best part of over a year, and it is being peformed in a months time. I am cacking it. I have done so much wrong it is unbelievable. But you know what I have done correctly? The effects!

Why is this? Because I have taken out anything complicated I had a final show about 2 weeks ago...and I have edited it even now to take out something which was too complex to pull off on stage at my current skill level, whilst still shownmanship...ing

Slow down. I'm not going to ask you o re-read. I am asking you to sit down and actually read the book for your first time in your life.

And I know you think that 13 steps is toilet...I was new once - you haven't learnt to appreciate it yet

Firstly, I don't use an ID... I use half an ID. This way the same effect can be achieved, but it can be shown from underneath. (I don't like short children) Ofcourse I need to use a mini-index-system too, but its brilliant when revealed, because it even fools the guys at my local magic store.

I'm a "one step further" kind of guy.

Tom
xx

by **IAIN** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:41

tom - you own 13 steps, dont be lazy, go and read it for the third time...osterlind has improved the method, i watched that disc tonight...i was chuckling away at it...

you've admitted you're not much of a performer - so dont judge effects until you've presented them to regular folk a few times...

anyway - you have a nice life, i find all this rather sad (in the original meaning of the word)...

by **Beardy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:41

Lenoir wrote:To be fair Chris, I'm pretty certain the method used by Blaine wasn't marketed, but hey.

Your post before that was spot on.

thankyou. It did take me a while to type...I'm not the fastest typer in the world, and not Browning

And I swear it is...comes with a wallet and what-not?

Then again I am only human...I may be remembering incorrectly! I'll go on a search for it...

by **eveningzoo** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:41

Just Echoing what everyone else is saying Eshly. You keep mentioning you have autism. My brother is Autistic so I know how difficult communication can be and is so just take time to look over what people have said to you, the tips they have given you and try to process it.

Think of it like this. you may spend £100 on three effects. ok.. so thata about 15 minutes of performance if you stretch them out. OR... you oculd spend £100 on Corindas material..the 13 steps book and the DVD colelction. These items will give you a mass of effects that you can perform which in my opinion are much better than any of Blaines street magic stuff (Thats just my mentalist taste). Aswell as giving you SHED loads of routines it will give you the creative ability, and state of mind to be able to form your own routines fromt he techniques you will learn. Buying the 13 steps a few years ago was the best thing I ever did..It really will give you years of material.

Back onto this lottery effect :- The 13 steps will give you a number of techniques that will enable you to create a similar effect if you wish. Create your own method....... IF you do this.. people will be on here going "WOW did you see ESHLY perform that lottery routine... how the F**k did he do that"

Enjoy creating your own things... its is ALOT more reqarding.. It feels great. Give it a try.

Over and out,

EZ

by **Randy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:43

Lenoir wrote:To be fair Chris, I'm pretty certain the method used by Blaine wasn't marketed, but hey.

Your post before that was spot on.

Well the method he used isn't marketed. But there are a bunch of different ways to achieve the same exact thing. I know that Nathan Stansforth or whatshisface has one he does for the stage which is essentially David Blaine's. I forget the name of the other who does Market his own version as well. I know that Osterlind has his own version as well too. I am also pretty sure there a ton of other different mentalist's and magicians out there that also have their own method.

The question is: Why do you just want to know David Blaine's. Everybody else's method's achieve the same effect to the audience.

by **Beardy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:45

Eshly wrote:
Firstly, I don't use an ID... I use half an ID. This way the same effect can be achieved, but it can be shown from underneath. (I don't like short children) Ofcourse I need to use a mini-index-system too, but its brilliant when revealed, because it even fools the guys at my local magic store.

I am going to say to you the one word that changed my magical career...

"why?"

Why do you only use half a deck, a pocket system, and go to fool magicians at your "local magic store"?

Why make it needlessly more complicated?

A very famous example here:

Derren Brown - when he "guesses which hand the coin is in"...this is an effect that you can purchase for...i dunno...£30 depending on postage and the shop in question. It is simple, yet it kills...every time! It is the PRESENTATION of the simple effect.

So stop thinking 13 steps is cack, and read it for the first time

by **Eshly** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:46

I need to buy a camcorder.

What people seem to forget is that I do make stuff all the time, currently my browser has two tabs open, this and a Google search for a lottery ticket in a high resolution photo.

If I can photo shop out the winning numbers, then insert my own mid-performance I am on to a winner. I haven't bought any actual trick in a long time now, I managed to stop that because it seems 99% of tricks use false advertising in their "What the spectator see's" bits.

I am going to say to you the one word that changed my magical career...

"why?"

Why do you only use half a deck, a pocket system, and go to fool magicians at your "local magic store"?

The Everest Principal: Because its there.

I want to be the best at what I do, and while thats very unlikely to ever happen. I like to put my abilities to some use.

Tom
xx

by **kolm** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:49

Eshly wrote:Firstly, I don't use an ID... I use half an ID. This way the same effect can be achieved, but it can be shown from underneath. (I don't like short children)

Don't do ID to children... they see right through it. That's if they even understand it

I'm a "one step further" kind of guy.

So is Derren Brown, an amazing showman and thinker. He's also a "one step further" guy... and it hit me what makes amazing magic. He uses very, very simple stuff (99% of what he does is in 13 steps) but he goes one step further with the trick. As a layman about 4 years ago, what made me fall in love with him (and magic) wasn't the methods, it was what he did. It was what he was telling me he could do I loved

And now, as a magician, whenever I learn or recognise how he does something, the first thing that comes into my head is "the cheeky sod". Because the method is that simple. That's why he's such an amazing performer. He thinks "What do I want to do?" and finds a simple way of doing it

by **Randy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:51

The Everest Principle is kind of dumb. You have to learn to climb/hike small hills and mountains before you can even THINK of trying out the big boys.

by **Eshly** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:51

kolm wrote:
Eshly wrote:Firstly, I don't use an ID... I use half an ID. This way the same effect can be achieved, but it can be shown from underneath. (I don't like short children)[/url]
Don't do ID to children... they see right through it. That's if they even understand it

I'm a "one step further" kind of guy.

So is Derren Brown, an amazing showman and thinker. He's also a "one step further" guy... and it hit me what makes amazing magic. He uses very, very simple stuff (99% of what he does is in 13 steps) but he goes one step further with the trick. As a layman about 4 years ago, what made me fall in love with him (and magic) wasn't the methods, it was what he did. It was what he was telling me he could do I loved

And now, as a magician, whenever I learn or recognise how he does something, the first thing that comes into my head is "the cheeky sod". Because the method is that simple. That's why he's such an amazing performer. He thinks "What do I want to do?" and finds a simple way of doing it

I agree totally there. Unfortunetly, no matter how hard I try... I can't think simply. For some reason my mind likes complicated new solutions and creations, rather than old ideas presented newly; which is certainly not good for me.

by **eveningzoo** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:54

If you are already working on a menthod that works then you are fine. IF it works. What I would say is once you have your idea... analyse it like HELL. HOW can you make this better?... You should be asking yourself this question untill the day you die. It will never be finished. How Can you make your current menthod Better, easier, simpler and more effective. Sit and think

by **Beardy** » Jan 23rd, '10, 01:57

Think logically...

if you want to have a lottery ticket that isnt swamied on, how could you do it?

pre-show...

a stamp...

hypnosis...

stooge...

instant stooge... (personal favourite...don't underestimate the power of instant stooging...)

billet index... (give it some though here...i dont mean 49 million indexes...)

a force...

a psychological force...

There. That is eight potential methods, most of which are simple to do. Don't overcomplicate things!

by **eveningzoo** » Jan 23rd, '10, 02:00

Also think about what you didnt see. What happened before the TV audience joined the effect. Could there be another part to this that we didnt see, therefore making a kinf of dual reality between the specs and the tv audience ??? Pre show hypnosis ?? (A bit unnecessary for this I fell but It would work). And I agree with Chris. Dont under estimate the power of stooges. The very nature of our job is to lie and to cheat My brother years ago once said to me "but when you perform arnt you just lying to people." Well yes...we Lie for entertainment lol. I dont understand people who say using stooges are cheating...cheating is int he very nature of our job !!

EZ

talkmagic.co.uk

Looking for David Blaine effect: lottery note prediction

Who is online