|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] | ||||||||||
quicknotist Special user 888 Posts |
Perhaps not to you, a self-professed amateur with no intention to ever make any income from your work in this field.
But even you should know, with your calculation you're just looking at turnover, not actual profit. Please stop sucking those sour grapes. Quote:
On 2011-07-31 19:38, Thomas Cooper wrote: |
|||||||||
mastermindreader 1949 - 2017 Seattle, WA 12586 Posts |
This thread has nothing whatsoever to do with TWU.
|
|||||||||
Thomas Cooper Special user 935 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-07-31 20:14, quicknotist wrote: Ohh I'm sorry, but I can produce a 50 page booklet for £8! And sorry, you are right Mr Cassidy. We should keep on topic.
I call myself "Thomas Cooper" here because this stops the magic café appearing when people google my stage name.
Does anyone else find the term "Special User" to be a bit condescending? |
|||||||||
quicknotist Special user 888 Posts |
The hijacking of threads is becoming rather tiresome.
It almost reminds me of a certain baldist commentator we encountered not so long ago. Perhaps we should start a new thread on "Retail of effects and exposure on television." I think there were some very important points being made here. Quote:
On 2011-07-31 20:17, mastermindreader wrote: |
|||||||||
Paul Shirley Inner circle Melbourne, Australia 1206 Posts |
A few years back, I had an interesting conversation with a well known Australian actor. A movie that he starred in during the early 90's made him a house hold name here... The movie also did very well in the U.K and U.S.
His contract stipulated that he would share in a percentage of all future video release sales. Unfortunately, as the medium DVD had not yet come to the fore... his contact didn't cover him for DVD sales. This film is still one of the highest selling DVD releases in Australias history. He didn't get a cent. I guess my point is that when we release an effect... we not only need to cover ourselves for the 'here and now' but for what may also happen n the future. I am with you on this one Nimrod. I think it is poor form to take the effect that you have, in good faith, allowed T.V performance rights to perform it on a show knowing that there is a chance that the method will be exposed. I like the show... but think that if you are going to perform an effect... it should be your own. Better still... it should be one that you haven't released yet. Performers may think twice about going on such a show if they knew that an effect, that they plan to release in the future, may be exposed. |
|||||||||
Pakar Ilusi Inner circle 5777 Posts |
Great thinking Loki...
I'll get my 5 minutes of fame and I will only risk someone else's secret! Wow! Just to get on TV...
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
|
|||||||||
stijnhommes Special user 568 Posts |
Quote: Why did Penn give additional information? Wasn't Johnny Thompson in the gallery to adjudicate?
On 2011-07-31 07:23, Martin.Lester wrote: |
|||||||||
Martin.Lester Inner circle 1014 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-08-01 05:59, stijnhommes wrote: While Johnny Thompson is credited as a Consultant, In all the show's I saw I can't say I recall him feeding any information to Jonathan Ross, it appeared to me that Jonathan Ross saw the act perform in rehearsal and was told the method at that time, so in most cases he was able to confirm if P&T was correct. The mental act that screwed up badly he also commented that everything went fine in rehearsal and felt sorry that it did not work out, but as stated before each act gets one chance only there was no re takes |
|||||||||
Shrubsole Inner circle Kent, England 2455 Posts |
I do understand that a performer doesn't make retirement money from selling a few PDFs, books or DVDs, but the guarantee from the performer to the buyer should be there, that the originator of the trick is not going o deliberately put the trick at risk and so devalue it for the buyer.
I also understand that if we have one routine in our act, blown apart on National TV, it should not be the end of the world. We should be able to disguise it or just insert something new into our acts. However, it's the principle of the matter in both ways. Originators of tricks do not want others exposing their work and buyers of a trick do not want the originator of the trick exposing it either. Seems our reasonably nice little society that could usually police itself through decency and general morals, is now being used and abused for some people's greed alone. If a few new lines are added to new products to cover this new leak of secrets, then that's a good thing for everyone.
Winner of the Dumbringer Award for total incompetence. (All years)
|
|||||||||
Lior Inner circle 1961 Posts |
Edit
The Lior Touch
https://1amagic.com/ PEA Dave Lederman Award 2009 PEA Dunninger Award 2001 Life Time Achivmeant IUPA 2016 |
|||||||||
PRINCE Inner circle 1448 Posts |
The next series is going to be called 'Penn & Teller Amaze Us'. I am sick and tired of watching the series and after/during the performance shaking my head and saying to myself 'you are joking'
If these so called magicians think that what they have performed is even going to fool P&T even a little bit, then they really need help. I don't want to get to deep into this as it going off the topic a bit. But how many times did Penn say... "well you didn't fool us, but you did amaze us" Come on, the quick change act - how was that ever going to fool???!!! Or what about Chris Dugdale's act to just name two recent acts. He hung himself as soon as he exposed that it was him in disguise. It really was a coincidence that Penn actually managed to pick his number . I was also waiting for Penn to mention the A** a N***** P** that was used for the numbers. There are so many mentalists that use a A** A N***** P** myself included, and I honestly think that I would have smashed the T.V if Penn went on to expose the P**! As if they wouldnt have known how the total number that by coincidence got arrived at! Terrible use of props and act which would never fool. I really think that a lot of performers forgot how knowledgable and experienced they are, and not they were performing for just a couple of magicians down the local magic club. Anyway back to the topic. The show is just an excuse for the majority of people to go on there just for T.V exposure and so they can put on their advertising 'As seen on T.V's Penn and Teller' I strongly beleive that whoever performs on the show should perform something original and definitely not something that has been marketed for magicians. Also, for all those who have performed on there and got exposed where the method and secret of a marketed trick/effect has been exposed, thanks for the respect you didn't consider to all other magicians who may be performing it. Whether they are a professional magician or hobbiest. You all knew the risk that P&T would expose if they felt like it, yet you were willing to neglect the ethics and respect just for 5mins of so called fame. Bring on next series - the show has been the best comedy on T.V yet. Now before the replies start coming in I want to mention that my comments above do not apply to all performers that have been on the show - I don't need to name and shame as we probably know who they are |
|||||||||
FairieSnuff Regular user 157 Posts |
I'm finding this thread very interesting. I seem to remember about six months back, having a few people (via email etc) suggesting I was witholding tv and film rights on my products just so I could make more money.
In fact and I was quite clear on this, I believed at the time (and still do) I'd be pretty miffed if I purchased something expensive and then found out it was either a) exposed by a poor performer on you tube b) used in a popular tv programme that exposed the prop as a trick prop c) anything else I hadn't thought of but would be valid lol. And so not just to protect myself, but also those who were kind enough to buy from me, they had as best as I could a garentee their item wouldn't end up exposed thereby possibly making their investment worthless. I've happily granted tv and or dvd rights to three people. I know who each of them are and know their use will not affect anyone else who may already have or may in the future these products. Evie x |
|||||||||
Bartelli Elite user Belgium 403 Posts |
For those who might still be interested in buying Nimrod's booklet "Shalosh: Stage Work", not all 444 copies have been sold to individuals. Some are still available (I edited out the link since this is a public forum). 138 copies left as I'm writing this.
Honestly, Nimrod's mentioning of this effect and his method made me curious to read more. I hadn't heard of this booklet before, but now I'm purchasing it. Remember: this show has only been watched in the UK and I'm sure the majority of the population the UK did not watch this show. There sure is harm done, but I don't think most of the harm is done in the exposing of methods. For us the biggest problem is that mentalism has become and is becoming more and more "magicized" (you know what I mean). @Nimrod: without ever having read your booklet. And I am glad some of them are still available.
Mentalist / Mindreader Bart Nijs
www.bartnijs.be Belgian Mentalist / Mindreader Bart Nijs Some webapps for mentalists |
|||||||||
David Thiel Inner circle Western Canada...where all that oil is 4005 Posts |
I've been rethinking what I posted here. While I still maintain that nothing illegal happened, I started putting myself in Nimrod's position and saw things differently.
How DO you protect the television -- or indeed ANY broadcast -- rights of an effect? How can a creator of an effect know that their "baby" will be taken care of and performed properly? You can't, I guess, unless you do what another poster here did: prohibit ALL television performances without written permission. I rather suspect Nimrod would have withheld these had he been asked. I was quite callous with my reply, Nimrod. I hadn't thought to consider the violation done to you. I apologize. David
Whatever doesn't kill you makes you stronger. Except bears. Bears will kill you.
My books are here: www.magicpendulums.com www.MidnightMagicAndMentalism.com |
|||||||||
Lior Inner circle 1961 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-08-01 15:51, David Thiel wrote: LIKE
The Lior Touch
https://1amagic.com/ PEA Dave Lederman Award 2009 PEA Dunninger Award 2001 Life Time Achivmeant IUPA 2016 |
|||||||||
Domino Magic Special user 999 Posts |
Quote:
On 2011-08-01 15:51, David Thiel wrote: And that isn't 100% either. It's not a legal violation, just an ethical one, as some here say this situation isn't ethical. Once you release a product, it's out of your control. Some people are going to do what they want no matter what the creator's view of ethical is. |
|||||||||
docsteve Inner circle 1831 Posts |
The fact P &T is on prime time in the UK TV summer line up is absolutely fantastic for magic.
Where do you draw the line at "exposure"! When magic shop sends emails highlighting the tricks that have made another UK based magus famous? When the trick that fools them is on sale with in 24 hours of the show? Nimrod has highlighted a problem with the way "we" licence are work in the current environment, and he should be applauded for doing so. Penn and Teller should be applauded for showcasing some of the best medic and mentalism on TV for many a year; BBC "the magicians" has great magic, even better performers but was a terrible format. The "purists" should grow up; the "secrets" aren't effing rocket science - after all, we're all here......
[
|
|||||||||
Jon_Thompson Inner circle Darkest Cheshire 2404 Posts |
I'm confused here. I get confused easily, so I want to get things clear in my mind.
Surely... If P&T simply work out a method on the spot whereby the effect they just witnessed could be achieved and it happens to be the same method as the performer used, surely that's just bad luck. If they recognise the method being used as the creation of Mr X and mention . that they recognise it in occluded terms, is that exposure to anyone but the performer and ourselves? The punters are still none the wiser. If they say "You used this method. It's called X and it's by Mr Y" then that IS exposure. Have they ever done that? |
|||||||||
PRINCE Inner circle 1448 Posts |
What???
Docsteve mentions that P&T should be applauded. I don't get it? Applauded for what? I agree that the premise of the show is great and 'magic' being promoted/show cased is great (if that's is what you mean then I totally agree). If P&T went to the producers with this idea for the show then again I agree and hats off to them as they have got the ratings and reputation they deserve. You can look at this from 2 angles. As a working magician it is very hard not to blame the show for exposure. BUT I am not blaming P&T for the exposure because that is what they do, and that is the whole idea behind the show in a sense - I blame the magicians who perform the effects. Everyone is fully aware that if P&T want to expose they will, and we have all seen that sometimes they don't expose, when they could have. To me that is the biggest contradiction ever. BUT again this is just my opinion and don't really want to get into that area. I don't know if I have read some of the comments correctly, but it reads as if some people on here basically are brushing off the fact that secrets get exposed and its not such a big deal. It is a big deal if you are a working magician performing in the real world and perhaps material you use, gets exposed. Why would a professional magician or even hobbiest want to even consider performing something again that has just been exposed on T.V. & I am fed up with comments like... "well its only in the U.K, and I doubt many lay people watched the show etc etc" Those sort of excuses are rubbish! I am a working performer and working every weekend. Every gig someone makes a comment or a joke that they watched P&T the other night on T.V etc etc My point is, that if any of the material I use gets exposed then it goes straight in the bottom draw. For those working magicians you know that from experience what works and is strong material to perform in the real world. If you take someting out it is very difficult to try and replace it with another effect you feel is strong enough to perform. Not only that all you time working on the handling, patter linking it with other material etc is completelty wasted - just because someone has no respect, does'nt care and just wanted 5 mins of fame so they can put on their website they have been on T.V. So, I completley blame the performers for even trying to risk or chance fooling P&T with a marketed effect because of the impact and damage it has on other fellow magicians. From a lay audience I think it is great T.V and show. Just feedback from people when I perform say how they enjoy the show and look forward to it every week. So the show does work - which it deserves to. It also gets magic back on the T.V which is great! I just wish magicians who go on there would consider ethics and respect, and not just their ego. |
|||||||||
Martin.Lester Inner circle 1014 Posts |
You Can't win them all , Even people that did there own orignal effect like Nick Einhorn still got blasted on The Café, Don't think Richard Bellers did much better!
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Penny for your thoughts » » P&T exposed me against my will (11 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.08 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 < |