I hope you like it Paul!!!

Pawel, the guys at alakazam are pretty awesome and keeping up with everything! They've done such a wicked job with the ageing video and the PDF! Let me know how yours turn out man!

Jamie Daws

Still waiting on mine. Jamie, the preorders for US went out?

No I did mine myself but the vid looks great and wish I had of seen it first before I done mine,still mine look good as I say.

A brilliant piece of dark mystery! I've just aged mine (thanks Alakazam & Moz) they look great, and thanks Jamie for releasing this

Received mine from Jamie yesterday and watched the DVD tonight.

Yeah. It's good. REAL good. Having only viewed the DVD (verses performing the effect) the routine seems totally thought-out and workable. The single discrepancy that is mentioned seems very easy to fade into the background with some time delay and subtle patter (which is also addressed in the DVD). I'm not sure I'm even going to bother aging my photos as I like the raw, graphical markings that are explained in the instructions.

Jamie made death appealing. Not an easy task.

Terrormaster, they did sir and I'm sure it'll be with you soon! Most of the international guys have received it now!

Roblane, glad you're liking it man! The ageing video really is awesome! I successfully aged the photos to the next Dark Series release a couple of days ago and they look wicked!

Wizard, Glad it got to you man! And thank you for the lovely comments! Let me know how you get on and what your reactions are like. I always like hearing about other peoples experiences performing these effects!

Thank you all for the support and for making the release so awesome! You all rock!

Jamie Daws

Jamie - can you shed some light on number two from the Dark Series?

The next in the series is an effect I've released in small numbers over the years but I had so many emails (amazingly from some incredible names in magic) asking to make it more readily available. When I showed the effect to the guys at Alakazam, they were really excited by it! We had so much fun filming it too. It came to a point we did about 15 takes of the performance because we couldn't stop nervously laughing knowing that we were all going to be shaking wrecks by the end of the performance! Being able to produce this is large numbers and to supply an in-depth DVD was such an amazing opportunity and I think its exactly what the effect needs!

That is all I'll say for now!

Jamie Daws

Jamie, arrived today. Sat through the DVD once and already got the gist of it. Simply and absolutely brilliant. Well done sir, I look forward to performing this.

Please fix your newsletter and add me in so I don't miss it ☺

I just received mine in the post today, Jamie...interrupted my annual view of Lord of the Rings to watch the DVD, and I was NOT disappointed! This is a beautiful piece, and I can't wait to get it down with a presentation to share with others!

Wonderful job, absolutely brilliant!

Rick

Terror Master, So glad you like it man! Simple is always best my friend! Let me know how you get on with it!

Rick, Ha ha, leaving the world of fantasy magic for the real stiff ai! Im glad it was worth it and I hope you get along well with it sir!

Just to let you all know, I've just heard back from the printers. Later this week, there will be refill packs available on my site! They will include a set of photos, one of the envelopes and aged paper should you want to age them! Ill let you know when they are up on the site!

Jamie Daws

Hi all, a little up date on my deceased project. I am performing with them in a Victorian seance next Sunday at an old english village pub. My whole routine is based around what was once Conley hatch lunatic asylum in london. I have many different items including the Luna books, Hobbs box, deceased and even a haunted pen that make up my hour long routine.
Here are the images of the cards I made up for this routine. Story goes like this: in Victorian England it was very easy to have your loved one or enemy committed to a mental institute. All it took was a signature from a doctor and a close relative and that was it. You would be locked away and subjected to a torrent of abuse and hideous treatments. Each of these people pictured could be insane, but in fact only two of them were truly insane. So insane in fact that they murdered their own children, for they were husband and wife murderes etc... Do the moves and hey presto you can do a cool reveal showing two insane people and the rest sane. Note that I took extra time to ensure everyone of the stamps is different. I did it all on computer as I couldn't afford to buy rubber stamps which would have been my preference. Still a bit more ageing to do to make the stamp effect a bit duller and worn. What do you think guys?
Paul.

Not much as there are no pics.

Hi all, I got my set from Alakazam about a month ago and all I can say is this is simply "BRILLIANT".

Kudos to you, Jamie. You have come up with an effect that really rocks!

The quality of the cards is top. The same applies to the envelope, the DVD (excellent teaching)
and the whole packaging in general.

You never can go wrong with any effect produced by Alakazam! Simply, RESPECT for Peter and his awesome team.

However since my order has arrived there is one thought that keeps spinning in my head which I'd like to share with you
and ask each of you for your personal opinion.

Am I right and thus too observant regarding a little bit of transparency I spotted in the method,
during the performance in the DVD or am I'm just thinking like a magician?

Your opinion would be much appreciated.

So, let's get to the point.

I'll try to do my best and describe this as accurate it gets, despite my language restrictions,
since as you have probably noticed, English isn't my mother tongue.

I think that the method is less transparent if not totally undetectable when you don't print the words
DEAD (or any other word of your preference) on the backs of the relevant cards.

What I mean is that it seems safer to leave the backs of the aforementioned cards as they are: BLANK.

IMHO, the effect and its outcome doesn't get weaker at all. On the contrary. And I'll explain why.

As you and as well any unwary spectator will notice and probably recall later [a few seconds before the end of the
effect and the final revelation when Jamie (performer) and David (spectator) spread their cards on the table] there
is one card reversed (BLANK BACK is shown) in each packet of five photos.

On the backs of all the others is printed in red ink the word DEAD.
At first glance, this approach seems to have a stronger impact on laymen as it builds another layer of climax.

However in case the spectator notices that there are only two blank back photos in play, there is a big and not
a slight, chance for him to recall that at the beginning and during the performance, the performer (Jamie
in this case) hands (in the first phase of the effect) his pile of cards/photos - with a blank back photo
showing at the top of it - to the spectator.

So, he registers in his mind that Jamie has already a blank back photo in his pile which (the pile) is given
to the spectator in order for David (the spectator in this case) to insert his single and literally freely chosen
photo into Jamie's pile.

Let me remind you that the spectator is holding his chosen photo tightly in his hand all the time and never let it go.

Later, when both spread their piles and reveal the outcome of each one, there is one face down (BLANK BACK) photo
in each pile.

Don't you think that it's a matter of time for the spectator to ask himself how is it possible for
Jamie to have a blank back, face down photo in his pile when at the same time the second face down, blank back one
that's in play is amongst the other 4 face up photos in the spectator's pile?

Bear in mind that all the other eight cards have the word DEAD in red ink written on their backs.

This means that only two blank backs photos are in play from the beginning of the effect.

In conclusion, if there are only two photos whith blank backs in play and the performer is shown to hand at some point
his face down pile of photos to the spectator, isn't this DISCREPANCY (especially later when the two piles are being spread
on the table) obvious as it seems more than possible to make the spectator wonder how could it be possible for the performer
to have at the end a face down, blank back photo amongst the other 4 face up photos in his spreaded pile?

It would be logical to have no blank back photo as earlier he handed his pile (face down, blank back showing) to the spectator,
since after the revelation the spectator has a face down, blank back photo too.

So, one scenario seems logical: the performer had from the beginning... you know what (trying hard not to expose anything).

I don't know if I managed to express myself in a way you absolutely understood what I tried to point out.
I also hope that I didn't expose any crucial detail of the method since I tried to be as careful as I had to.

Thank you in advance for being patient with my post for being so long and maybe complicated to undestand fully.

Your opinion, any idea or advise would be well appreciated.

Warmest regards to all, as always.
Andrew K.

Does this come with words already written on the backs or is this something you add yourself?

You are right? I guess spectators won't remember the back of the picture that was handed over most of the time but they can. I was going to stamp and age photos but now after rethinking this I will stamp only envelope pictures which eliminates the problem. I think it would be as strong as with all the pictures stamped. Or maybe you make the DEAD slightly darker to distinguish when you turn them over. When you jand it there is no way they can remember the "shade" of it.

I stil think we are overthinking this and Jamie's way is as good as it gets. End of the line is you get blank pictures which you can customize and make your own.

Thinking like a magician as well, there is a way you could perform this where there was no discrepancy at the end.
However there are 2 downsides the 1st being you would have to do a "move" before you handed the spectator's packet to them (it could be done under the table or behind your back as a way of explaining to the spectator what's going to happen.)
The 2nd being when spectator's packet is handed back it must be done under the table (it cannot be seen.)
On the plus side the spectator actually reverses the card he has chosen back into the packet, everything looks as it should when packets displayed & the observant spectator will see the "Murder" they chose in their packet at the beginning..!
Hope you can reach between the lines of what's going on..

Better take this downstairs

Some really interesting thoughts in here!

Personally, I've been performing this for about a year now and I can hands down say that the discrepancies in this effect are unnoticeable. Infant, between magician and layperson, no one has ever questioned me on either discrepancy. I think we tend to think far to much like magicians when it comes to these kind of things. You must remember, the discrepancies happen before the spectator realises what is going to happen. If they do not know there will be words on the back then why would they be looking at them? I just think its a problem that is not really there at all in absolute honesty. I wouldn't even factor it in.

In terms of the revelation of the words on the back, we left them blank so that you can present this as you wish but for me, it really is a big part of the effect. In the spectators minds, that prediction could be switched or something could maybe have happened to it. When you turn over the pictures, its almost like it was inevitable from the very start. It was already written, already determined.

I guess with all of these kinds of effects, it is completely each to their own but purely from working it so much, I feel as though the routine is perfect for me and my style!

Jamie Daws