Hey all. Does anybody know of any handlings of Open Travellers (No Palm Aces) where the Aces vanish from a tabled spread before being reproduced? Here is a video clip of what I mean: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e8qPyQ_qvKA

I've been doing a routine like that since Feb '02 and I just want to see if there is anything else out there that is similar. In my routine only the four aces are used (apparently) and you never use the deck. Every ace including the first and last are made to vanish like the clip (although the first is slightly different and obviously the last is not from a spread). In this way both the vanish and the reproduction happen on the table and the only times the cards are lifted off the table is to briefly display each packet and which aces have already gone and which are left to go.

Jon,

There was a very good discussion on OT a month or 2 ago that you may find with a Café search! I don't recall if it addressed your query but I remember it being loaded with advice on the routine!

MMc

JM, where is the rest of the routine? How do you get into it at the begining? Where does the routine go from there? Not much to go on from that clip.

The rest of the routine isn't what I am looking for though. I am only looking for the specific idea of vanishing the cards while tabled which I think the clip shows.

JM - I haven't seen that version before. Are there gaffs involved?

Jeff

....perhaps :-P

Yeah there is a gaff but you end clean and you use it for two of the four vanishes. It has some other uses I've played with as well with the appearance and vanish of a card from a 2-3 card spread.

Nice usage of the gaff!(I'm thinking of the generally family of gaffs ala coins to cards or other versions)

I've seen a double alignment move(not what you are doing) to make a card appear to vanish on the table before, but it was more in the vein of a sandwich effect and occurred as you turned 3 cards over rather than a "palm". Not sure on reference.

Good stuff though, that would make for a sick routine!

Initially the routine was being "done" with double alignments but that was more a pipe dream. With the gaff the handling can be very casual; you don't have to worry about any spreading and you can really treat the gaffed card as though it were normal.

I may get around to recording the entire routine. The handling of the first and last card are not mine though. They are essentially Wesley James's from Pasteboard Perpensions although slightly changed to accomodate the gaff. The second and third phases are my own in an attempt to keep everything done on the table (i.e. no Tent Vanish).

Oh,why does the OT need such a gaff?
For laymen,I think the presentation of Wayne Houchin's version is great
for magician,I think the handling of Arnaud Chevrier's version is by far the best.

It doesn't NEED a gaff. Plenty of routines that have evolved over time don't really need the changes that were made; the originals are fine. That doesn't mean that changes can't make them better.

Here I am trying to slightly change the structure of the vanish sequence. When you lift your hand up the audience genuinely believes you have a card palmed (at least the first time) since they clearly see two cards and I try to make it look like I am really palming the cards, albeit with poor palming technique. When I turn my hand over and show it empty it plays a bit stronger than when I do the same thing after a Tent Vanish. Now one could argue that in routines like this you actually want to slightly downplay the vanishes because the productions are really what the routine is about. I agree to an extent but think that it can be covered presentationally. I'll try to get around to recording the full routine today since I have some free time this evening.

Jonathan

It's a fact that plenty of routines have developed, but there is still a search for perfection with the first and the last card, and this is without mentioning the huge gap between the technical progression and the script's absence of evolution evolution. The casual handling of the double has reached an incredible level and a huge number of variants. The first card has not been put under the spotlight except for one member on the café here. The last card has been involving lapping and hold outs but sofar no obvious solution has made it out.
Let's not discard gaffs. For example Bernard Bilis in his latest work on the effect (100% Bilis #2) is involving one gaffed card into use for being able to show each card immediately before it travels.

So let's not limit our imaginations by looking down at gaffs. If they improve on the effect (rather than the method) why should we discard their use?

Lawrence, I think you misread my posts although it may be my fault for not being clear. I do not look down on using a gaff. In fact, in this routine I actually am using a gaff to bring about the vanishes.

Also as I mentioned before Wesley James has work on the first and fourth cards from quite a few years ago (20+ I believe).