|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
magiclee Special user 570 Posts |
I have had the trick in my possession for a few day's. I liked the idea right away but there seemed to be several calculations that were a little difficult for me. I was thinking of abandoning the trick until I was sent a revised copy of the manuscript which featured "Alternate Handlings". The tip from a Dr. John Aime simplified the method immensely. It is now simple to do and I'm glad I didn't give up.
In my opinion I think this is a wonderful trick that you can learn right away. There is very little you have to do to make this a real winner. magiclee |
|||||||||
Dmann Inner circle Crossville, Tennessee 1683 Posts |
I told you guys it was raw and uncut... Just kidding. We are working on the problem and should have it fixed soon. Thanks for your kind patience.
|
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
The demo has been fixed for viewing "Order of the Holy Grail". The version demo'd was NOT a perfect hit so you can see how easy it really is!
The demo can be viewed at: http://www.precisionmagic.com/News.htm |
|||||||||
Cameron Francis V.I.P. 7025 Posts |
Do the cards have to go back into the case? I wasn't crazy about that as it seemed totally unmotivated.
MOMENT'S NOTICE LIVE 3 - Six impromptu card tricks! Out now! http://cameronfrancismagic.com/moments-notice-live-3.html
|
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
Cameron
The cards do not have to go back to the case. There are TWO alternative handlings for NEVER using the card case by both Dr. John Aime and Christopher Williams. They are both excellent and ingenious handlings. Regarding the card case, I patter that once the carda are in the case that the cards are isolated and cannot be tampered with. The spectators are holding the card case cupped with both hands. I recap what has occurred so far so the opening of the card case later is justified as it has kept the cards "safe" from any tampering. Thanks! Frank V. |
|||||||||
Y2John Inner circle 1498 Posts |
Hey Cameron, I also felt returning the cards to the case had no motivation/reasoning, and had discussed this with Dmann... additional handlings do solve this, though the effect/routine does differ sleightly.
|
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
Like I said, I have never been questioned returning the cards to the box by laymen. As magicians we tend to overthink our processes and procedures. Many laymen have mentioned and said "You put the cards in the box so I know you could not touch them". WOW!!
As I always say "I let the spectators decide how I perform my effects. It is YOUR best feedback you can get". For the magicians that prefer not using a card case, there are TWO alternative handlings for NEVER using the card case by both Dr. John Aime and Christopher Williams. They are both excellent and diabolical handlings and will be included in the download and instructions. |
|||||||||
Y2John Inner circle 1498 Posts |
True...
|
|||||||||
Douglas.M Elite user 465 Posts |
I am always on the look out for ACAAN effects, and this really seems interesting, but I just have two questions (not looking for method-tipping):
1. Is the number a "thought-of number" and is the picked card a "thought-of card" ( i.e. does the deck have to be brought into play during the choosing process?). 2. This type of effect is so strong that spectators are likely to ask: "can I examine the cards?" I realize that there is no rough and smooth, no short cards, and no cards stuck together, but is it an examinable deck of cards? I mean, can the whole deck be spread to show a complete deck of random cards? Thank you, Douglas M. |
|||||||||
jclark Special user 510 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-12-23 11:01, ted french wrote: ROFLOL. Man, I read that and thought, "He MUST be joking... nobody would seriously write such a statement." But just in case... While I applaud anyone who has the intestinal fortitude to study advanced maths at the university level (a topic I'm not very fond of myself), to suggest that it would have any relevance to syntax and structure is balls at best. That's as absurd as suggesting that an ASC certified auto mechanic is qualified to conduct microsurgery on the left ventricle of a human heart. The hype being forwarded in the forgoing statements are, at most, qualitative. That's a major aspect of marketing in general. But since they are subjective and not objective, the antecedent of your reference to his academic credentials fails all standards of logic in argumentation, which, ironically, is a distant cousin to algebra. BTW, Chris (if you read this)... I know Oxford well. Spent time at Christ Church before I returned back to the US. I was at RMCS just down the road in Shrivenham (on the military base) and did some of my PhD research there and worked with a couple of professors who are far more smarter (grammer joke) than I am. What college were you in? Lovely city. Lovely university. Lovely people. Best, JC |
|||||||||
jordanjohnson Special user Hiding in the Shadows 593 Posts |
"The hype being forwarded in the forgoing statements are, at most, qualitative. That's a major aspect of marketing in general. But since they are subjective and not objective, the antecedent of your reference to his academic credentials fails all standards of logic in argumentation, which, ironically, is a distant cousin to algebra."
Holy crap James and did you study advanced grammatical usage and whatever the study of big words is LMAO Sorry don't know how to do the cool copy someone's quote fom above thing. |
|||||||||
Jonathan Townsend Eternal Order Ossining, NY 27297 Posts |
There's a quote icon that looks like a page and red arrow. When the edit window comes up - remove what you don't need but leave the [X] and [/X] tags intact.
I'm going to hold off pondering the bit about something being "at most, qualitative" and the notion that logic is a distant relation to algebra (Boole?) go by as it's way too late to go search for notes on qualia or early twentieth century mathematics. Maybe we have a new joke in the works here: why does the magician...
...to all the coins I've dropped here
|
|||||||||
Craig Crossman Special user Palm Beach, Florida 523 Posts |
As a seeker of the perfect ACAAN, I'm always excited to hear that someone has come up with something new. But after looking at the video, this is not the "elegant" ACAAN solution I am looking for. Basically there is WAY TOO MUCH HANDLING of the cards!
And putting the cards BACK in the box? WHY would you do that? Perhaps to stack some cards on top of the deck? As a spectator, that's what I would think. "Oh look, he had some cards in the box and he just slipped them on top to make the number match." The ACAAN premise is really a simple one: A boxed deck is placed on the table. It's NEVER again touched by the performer. Someone names a card out loud. Another calls out a number between 1-52. A spectator opens the box and counts to that number. It is the named card. Simple, sweet and direct. Elegant. Perhaps it will happen, perhaps it won't. But folks, this isn't it. I just want to drive home this most important point: The ACAAN should always be presented as a feat of MENTALISM and not as a "card trick" which is what this effort appears to be with all the HANDLING of the cards! With the perfect ACAAN, it just HAPPENS. It is a PREDICTION that was made by the performer before the demonstration began. And because of that, there is no reason to handle the cards. It must be presented as I described otherwise it will be dismissed away as a card trick. Thanks though for your continued efforts in trying to find the elegant solution to the ACAAN conundrum. Craig Crossman |
|||||||||
jclark Special user 510 Posts |
Quote:
On 2007-12-29 02:11, Jonathan Townsend wrote: I love the joke idea... Hadn't even though of Boolean Reasoning or the Logic of Equations; I was talking about Modal logic and its relatives. Was first introduced to it in a 400 level Philosophy of Language class that had us doing ridiculous amounts of logic equations in relation to fallacies in argumentation--a topic I hadn't thought much about again until lately. The two are different, mostly in the respect that formal equations in modal logic use operators not found in traditional formal logic such as Boolean. Though my reference to it (either) being a distant cousin to algebra is mostly tongue in cheek. Check out the works of Ludwig Wittgenstein, et al. Makes for great reading. Okay, I'm back on topic. Couldn't get the demo to work for me. I must be doing something wrong... blast it all. JC |
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
Guys....
Like I said before, I have never been questioned returning the cards to the box by laymen. As magicians we tend to overthink our processes and procedures. Many laymen have mentioned and said "You put the cards in the box so I know you could not touch them". WOW!! As I always say "I let the spectators decide how I perform my effects. It is YOUR best feedback you can get". For the magicians that prefer not using a card case, there are TWO alternative handlings for NEVER using the card case by both Dr. John Aime and Christopher Williams. They are both excellent and diabolical handlings and will be included in the download and instructions. You have TWO choices for performing OOTHG: Card case and non card case routines... I still prefer the card case method because I present logic and reasoning to put the cards BACK into the case, pause, re-cap and have the spec take the cards out. Even though the video is rushed and does show the above example, we are planning to re-shoot the video soon. |
|||||||||
Y2John Inner circle 1498 Posts |
In the demo you presented no logic or reasoning... though with time misdirection etc it won't be an issue, but for fellow magis it is something that seems out of place.
Of course you could just routine it so the card case is an integral part of the presentation, like it's the thing that shffles and places there card etc... maybe. |
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
We are planning to re-shoot the demo with NOT using the card case. In the demo, I did not present logic or s reason to use the card case because of a time crunch. My original routine uses the card case as an integral part of the performance. I use it to isolate the cards so they cannot be tampered with. OOTHG will offer both effects where the card case can be used or NOT used.
Like I said before, I have never been questioned why the card case was used..... |
|||||||||
jordanjohnson Special user Hiding in the Shadows 593 Posts |
I don't understand why in the demo you presented it differently than you usually do? Time crunch or not which I don't know why adding a 30 second reason for putting the cards in the box would be so time consuming? I'd like to see a demo exactly how YOU perform it with patter and everything because it seems like in the demo is how you perform it, then when everyone started busting on why the cards had to go back in the box you changed it to well it makes sure I didn't mess with the cards. So to me something seems fishy that you wouldn't perform on the demo exactly how you would in real world situations?
|
|||||||||
Ben Train Inner circle Erdnase never had 4639 Posts |
I'm not sure I understand the logic of putting the cards in the box to prevent tampering. The cards are in your hand during the selection, when the card is returned, and during the naming of the number. Then they are put in the box...?
The best method I have seen looks like this: 1) A deck of cards is shuffled. 2) They are placed in the box. 3) A card is named. 4) A number is named. 5) Cards are removed from box and spectator counts down, shows card. If you had simply told us this was an interesting variation on the ACAAN, then people would have watched, and the few who weren't fans wouldn't have posted and the ones that were would have hyped it up for you. But, calling it the holy grail of the plot, and making excuses for the shortcomings, leaves you open for less the positive comments. Anyway, I'm intrigued, but I don't think this is the the holy grail.
If you're reading this you're my favourite magician.
Check out www.TorontoMagicCompany.com for upcoming shows, and instagram.com/train.ben for god knows what! |
|||||||||
slydini62 Special user 939 Posts |
Ben
Your version might use any or all of the following: a) complete deck memorization b) Heavy Sleights c) narrowing down to a certain range of numbers (example 10-20) d) Timed misdirection e) A ton of practice and some LUCK f) Stooges OOTHG is an easy version that is within the skill level of most magicians. The true ACAAN is VERY hard to master. If you want to accomplish your version I would: Have a person write a number and perform a center tear ( or similiar method or device) to peek and know their selected number without them knowing about it. Then you could put it in the card box. Then you could ask the number for the VERY first time and have them open the box. I've created the basic effect and the magician needs to add HIS touches and creativity to the trick. It's all up to you but OOTHG is a starting foundation for you to build upon a good ACAAN effect without all of the difficulty that comes from the TRUE ACAAN work. I have several variations from top pros that don't even use the card box so it will be your preference on which one you want to perform. |
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Latest and Greatest? » » The Order of the Holy Grail (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 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 < |