Alan, thanks for the post. Dated and unpractical? How so?

I can see both sides of this and do not wish to get into the mix here( my left hook aint what it used to be)

If you're gonna do a photographic trick with an electronic device such as my beloved n95 8gig ( ) I think people may suspect electronic trickery. The old style camera might negate that thought.

Just adding a positive to the some of the valid negatives brought up.

I wish both of you would cease with the personal attacks.

JC: Don't take it personally. Not everyone will like all your products. It's not necessary to reply to every negative post to "set the record straight", and certainly not advisable to retaliate insults with insults. Yours are now on record in open forum for any potential customer to read and be discouraged by.

Chris: Don't take it personally. It's his product. He has a vested interest in it's success. You've already made your point, and made it well. Please don't contine to pander in retaliations.

To JC, Chris, and James: If these insults continue, none of you will benefit. You will all seem a little less ethical and credible in the eyes of the readers.

Agreed Dream, I just don't appreciate being wrongfully bashed, especially by someone who doesn't know me. My main point is, had ANYONE other than myself have said Bluetooth, it would have been a valid answer to James post, as it was me, it was supposedly an unfair and invalid point. I don't actually ever remember bashing James company or any of their products. This, the effect sounds nice, but as a 'worker', I can't be carrying round a large camera from table to table. It will be fine for some, just not for me, my only one real post in this thread, was answering James post of 'Planning on giving that camera out to someone to take home with them after you take that photo? That's sort of short sighted don't you think Xiqual? And my guess is, if you performed for a living, that might get a bit expensive. ROFLOL', merely stating that todays technology has Bluetooth, which is fair point

Your Welcome.
we are all aware of the state of poliriod just now. The technology in it is dated. A Camera phone which 90% of People have these days and soon 100% of mobile/cell uses will have as it is becoming industry standard Is more compact and user friendly in that sense. FAR more easy to customise for the effect desired and SO much easier to pass on that picture for the spec to keep via Bluetooth. Now I know apple made a bad decision with the "crippled" bluetooth BUT an mms with ALL uk companys just now IS far cheaper and more cost effective than giving away a poliriod.

I think that covers both points.

Alan: Was just curious as to what the specifics were in your view. Helps me understand the point made, that's all. I think the issue we are dealing with here is more about venues too. See the following response to Paul.

Dream: You are right. My response to James was designed to convey sarcasm in a joking manner. Clearly, I missed the delivery. I've sent an apology by PM and happily make that known here. As to my other remarks, some people just need to know that poking a sleeping bear is both inappropriate and unwise. There's certainly no need for it, and I am no more tolerant of it than most people are; I just hold no reservations in voicing my position publically. Of course, if that offends anyone other than the intended recipient, then I will gladly apologize to them too as that isn't my intent. Your admonishment is both welcome and accepted. Thank you for the reminder.

Paul, now that's a good post.

I prefer addressing real questions rather than statements with no substance behind them, or those intended to resound as quips. I totally value other people's views, I just don't think negative attacks without logical discourse offers any substantive value. Thanks for adding to the discussion. It makes for much more interesting dialogue.

So to answer your questions directly:

I can name a handful of effects that will, as you put it, stand the test of time. Logical arguments abound regarding using unfamiliar objects (i.e. sponge balls) vs more familiar ones that audience members are used to seeing or handling, so I'm not sure it is worth our time to entirely rehash them. I think both arguments have their merits, to be honest. It just depends on the performer.

While marketers and strategic planners try to predict trends and how a market will change in 10 years, nobody really knows for sure what will happen. So for me, 10 years is a long time. I can't possibly estimate how many times you could use the effect during that period, but I'm willing to wager that it could be as often as you chose and have a venue for. And in that respect, any effect you enjoy (be it sponge balls, a dove pan, or a trick with an outdated camera that is starting to see it's final days) is really up to you and how you play it.

Generally speaking, I don't know that it is a street type effect to be honest; that is a good point you make. However, during our filming it went over great in that kind of setting. I've always used it for other locations and it does, as you noted, go over very well in parlor and for stage. In fact, that is a point addressed on the DVD. You were dead on to recognize that.

I would not recommend it for part time performers who do walk around or restaurant gigs. It is instantly repeatable, but I don't personally feel it would be the right venue. Though, enterprising performers can make of it what they want. I had a guy walk up to my table once and do silk from thumb tip and a pretty weak sponge ball routine; he must have been in his late 40s. To be honest, it was sad. But that's just me. That reeks of the most common forms of amateur magic on the market, magic that many people have seen before. That's not to detract from that magic per se, only that I don't see the point and tend to do routines that most people do not do. Namely, my own creations.

In my view, and it is obvious a personal opinion just as yours are, magic is much more than tricks. It's the experience you provide, the joy you bring, et cetra. Far more than we could share in one thread like this. So while sponge balls may indeed work for some people, when (as you noted) presented by a skilled performer, an effect using a camera like this can be as well. It all depends on the hands holding it.

The rest is speculation and conjecture at best, wouldn't you agree? Having personally performed this for a long time, nearly 20 years now (which sort of does show it's age... lol), I have come to truly appreciate the effect and the results it produces. Even when filming this DVD (obviously we feel it is worthy of producing, or we'd not have invested in it) we were getting ready to do another segment and looked down the street to see a previous couple we did it for still, nearly 10 minutes later, staring at the photo and discussing it. That for me is the prize. We created a memorable experience for them.

I couldn't ask for anything more.

Again, thank you to nearly everyone here; I enjoy learning from and hearing your views.

Regards,

JC

Yet again your welcome I just went ove rmy first post and relised it was rather short and I really did not mean it to be.I just think that the formatt could be better thoguht out. As always I wish you all the luck in the world with the project and with future projects.

Alan

Cheers Alan, now I am back to the grind. The Café is a mental break from the reality of owning a company and managing a magazine; both of which are killers. LOL. Best to you. JC

Be safe

Here's an idea, why not play off the fact that the Polaroid is an old and rarely used camera and build the routine around that. Maybe work in a comedy angle where you talk about not being able to afford one of those fancy schmancy digital cameras so you had to go with the Polaroid.

BTW check out Christopher Williams "Bright Ideas" from Alakazam to see the young pro in action.

Actually, I should not have started in with the sarcastic comment.

I apologise for the attitude.

I do feel that this technology is outdated. I have performed this for paying audiences way back in 1993.

I mentioned one source of this trick another is Lee Earle's excellent prediction effect that goes a bit different route. Ted Lesley also has a lot of underground work on this effect.

I actually used an ESP card for the revelation.

The bottom line? This idea is not new, the technology is obsolete. If you live in a place where digital cameras are common I think this would be a strange thing to carry around.

Good luck to JC with this effect though, I'll stick with my Nokia N95 and Bluetooth.
James Linn
American living in Taiwan
46 years old
Part time pro magician
Teacher
Strength coach
Father of four
Fluent in Mandarin Chinese [self taught]

The "young pro?" That's humorous!

Why is that humorous?
Shaun Dunn
Unemployed ninja
High School Dropout
2nd rate video producer
Out of shape break dancer
Father of ???
Master of Destruction
Party Animal
Professional Bikini Inspector
Whup A** can opener

Actually, I am going to try and see if this wil work with the old SX-70 Polaroid.
THe antique appearance of that camera can be used to create a spiritualistic frame for the presentation.

Tophie: bravo, and that's the point. It will work for some, not for all. Drop me an email at jclark at blacks magic group (dot) com. I'll hook you up with some crazy routines that I use that will scare the bageezus out of people (in a good way).

And only 14 years old! Wow, you should be proud.
James

I forgot to add fitness model stand in and dance contest winner. 14 I wish, I would trade 28 for 14 in a heartbeat with what I know now.
Shaun Dunn
http://www.papercraneproductions.net

I know one you forgot to add. Total nonsense demo maker.
James

Whoa, taking things kinda personal don't ya think? I wasnt attacking you personally I was having fun on here I don't come on here to start fights.

What's up Shaun? Been a while. Hope you are well. Don't take it like that, James is just playing bro. It's all fun and games until someone loses a sponge ball.