The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » New to magic? » » Let spectator reveal? (0 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

kaubell
View Profile
New user
90 Posts

Profile of kaubell
Hey,

I have been wondering this. Many tricks says "the spectator can turn the card over himself" and similar situations, where the final control is given for the spectator.
In my experience, it makes the effect lose the final impact big time. Spectator usually just casually checks it like its "nothing", then maybe react or not, the revelation lacks impact when spectator has the control, it makes it much cheaper. They got to see it too easy

Personally I like to milk it just a bit and reveal it in "contrasty" manner, where the other distractions, such as sandwich cards are not seen and the selection is only card that I hold and then show it, the only point of attention.
The waiting before reveal builds up a little peak in their mind, they wait, they want to see it, and then when they see it, they see something they builded interesting for, the impact is stronger. But too long waiting makes them feel adhd, so I try to always make it natural, not to delay it.

So I don't know? I think its more fair when they reveal, but it makes the whole idea, the ending, weaker (in my personal experiences)
MRSharpe
View Profile
Special user
Never a dull moment with
942 Posts

Profile of MRSharpe
It actually depends on the effect. For example effect with multiple phases, particularly those where the effect is duplicated in each phase with a different working method, may be more effective when the spectator actually does the final reveal. This eliminates the possibility that you have switched cards for example. The first effect which comes to mind in this regard in which I always allow the spectator to do the second reveal is The Chicago Opener AKA Red Hot Mama. In general though it is a good idea that once you have an effect set and ready to reveal that it be milked for all it's worth, even if the spectator is doing the actual revealing.
Custom Props Designer and Fabricator as well as Performer from Indiana, USA
Andy Young
View Profile
Special user
Jersey Shore, PA
710 Posts

Profile of Andy Young
Kaubell if you spectators check it like it is nothing, then you haven't built the effect up. There are plenty of times when I have spectators revel the card and they don't act like it is nothing. Perhaps (although I won't say for sure) it is a matter of clarity in effect. You have to sell and explain to the spectators how and why this is so darn amazing. Just tell them -- I mean don't waste your time going through all the work and then at the end have it ruined because they didn't know what happened.

As for the ending being weaker, I can agree that you can put a little more umph into it when you revel the card. You can pause, pretend to get it wrong, ect, but sometimes you need to let them revel it. Like if you do a two card transposition. It really sends the message that I never touched a thing.
Tim Cavendish
View Profile
Inner circle
1348 Posts

Profile of Tim Cavendish
Would the director of a play entrust the climax of a theatrical drama to an unrehearsed audience volunteer?
Sackninja
View Profile
New user
64 Posts

Profile of Sackninja
Multi phase routines, yes I let them reveal. It's built into the routine. I build it so the reveal has weight. Even some one phase routines, with one reval can have weight when someone else reveals the card. I'll use two examples of routines I perform for these.

The first is my three phase ambitious card. The first the card goes in to the deck and I reveal the signed card jumps back to the top. The second, I put it in again, turn the top card over and change the card to the signed card with a rub. Third, I cut the pack and put the card in the lower, with them holding the top. It jumps to the top of their pile. They turn it over themselves. This gets huge reactions with no real verbal build up. Instead I build it with the effect. They cn never come up with an explanation for this, partly because they turned it over themselves.

The second is gemini twins. The two predictions are in the deck. I build it up. I leave it a minute. I put emphasis on how they could stop me anywhere they want. I give them predicitons and tell them to turn the cards over at the same time. It gets good reactions.

If you want them to turn over the card, you would want to routine it around this. It could get a bigger reaction. You just really need to think on how to build up the effect so it really plays big. Smile
Andy Young
View Profile
Special user
Jersey Shore, PA
710 Posts

Profile of Andy Young
Quote:
On Jul 29, 2014, Tim Cavendish wrote:
Would the director of a play entrust the climax of a theatrical drama to an unrehearsed audience volunteer?


If it was written that way then yes. Magic is like a play and you should stick with how you practice. If you want someone to finish it for you do it that way. If not, then don't.
kaubell
View Profile
New user
90 Posts

Profile of kaubell
I agree completely there are very powerful ways to let the spectator reveal and you can use lot of tactics to milk it to max.

Mostly what I mean is, how they reveal, how they handle, how they look the card, it lacks beauty.
For example you build and build, then give the deck to the spectator and he seeks the card through the deck, then he takes the card out in the most clumsy manner, it will kill the beauty at the most important part.
Second is, the way the spectator shows the card around for other people once they got it. They don't care for your effect, they care to see the result themselve and the ending is littlebit hazy.

Ofcourse, there are many ways to milk it before they can reveal, but personally I don't like unnecessary waiting; to make them wait just because I talk a lot of extras, this makes them think "come on..".
IMO The waiting has to have good reason, for example you put the deck away, etc.. Talking for 2minutes "you could have stopped anywhere" is no good. Magic is often lacking direct and natural behaviour with the people.

But, for example gemini twins, when I put the 2 cards on the table in the most cleanest manner and theres no way I can switch the cards: They can clearly see theres *no* way I can manipulate the cards, why I cant just turn over the cards myself then, to make the ending look like I want to? Smile It cant lack the impact at all, it will only make it look like controlled situation and its unnecessary for the spectators to turn over, because the situation is so clean already. They keep heavy eye on the cards already.

And the another point is, why they can reveal only in a few tricks and in some tricks magician has to do the job? Don't it mean the other tricks are "fake" and only the tricks where spectator reveals are real Smile

But still, what ever suits is the best way to go! Personally I like to reveal myself so I can control the impact.
Ed_Millis
View Profile
Inner circle
Yuma, AZ
2290 Posts

Profile of Ed_Millis
If you build the tension to the point where they can't hardly wait to see the card, then they will definitely react. If they can turn this card over as the "le grande finale" with only a shrug, then you need to work on your routine. Either you've picked the wrong volunteer or something about your routine is not engaging this person at any level below mere curiosity.

Ed
Yellowcustard
View Profile
Inner circle
New Zealand
1310 Posts

Profile of Yellowcustard
I agree with much of what is written above. I am going to give a few real life examples I use and hope you can understand what I mean and think of how you can apply it to your magic moments.

In my sponge ball routine I end with putting one in my hand and one in the spectators hand. Then my vanishes and both balls are in the spectators hand. I stage this by putting one ball in my hand then one in theirs and ask them to squeeze tight. I make it clear I have ball one and they have ball two and ask them to squeeze. then I pause then I say are you squeezing tight, as they say yes I say I am not and show man hand empty. Now I just wait for them. There is a lot that can happen first they and crowd around them process mine as gone now either the spectator or the audience want to know whats happened in the spectators hand.

I do a similar thing with Daleys last trick. I put two cards on the spectator flat hand and the other two on the table. I ask the spectator which card is on top the Ace of spades or the Ace of clubs. when they answear I ask them to turn it over. they see it the 2 of heart. Now I just wait. Again pepole want to know what the other card the spectator has and its the 2 of Diamonds then waht about the two other cards.

This approach works well for me and I think the benfits are
1) The spectator and crowd around them get to asbour whats happing and explore more on there own.
2) Its not all about you.
3) The spectaor is the focus at the end.

Hope this helps
Enjoy your magic,

and let others enjoy it as well!
Ado
View Profile
Inner circle
Pittsburgh, PA
1004 Posts

Profile of Ado
Do both things: milk it, and let them reveal. Build the tension in their hands.

If you're not doing that, then the problem is your presentation, not who reveals.

P!
Sackninja
View Profile
New user
64 Posts

Profile of Sackninja
I gathered two things from your second post. You are not talking exclusively about either a card on top of the deck or a card separate from the deck. I assumed you were. I wouldn't let someway else reveal that there vcard is the only card turned over in the deck. They would in fact show that badly to everyone.

The second is that you feel thew effect lacks beauty if they reveal the card. What beauty is lost when they turn over the top card. Because at that stage, when the effect is done I feel any kind of flourish is unecessary and would !take them think you're doing something. That last bit is just my opinion though.

However you mentioned leaving cards in geminii twins on the table. I don't, even if I have a table I leave them I'm their hands and show that every card is different once again. In my other example, my acr routine, the card was also in their hands, on top of a pack I left in their hands. Its not like I would take back the back to reveal their cards. All this is just my opinion of course.
kaubell
View Profile
New user
90 Posts

Profile of kaubell
Yes yes,

Im not talking about the legendary "magic that happens in spectators hands" -stuff. That is powerful when the *effect* happens in their hands.
What I'm talking about is different; How they take the single card from the table, looks at it themselve and then shows around -stuff, How they go through the deck to find their card, etc, its very clumsy and broken, they might kill your whole effect..
In simple way, letting the spectator to reveal, not about making the *magic effect* happen in their hands.

Sometimes I feel people are against just for the sake of disagree ("You mentioned leaving cards in geminii twins on the table. I don't, even if I have a table") Also I feel you have misunderstood the cliche "magic that happens in spectators hands is strongest" and you feel every thing has to be placed to their hands. Because in gemini twins, the magic has already happened before the reveal, so their hands are unnecessary. It don't matter where the cards are when you reveal. Just think about it, the *magic* that happens in their hands is strongest. Not: Everything has to be filtered through the spectators hands Smile

In ACR, its understandable when the effect happens in their hands. But in many tricks its very unnecessary to let them reveal.

My intention is not to change any of you, we all have to live by our heart. But my intention is to raise a discussion of a doubt Smile

Keep doing what feels best for you, because that's what satisfies you! Smile
Sackninja
View Profile
New user
64 Posts

Profile of Sackninja
You make really good points kaubell. And I must admit while I mentioned it, leaving the cards in peoples hands duting geminii twins doesn't really add anything. I just kind of do it, because, well I don't really know. Habit I suppose.

As you said, do whatever you feel is right for you. Smile
RedHatMagic
View Profile
Loyal user
UK
237 Posts

Profile of RedHatMagic
Letting a spectator turn over card A is great misdirection to allow you to do dirty work with card B.

Just a thought. It really depends on the routine.
Let the Entertainment Commence!
lifeofwonder
View Profile
New user
Australia
54 Posts

Profile of lifeofwonder
Really depends on the routine but I find that if it is a multi-phase routine. eg. Ambitious Card, it adds to the effect when you get the spectator to turn the card for at least one of the later phases. RedHatMagic, that's a perfect example of giving you time to add in another ambitious card phase Smile
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » New to magic? » » Let spectator reveal? (0 Likes)
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2021 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