Thinking about the 'new' nest of wallets trick has got me considering investing in pro-flight or some other ring flight. But, similar to my issues with Any Card To Any Spectator's Wallet, I'm wondering whether the trick ever comes across as slightly gauche. I mean, you end up having a spectator's valuable and personal jewelry rattling against a set of keys on your key chain.

Maybe I'm being overly concerned and the impact of the trick overrides any issues that a spectator might have. I don't know though. I'm not sure I'd like my wedding ring jangling on a set of keys. But then again there are some magicians that get spectators to retrieve a signed card from their sock.

Any one else have similar qualms?

Always a risk when working with someone's borrowed jewelry. There are some folks out there that will sue at the drop of a hat - or especially a ring!

All I can say is pick your audience carefully when borrowing their possessions, and IMO do not perform any risky or potentially damaging effects. If you are truly worried about this - enough to affect your performance - then work only with your own jewelry or that of someone you know and trust well.

Thanks!

Jim

Pat Page had some beautiful ideas for flying ring effects - these are outlined within his book 'Magic Page by Page'.

However, his main point, that I totally agree with, is this. Because the trick is relatively easy to perform, most magicians seem to rush through it at breakneck speed. I certainly noticed this at a show I did last November whereby, the majority of the seven other magicians working, used one gimmicked version or another. They vanish the ring (often pretty badly) then immediately go into the reveal. That is WRONG - there isn't any build up, 'magic theatre', or whatever you want to call it.

It's as if they cannot wait to pull out and flash off their gimmicked toy - key case or car keys (more recently, a neck-chain or nest of purses), to show their audience the ring's re-appearance. In other words, there is NO routine. There is NO mystery. Add to this, the fact that as soon as you put the spectators borrowed ring on your finger or in your hand, a good percentage will know that the ring is about to vanish anyway - hence half of the plot is lost before it even begins!

Pat Page's vanishing/flying ring entailed the borrowed article being found in an entirely new place on your person (well I certainly haven't read it before) - and it's actually PART of a routine. It's also much more natural or, using the new buzz word in magic - 'organic'. It doesn't use gimmicked props (so there's NO worry about a failure of any kind) but the pay-off is exceptionally funny. The reason being is that they are looking straight at it all along, but don't see it. And the reason they don't see it is simply because they aren't looking for it - because, they DON'T KNOW that it's actually vanished at that stage!

As mentioned already - not every person, particularly women, want to loan you such a valued, often sentimental possession, anyway. Added to which, and this is only in MY experience (so I could be wrong) most older women appear to have put on a few pounds since they walked up the aisle. Therefore, getting the ring off their finger is not always the easiest of tasks! To this end, even when spectators are willing to assist, YOU are putting THEM on the spot by everyone subsequently watching them having the embarrassment of struggling to remove it. It just isn't professional.

Just to add that Pat's version allows for any, andI truly mean ANY, sized ring being borrowed. It's also better, in my opinion, because you are more likely to get someone to loan you their valued possession, due to the fact that they (or their spouse) are holding it throughout. The routine is also structured so they don't even know the disappearance has occurred because they are still holding the thing - or at least they think that they are!

This isn't a shameful plug for Pat's book (albeit, I can't recommend it highly enough!) - it's just a few ideas that may get people thinking. It's also evidence that you don't need to invest in expensive toys, when much better, more magical/entertaining ideas are already out there; yet again, within the written word.

Then there is that urban legend, I think...
When the magician hands back the ring, the spectator says, "That's not my ring. My ring had a real diamond in it."

Randi

I perform Ring Flight Revolution regularly, but I only ever use a ring without a stone and my routine allows for a lot of magic with my own ring before the revelation of the vanished ring on my keyring. The problem I see regularly is the lack of time between the vanish and the appearance. It should be a strong piece of magic but usually iosn't because of a lack of thought on how the prop is used in the context of the whole routine. In fact, I drove a friend of mine crazy because I had the prop for about 5 months before performing with it because I was not just gpoing to include it because it is a cool prop ( and really expensive ). I'm happy about my decision though, as the appearance now gets the rwactions it deserves because of the time factor. I would suggest. But to the point of the thread. No stone and really treat the borrowed ring with respect. Check out Dan Fleshman's ring and string routine for some good ideas too. It helped me immensely.

Watch my "Just-In-Case" no reel routine at http://www.pete-biro.com/tricks scroll down. The ring does not appear among a batch of keys.

I just got Nich Eihnhorn's Pro-Flight. Love it. Very easy to use. Magical. He also includes a nice ring on string routine you can use to open with.

Just walk away with their ring and see how fast they change their tune.

I don't seem to have trouble getting the loan of a ring. If you appear trustworthy, and you've performed magic with your ring, they'll wonder if you can do magic with their ring. Some magicians don't think about what can go wrong, because they often think that the manufacturer of the prop is exercising good judgement - it's not always the case. I use Dusheck's Ringer because it allows me to treat the ring as gently as I'd like my own ring to be treated.

Despite my inexperience, I'm very quickly gravitating towards ring magic being my favorite. I never used to wear so much as a single ring. Six months down the track and I seem to be accumulating more and more.

Rather than pretend I know anything about anything after such a short time in the game, I'm going to put my advice in the form of a question, to see if what I have observed anecdotally is an experience that is shared by others when performing with rings. Rings are a unique item in that they often simultaneously hold both great monetary and great sentimental value to the audience member. When it comes to rings, I don't see that using a borrowed ring increases audience participation or emotional investment with a routine as it may do with other types of audience participation (i.e Deep 3), but solely as a means of eliminating the ring from being the "source" of the magic. You're advertising "Hey, it's ME that's magic, it's ME with the skill, not the ring!", which of course, is not a bad thing. However, as others have said, there's a certain level of reluctance and discomfort when you ask to borrow a ring. On one hand, people don't want to spoil things for those around them, so they will feel pressured to produce their ring, which will lead to them not enjoying the routine as much as they would otherwise if they were comfortable. My way around this is to offfer them an option. "I'm going to need a ring for this next part. If somebody would like to lend me a ring that would be fantastic, however there's no obligation, I'm happy to use my own if you prefer. I continue on by explaining that it makes no difference to the routine except that I would like them to feel confident that this is just an ordinary every day ring.

Is that the general consensus when it comes to borrowed rings here?

Another thing I wanted to comment on is the lack of story telling and incredibly short routines around rings and especially ring flight type tricks others have pointed out. Lately I have been getting closer to mastering Nick Einhorn's Pro-Flite, but I must admit, I feel incredibly lazy performing it without either the ring on strng as taught on the DVD, or some other larger routine. In fact, I can see how when performing it as a 12 second routine, the impact of the routine would rely entirely on using a borrowed ring.

I think the safest and most visual way to go is to not have any rings on the key case. Less practical with the fob style Ring Flights.

Borrow enough rings and you'll find yourself behind the fifteen ball one of these days...never take a chance...Michael Bailey advised using a HUGE magnifying glass for comedy effect, but really to inspect the ring,setting,facets,stone,etc.before you take a chance...

I think Gazzo stoped doing the ring flight in the street after being asked to do it for a women who later accused him of not giving back the diamond ring she said she given him.

I suspect that the real key here is knowing when, with whom, and what ring to use in your ring flight routine. The methodology is pretty much irrelevant to the effect and outcome. It doesn't matter which kind of prop you use, Reel, reel-less, nest of wallets, small box (remember that one by Mark Leveridge?), gaffed keys, gaffed bead type key chains, etc. I've built routines and used almost every version that has come down the road. I like the idea of taking a borrowed ring and using it for some magical moments and to have it vanish only to be found in an impossible location.

I think I've performed some version of this routine over a thousand times. In all those times I never lost a ring, damaged a ring (including losing a stone), had a complaint from the ring owner, or appeared to handle the ring roughly or with disrespect (never the stupid jokes about the quality of the ring or some unfunny fake reading of an imagined engraving).

I would always select a person that seemed to be enjoying the magic, having a lot of fun, and had more than one ring on their finger. I always looked for a person that had a heavy built ring of solid metal and no stone. I'd look for a guy wearing a gold colored signet ring (heavy enough for one of the ring and string and ring off/on stick routines). Often I'd find someone wearing more than one band (wedding ring look) or a band on the off had indicating it wasn't a wedding ring. I rarely had to borrow a wedding band (but did from time to time from the willing), and I rarely borrowed an expensive looking multi stone ladies ring.

Most of the issues surrounding the Flying Ring can be addressed and controlled for by proper management. I will tell you that there have been hundreds of times when I was prepared to perform the Flying ring routine (in terms of props at the ready) but passed on it for a different routine simply because the factors I looked for simply were not present. When in doubt leave it out.

If you, personally have any concerns about the trick at all then move on and learn and master another trick/effect that causes you less stress and concern. Performing for strangers is enough stress without adding stress over a particular prop, trick, or effect. As Dick Oslund is fond of saying 'Keep it simple, keep it fun!" Wise words.

I stopped using the reel version and started doing Steve Dusheck's Ringer. No fast trip for the ring - it's always in your hand or on the key ring. The reaction is the same, and it's actually easier to perform. I still look for "cheap" rings or rings without stones - I'll even ask "is this an expensive ring". If they say yes, I say does anybody have a ring that's not so valuable? This usually works - but lately I've noticed that the younger girls don't wear rings at all.

The best solution for the "ring scam" for me has been to perform with my own "Wizards' Ring." I take off my ornate (yet cheap!) ring and tell the story of how valuable it is and how it was left to me in a will, and how much I value it. I ask the spectators to be careful with it and then it is up to them to worry about damaging MY ring. I use Spellbinder's "Ring into Nest of Boxes" and it is the magic that is important, not what is happening to someone else's ring. The ring vanishes and reappears as usual, but no worries about accusations of ownership or damages... it's MY ring. I only have about 10 of them in my collection of fancy spooky Wizards' rings for all occasions. Of course, being a Wizards' Ring, it does more than just transport itself across to reappear in a nest of boxes and a ball of yarn but finds frequent use for making magic happen by "the power of the ring" rather than a magic wand.

I find all the comments above to be very helpful. I decided to take a totally different route and use a ring grinder with a Lippincott box, my Lippincott is felt wind. This serves two purposes, first it keeps it safe And second it squashes any noise. The combination allows me for a longer routine with more fun.

If you like the Lippincott type boxes for the impossible location I recommend The Vault by Leo Smetsers as it adds an extra layer of impossibility to the effect.

Thanks Warren I’ll check it out.