The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Wormhole (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
Vincenzo
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
202 Posts

Profile of Vincenzo
Mike Close has read the booklet and expressed that the idea has been around for ages and I should not continue to sell it as it has nothing new to offer (his words).
Wormhole is going to be taken down shortly and will be replaced by an original illusion for street or stage. It's going to look like Steve Fearsons Laser, but different.
More info soon.
-Vincenzo
Chris A.
View Profile
Inner circle
AKA Chris A.
1123 Posts

Profile of Chris A.
I pretty much figured that's what he would say.

Quote:
I tried really hard, but I couldn't find anything original in your writeup that hasn't already been marketed by Mike Close for several years now.


It was good that you're choosing to not sell it anymore.

It shows that you should probably send out your new routines to a few knowledgable folks to check them out before you sell them. Smile
AKA Chris A.
Keepin' the Funk Alive
Logan
View Profile
Inner circle
2279 Posts

Profile of Logan
Quote:
On 2003-03-08 18:05, Vincenzo wrote:
Mike Close has read the booklet and expressed that the idea has been around for ages and I should not continue to sell it as it has nothing new to offer (his words).
Wormhole is going to be taken down shortly and will be replaced by an original illusion for street or stage. It's going to look like Steve Fearsons Laser, but different.
More info soon.
-Vincenzo


Like Laser aye? I'll be looking forward to that! Is it easy to do?

Logan
You've been hit by, you've been struck by, a smooth criminal.

Singapore's Hairiest Corporate Comedy Magician!
ixnay66
View Profile
Inner circle
Denver
1504 Posts

Profile of ixnay66
Guys...just because you saw a Mike Close video that had an effect like that doesn't mean he invented it. Do some digging before you start saying things like this. That idea is Mike Webbers and he published it in Lifesavers. Mike Close expanded on Webber's idea after he read it and this is pretty common knowledge. So no...it's not Mike Close's and you don't need his permission or blessing to sell it. People seem to like it so I say sell it. You might want to cut the price in half though. Paul Wilson has something similar on his Knock Em Dead video. Of course, it might have even been created by someone before Mike Webber. If anyone knows, please post.
Best,
Chris
Vincenzo
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
202 Posts

Profile of Vincenzo
Quote:

On 2003-03-08 20:25, Logan wrote:

Like Laser aye? I'll be looking forward to that! Is it easy to do?

Logan

Yes it is easy to do, cheap to make, visual (but not AS visual as Steve's) and no assistants. Check out the new topic in Secret sessions called Vincenzo Ravina's Division.
Tim Trono
View Profile
Inner circle
1114 Posts

Profile of Tim Trono
Chris is absolutely correct that time should be taken to ensure proper crediting. Several people have simply mentioned Michael Close but have not taken the time to properly thoroughly credit as Chris mentions.

Michael Close clearly acknowledges in Workers #1 that his initial inspiration for “The Pothole Trick” was from Michael Weber’s “One Two Punch” trick (LifeSavers book pages 39-44 or his video in the Stevens Greater Magic Series). Weber in turn credits Alex Elmsley for his “Puncture” routine as an inspirational source for the “effect”. The methodology we are apparently discussing is from Weber though the “effect” goes back to Elmsley. It has also been explored by Harvey Rosenthal, Mike Powers, Paul Wilson, etc.

Elmsley was, to my knowledge the first with this plot and Weber the first with this method.

My personal feeling is that simply changing the “object” the hole is on is not quite enough to justify a release. Even if it was invented independently, it has already been released and popularized by Weber, Close, etc.

Tim Trono
Chris A.
View Profile
Inner circle
AKA Chris A.
1123 Posts

Profile of Chris A.
Quote:
On 2003-03-08 21:14, ixnay66 wrote:
Guys...just because you saw a Mike Close video that had an effect like that doesn't mean he invented it.
No one said he did. He credits it quite clearly in his "workers" book.

Quote:
Do some digging before you start saying things like this. That idea is Mike Webbers and he published it in Lifesavers. Mike Close expanded on Webber's idea after he read it and this is pretty common knowledge.
Yes, Mike Close added significantly to the effect.

Vicenzo did not. His writeup is exactly the same as the close marketed effect except done with playing cards instead of playing cards.

Quote:
So no...it's not Mike Close's and you don't need his permission or blessing to sell it.
By that logic, I can take any effect, change a double lift to a top change and sell it without their permission.

Quote:
People seem to like it so I say sell it.
Have you actually read vicenzos "wormhole". And if so, have you also read closes handling of pothole?

Wormhole is not just similar to "pothole".

It is 99% exactly the same, except using cards instead of business cards.

Close asked him not to sell it and he seems to be doing the right thing by respecting the wishes of MC.

Quote:
You might want to cut the price in half though.
Doing so wouldn't assuage those who buy wormhole not knowing that it is a near identical routine to "pothole".

As close said, if you read both effects, you will see that vicenzos "wormhole" adds nothing to the effect.

In fact, "wormhole" lacks the presentation and handling tips that make the close routine so good.

So in effect, Vicenzo is charging you $20 for a manuscript selling you an inferior version of an effect you can get with complete with props for around $15.

For those already owning pothole, Vicenzos "wormhole' offers exactly nothing.

The decision Vincenzos part to cease marketing of this "wormhole" is the right thing to do.

I salute Vicenzo for taking the ethical course of action.
AKA Chris A.
Keepin' the Funk Alive
ixnay66
View Profile
Inner circle
Denver
1504 Posts

Profile of ixnay66
I didn't realize Vicenzos version was about drawing a picture of the street the spectator lives on, calling a punched hole a pothole and moving it. My mistake. Sorry
Chris A.
View Profile
Inner circle
AKA Chris A.
1123 Posts

Profile of Chris A.
Quote:
On 2003-03-09 01:55, ixnay66 wrote:
I didn't realize Vicenzos version was about drawing a picture of the street the spectator lives on, calling a punched hole a pothole and moving it. My mistake. Sorry
So by that fallacious logic, I should be able to take any effect, keep the same method, change the patter and presentation very slightly, and then resell it as my own. Smile

The only difference in "wormholes" method is that vincenzo used a playing card instead of a business card. If you think that warrants selling "wormhole" as a separate effect, then I guess we'll have to agree to disagree.

In fact, in his document for the "wormhole" effect, vicenzo offers little more than the bare method for the effect. There is little or no presentation offered.

As such, we can only compare what vicenzo was selling for $20 versus what close sells for around $15.

Under examination, you'll find that vicenzos "wormhole" is simply "pothole" done with a playing card and bereft of the cute "pothole" story and the necessary prop.


The rest of the "wormholes" method including the preparation of the gaff card is exact.


Did you actually read vicenzos routine and compare it with the close routine?

If so, I doubt you would think that vicenzos routine offered anything new to the effect. In fact, it offers substancially less beyond the bare method.

Heck, even the original "moving hole" routines used a playing card, so I guess vicenzo really added less then nothing.

He's doing the ethically correct thing by removing the effect from sale.
AKA Chris A.
Keepin' the Funk Alive
ixnay66
View Profile
Inner circle
Denver
1504 Posts

Profile of ixnay66
I see nothing in his write up of Wormhole that mentions a drawing of a street and a pothole that's moved to another street in front of another house. I also don't see a picture on the playing card of a street and a bunch of houses. You're problem with the routine is that the method is exactly the same as the Pothole Trick, correct? Then you must also have a problem with the Pothole Trick because the method is EXACTLY THE SAME as Mike Webber's version, which was the first to use that method. You say all Vicento did was put it on a playing card instead of a business card. By that logic, all Mike Close did was take the same trick and instead of doing it on a movie ticket, he did it on a business card. So what if Vicento's isn't as charming as the Pothole trick? Maybe there are people that don't have time to draw a street on a business card. Maybe they just want a one-two punch like Sankey's routine. He punches a hole, he moves it. Effect over. Judging by the posts on this thread, there are people that have tried itI definitely believe in proper crediting but telling a guy he needs to email Mike Close when it isn't even Mike Close's method is ridiculous. All he did was take a method and make it differen't It isn't on a movie ticket (Webber) and it's not on a business card (Close) it IS on a playing card (Wilson) but isn't a matrix effect. So being so kind as to tell him his trick adds absolutely nothing isn't only untrue, but it's ignorant. It gives people the opportunity to use a good method for a FAST moving hole routine without a lot of presentation weighing it down. I'm all for a good story and I LOVE the pothole trick. But sometimes it's nice to just nail someone right between the eyes when they only have a moment to spare.
Chris A.
View Profile
Inner circle
AKA Chris A.
1123 Posts

Profile of Chris A.
Quote:
On 2003-03-09 02:24, ixnay66 wrote:
I see nothing in his write up of Wormhole that mentions a drawing of a street and a pothole that's moved to another street in front of another house. I also don't see a picture on the playing card of a street and a bunch of houses. You're problem with the routine is that the method is exactly the same as the Pothole Trick, correct?

Then you must also have a problem with the Pothole Trick because the method is EXACTLY THE SAME as Mike Webber's version, which was the first to use that method.
Nope, because at least Close added something of value to the effect.

Vicenzo clearly did not.

If he did add something to the effect, I'd be happy to hear of it.

Quote:
You say all Vicento did was put it on a playing card instead of a business card. By that logic, all Mike Close did was take the same trick and instead of doing it on a movie ticket, he did it on a business card.
The older effects were good, but the effect wasn't a real "worker" until close added presentational and methodological improvements to the basic effect.

Quote:
So what if Vicento's isn't as charming as the Pothole trick?
Irrelevant. At least close added a presentation to the effect.

Vicenzo added nothing, zero, nada, zilch.

Quote:
Judging by the posts on this thread, there are people that have tried itI definitely believe in proper crediting but telling a guy he needs to email Mike Close when it isn't even Mike Close's method is ridiculous.
Nope, it's considered a polite and respectful thing to do.

Researching an effect you intend to charge $20 should in no way be considered "ridiculous".

Quote:
So being so kind as to tell him his trick adds absolutely nothing isn't only untrue, but it's ignorant.
It's quite true. If I could publish both methods without exposing a marketed effect, I would, just so that people could see the amazing similiarities for themselves.

Humour this "ignorant" fellow and please tell me what is new in Vincenzos method that is not covered by its antecedants and that is worth $20.

Close had sense to properly credit his effect, giving recognition the previous weber handling.

Vicenzo does not credit Close, Weber, or any others in his "wormhole" manuscript. Read his initial posts in this thread and you'll see that he considered it his original invention.

It's clear to see that it is not. Vicenzo realizes this and is now doing the right thing.

Quote:
It gives people the opportunity to use a good method for a FAST moving hole routine without a lot of presentation weighing it down.
And those people can easily get the same quick effect using the close method or any of the other methods out there.

"Wormhole" is simply superfluous.

Essentially, the wormhole document is completely devoid of presentation, merely presenting the basic methodology and expecting us to pony up $20 for it.

Vicenzo doesn't even throw in a hole punch as Close does. (at a lower price point I might add)

Quote:
I'm all for a good story and I LOVE the pothole trick. But sometimes it's nice to just nail someone right between the eyes when they only have a moment to spare.
Hm, I even posted a link above where someone in this very forum proposed using the pohole method with a playing card for a quick "one off".

It doesn'take a lot of deep thought to imagine you can punch the hole in nearly any small piece of cardboard like paper and get the same effect.

The thought occured to me when I originally bought the pothole trick.

Difference is, I didn't write down this excruciatingly obvious variation and attempt to sell it for $20 via the web.

But Vincenzo did the right thing.

He asked for comments about his re-invention of a near classic effect and I gave him my honest thoughts on it.

Vicenzo has decided to respect the wishes of Mike Close who gave his views on selling this extremely minor variation of his extremely popular effect.

And for that I respect him.

What I do not respect are those folks who feel that it's ok to defend the practice of reselling the effects of others without adding substantial presentational or methodological improvements to the effect.
AKA Chris A.
Keepin' the Funk Alive
ixnay66
View Profile
Inner circle
Denver
1504 Posts

Profile of ixnay66
Dude WAKE UP!!!!!
He's NOT SELLING THE POTHOLE TRICK. Your apparent problem is he didn't have a presentation that was better (in YOUR opinion) then the Pothole Trick. Go back and read all the previous posts on this thread by people who bought this effect and had AMAZING reactions from it. Those people apparently are very satisfied by it. You go on and on about how it's wrong because it's the same method as Close, then you do a
complete 180 degree turn and change your argument saying it's the presentation you have a problem with when you see that Close used THE EXACT METHOD as Webber. I've delt with you before so I can see you'll cut and paste replies to this until the thread is 10 pages long and frankly I already know I'm right and your wrong regarding your argument. It has anough holes in it to strain spagetti. I'm done with this topic and "knowledgable folks" like you. Duh
slap aces
View Profile
New user
40 Posts

Profile of slap aces
Might I point out that the "Dude" you are referring to is a highly respected and recognised figure in the world of magic who is KNOWN to be extremely knowledgable. A little respect for his opinion would go a long way to bringing this to a close.

Credits are important - re-invention happens ALL THE TIME. Vincenzo re-invented a great idea - kudos to him but he has nothing new to sell. I too have a cool presentation for the Close effect - but the trick is his.

Close added to Weber's plot using his mechanics. The result was a much better trick.

As for the people who bought Vincenzo's trick then got great reactions - of course they did. Mike Close's effect always gets great reactions - whatever presentation you use.

All that said, I think the last word on your remarkably foolish post probably defines you best.
Chris A.
View Profile
Inner circle
AKA Chris A.
1123 Posts

Profile of Chris A.
Quote:
On 2003-03-09 12:51, ixnay66 wrote:
Dude WAKE UP!!!!!
I'm quite awake thank you.

Quote:
He's NOT SELLING THE POTHOLE TRICK.
Nope, he's actually selling the pothole trick minus any kind of presentation.

Quote:
Your apparent problem is he didn't have a presentation that was better (in YOUR opinion) then the Pothole Trick.
Actually, "wormhole"pretty much has no presentation at all, so you're missing the point here.

Quote:
Go back and read all the previous posts on this thread by people who bought this effect and had AMAZING reactions from it.
Well. So what?

If I took an effect, added nothing to it (as vicenzo did) and then sold it, I guess it would be ok as long as people liked it?

Sure. Smile

Quote:
Those people apparently are very satisfied by it.
So if people are "very satisfied" with some of the knockoffs of effects like cosmosis and the cornelisus pen, then it's ethically ok to sell said knockoffs?

Quote:
You go on and on about how it's wrong because it's the same method as Close, then you do a
complete 180 degree turn and change your argument saying it's the presentation you have a problem with when you see that Close used THE EXACT METHOD as Webber.
Makes no difference my friend.

Since you seem to be dancing around the point, I'll give it to you again.

Close added significant methodological and presentational improvements to the basic plot.

As such, he gave us something worth paying for and made the effect unique.

Vicenzo added nothing. His manuscript is woefully lacking in anything that is original that would make "wormhole" worthy of resale.

To his credit, he realizes this and has pulled "wormhole" from sale.

I've noticed you won't (or more likely can't)answer the salient question here.

Please point out where the "wormhole" effect adds any substantial improvements over its antecedants that would make it worth $20? Or for that reason, worth rehashing at all.

Quote:
....long and frankly I already know I'm right and your wrong regarding your argument.
Ok.

When logic fails, I guess it's time to simply turn tail and skedadle.

I understand. Smile

Quote:
It has anough holes in it to strain spagetti.
????

Quote:
I'm done with this topic and "knowledgable folks" like you.
C'mon Ixnay.

I'm willing to wait for some actual logic to wend its way into your arguments.

Tho' I'm wisely not holding my breath. Smile
AKA Chris A.
Keepin' the Funk Alive
thehawk
View Profile
Inner circle
2275 Posts

Profile of thehawk
I believe everybody got the message. Webber started it, Close improved it and Vincenzo is trying to make money off the above two.
marko
View Profile
Inner circle
2110 Posts

Profile of marko
Look, there's really no point to continue this debate. Vincenzo is doing the honorable thing and taking it off the market either way. End of story.
Thought: Why does man kill? He kills for food. And not only food: frequently there must be a beverage.
Vincenzo
View Profile
Loyal user
Canada
202 Posts

Profile of Vincenzo
Ok, just to sum this all up: Wormhole is no longer for sale. It's gone.

"Webber started it, Close improved it and Vincenzo is trying to make money off the above two."

And just to set the record straight, I would never copy another magic effect and pass it off as my own on purpose.
I made a mistake. It was an accident.
Yeesh.
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Wormhole (0 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2
X
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved.
This page was created in 0.2 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 <

ROTFL Billions and billions served! ROTFL