|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 | ||||||||||
InvisibleMonkey Regular user 136 Posts |
Perhaps, Rick,
But if you're going to break the rules, maybe do it in a way that isn't so obvious (especially if you are already a Star, who's reputation is based around your ability to manipulate minds, not video.) Because if a member of the public realises that you are doing one thing with video effects, it undermines absolutely everything else you do. And this effect is SO common online at the moment, most memorable one was the Navy advert where you could email your friend a video of the navy delivering your message (in fact I think it was posted in these forums a few months back) As for Nymans quote... But I do wonder if Derren did the video editing himself? (yeah right!) Did he skillfully add the CGI poster (and all the rest of it) or was that just some techy guy in the production team? Personally I think it's lazy. And I wonder exactly how much this "method" will be used in this series. My guess is we'll see it again sooner or later. It's thier new toy and they are not going to want to stop playing with it. |
|||||||||
OrderD29 New user 26 Posts |
I have to play Devils Advocate here for a minute. You seem to presume that because it might have been some CGI trickery then it definately was. Your whole arguement seems to be based on this unproven fact.
I know that with editing and so forth the timescale that appears on the TV might not be relevant to what actually happened (again, I don't know one way or the other but I'm not making presumptions) but it appeared that the footage was shown to the guy very shortly after he had revealed his impression of the word. Bearing in mind that the camera shot was a handheld camera with a manual zoom, the ability to produce such a realistic looking CG shot in such a short space of time, even if 5 minutes extra passed that we didn't see, is incredible, probably more so than the other things DB did in the episode! I presume that people remember one of the other things Derren did in one of the first lots of his series several years ago, the hold up at St Pancras where he interviewed the woman witness afterwards who said that she didn't remember much of what had happened but with his prompting, she came up with lots of detail. Might it be relevant that the guy in this TorT episode remembered the woman dressed in red standing by the machine? Possibly, or possibly not. Was the word above the machine CG? Possibly, or possibly not. To base postings on the fact that it 'could be' CG and to say that that throws anything else he might do out of the window is not something that sits comfortably with me. It's been mentioned on forums such as this that if people can't figure out how something's done then they make wrong presumptions, albeit in good faith. Is that what might be happening here? Probably, probably not. |
|||||||||
Katherine Anne New user 91 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-05-14 07:26, RickDangerous wrote: One of the ebst posts I've read in a long time. Bravo, Rick! |
|||||||||
InvisibleMonkey Regular user 136 Posts |
Well OrderD29,
Have you not seen the Navy adverts (also done with a handheld camera?) It's a clever bit of Java programming - very easy to do. All you need to do is overlay a few grain effects onto the finished product and there you go. It's as quick as typing the word into a PC and the computer generates the rest. It's not very difficult to do at all, you simply mask the area you want the image to be placed and the computer can generate frame by frame the subtle differences in camera positioning in relation to the mask. Once you've seen it done a few times, you learn to notice the inate flaws in the system, which is a slight wobble or lag in the placement of the poster (or whatever image you are placing on the scene. and a certain "unreality" which you cant quite put into words about the overlayed image. It is very clear on this episode. I would be willing to bet my years wages on it being done this way. |
|||||||||
Anthony Jacquin Inner circle UK 2220 Posts |
Real time CGI is simply the digital equivalent of a swami. It is not lazy if the effect on the participant was real. It probably took a lot of effort:)
Anthony
Anthony Jacquin
Reality is Plastic! The Art of Impromptu Hypnosis Updated for 2016 Now on Kindle and Audible! |
|||||||||
InvisibleMonkey Regular user 136 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-05-15 19:35, Anthony Jacquin wrote: I suppose you could see it that way, Swamiing a poster, whilst you're not even there would be a hell of a feat. I still believe that if you cant do it in person or on stage, then it's no longer a demonstration of your abilities as a mentalist, it's a demonstration of your effects budget, someone elses coding/artistic skills, and how far you'll go to achieve an effect without using actually skill as a mentalist. It's in the same league as a stooge really, as far as audience deception (the bad type) goes. |
|||||||||
richpoyle Regular user UK 116 Posts |
Firstly, a short comment on the (unproven) CGI claims above: this wasn't really a complete effect, but just a 'convincer' for the participant, to make him believe his memory was better than he thought: so personally, I'm OK with it, however it was achieved - simply because it was a means to an end rather than the whole effect.
Secondly, tonight's show was another masterclass in presentation: three classic mentalism effects (confabulation, drawing dupe and headline prediction) rethought, reworked and linked into a satisfying time-travel theme. My only complaint would be that 24 minutes of airtime was too short for three such brilliantly presented effects. The confubulation routine, in particular, seemed rushed and lacked the impact it deserved. A printed newspaper from 1938 as the 'prediction' was a stroke of genius and anyone who's seen Derren's live shows will know he could make such an effect last 20 minutes alone. But it was the headline prediction that absolutely grabbed me: really beautifully done and once again, shifting the focus and abilities away from Derren to the 'spectator', in this case Dr Who actor David Tennant. Using automatic writing to predict news stories 4 days in advance was a clever and visual idea - once again, something I wish I'd thought of! |
|||||||||
Matthew Wright Special user 551 Posts |
Just to address a couple of posts above in one thread.
Derren was interviewed on radio the other day and said he has ideas for his next TV show (so he isn't going away just yet). He said he wants to do a show where he invites special guests to perform so other mentalists and magicians who are developing great magic may just get their chance! (no need to be bitter) |
|||||||||
Ian Broadmore Special user 555 Posts |
I watched Trick or Treat last night, one word sum up BORING.....
|
|||||||||
human Loyal user 297 Posts |
||||||||||
RickDangerous Special user I can't believe I made 974 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-05-15 17:43, Katherine Anne wrote: Oh, that's nice. Thank you Katherine
"Reality is what you can get away with."
Robert A. Wilson "Think for yourself and question authority." Timothy Leary |
|||||||||
OrderD29 New user 26 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-05-16 19:06, richpoyle wrote: I had seen the Navy message webcast and I have since been back and looked at all of the delivery methods available (diver etc). To me they still look very fake, 'floaty' and unconvincing. I have also looked again at the TorT episode in question and, rightly or wrongly, I am unable to see any of the tell-tale signs that were evident in the Navy promotion material. Again, I will reiterate the point that I made in my last post - it could well be CG that was used for the effect or it might not have been. To me there is no evidence either way. I think that the quote above sums something up perfectly and using a convincer to allow a participant to believe something Derren suggests in order to take that person to a level where the actual effect can be accomplished is something that he has used before in TorT (in the first series, using the OOTW principle to help get the eldery lady who was being taught poker convinced that she really could tell which cards were high or low by reading body language and vocal signs). |
|||||||||
richpoyle Regular user UK 116 Posts |
What's the difference between electronically adding some text to a billboard and writing on a business card with a swami or Super Sharpie?
None. |
|||||||||
qichi Regular user Los Angeles, CA 123 Posts |
No one gets more work done with as much style as Mr. Brown does
mad respect due.
"There is no art: things are made for use." Antonin Artaud
|
|||||||||
InvisibleMonkey Regular user 136 Posts |
Quote:
On 2008-05-17 20:35, richpoyle wrote: With a Swami or Super Sharpie, you require a level of skill and also lets the participant and audience have a chance (if only very remote) to experience "what is really going on." Whilst the difference in effect may be nonexistant, the difference in the actual profession/skills being used is very... one is that of the magician, the other that of the video editor. I was under the impression that Derren is seen as a "type of" magician... not a fictional film maker. I'll go back to my previous example... What is the difference between a levitation effect done by a magician, and one in a blockbuster film? On camera as an audience, not much (if any) However would you consider someone a Magician if all thier effects were done by video effects, CGI and the likes? If David Blaines ICE stunt or Box stunt was done simply with CGI or video effects, would he still be a Magician? If Uri Gellar only performed spoon bends on screen using CGI, what would that make him? An Actor in a Sci Fi film. My point is that these people are supposed to be of the Magician Ilk, is it not an utterly lazy and meaningless direction to take when you achieve your effects by what is possible with Camera trickery, editing or CGI? Virtually any Magicians effect can be done by any old actor, if they have the right special effects crew... it dosn't make them a magician/mentalist. |
|||||||||
bear trees Loyal user uk 263 Posts |
It was a convincer it dosent matter how it was executed.
|
|||||||||
richpoyle Regular user UK 116 Posts |
One final point. Have a look at this very old clip of Derren doing a blindfold stunt.
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=wUOg6o0QTSQ I have a theory about how this excellent effect was achieved, and it relies on this being a TV effect and that Chris Ryan is watching Derren via monitor/TV in nightvision. Discussing the theory here would be inappropriate but if it is correct, it in no way diminishes his skills as magician, mentalist, performer, whatever you wish to call him. |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
As has already been touched on... I don't think the sign was put there to make the t.v audience gasp with amazement really.... it was used to get the participant to believe that his subconscious was actually more powerful than he gave credit for... hence making the project at hand easier to execute for DB.
Secondly, when DB can actually force an image or word in to someone's mind through suggestion... do you really think that they would resort to time consuming and somewhat expensive CG to get essentially the same result? Richpoyle: I know where your going with your theory... spot on! Had the same thoughts myself. Its very devious indeed |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » Derren Brown Trick or Treat series 2 (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5 |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 seconds requiring 5 database queries. |
The views and comments expressed on The Magic Café are not necessarily those of The Magic Café, Steve Brooks, or Steve Brooks Magic. > Privacy Statement < |