On Nov 3, 2014, Fatgumbo wrote:

Hi certainly. You have previously mentioned (not on this thread) using the destination box for walk around by giving it to the spectator to hold at the start of the routine. What do you think is more practical, producing a glass box from your pocket and giving it to your spectator to hold, then place back in your pocket at the end, or carrying that wooden suitcase with you, and carrying it with both hands to the next table?

In terms of impact, a card which has been seen in full view the whole time and in the spectators hands which undoubtedly could not have been switched makes for a stronger impact. I observed this when switching from kennedy's mystery box to mark southworth's the box.

On Oct 31, 2014, Cohiba wrote:

Quote:

On Oct 31, 2014, genius wrote:
The use of a prop in this effect is obvious. Who carries clear glass boxes with them? This is not organic mentalism!

Mindblowingly,
Charles

Well the average guy on the street isn't going to have a clear glass box in his pocket, but a magician or mentalist aiming to be as fair as possible to his audience very likely would.

What's more fair then a folded card with a paperclip on it?

The concern should be whether or not the prop makes sense in the routine, and whether or not it looks suspicious. If its use makes complete sense, and it arouses no suspicion, then I believe you are still abiding by the "organic" ideal.

A portable finger-chopper, for example, makes sense (because you're a magician showing something impossible - you carry weird props to show your skills); however, it arouses suspicion as a funky magician prop, so it does not fit into the organic ideal.

On Nov 2, 2014, Jon Allen wrote:

Quote:

On Nov 3, 2014, Fatgumbo wrote:

Hi certainly. You have previously mentioned (not on this thread) using the destination box for walk around by giving it to the spectator to hold at the start of the routine. What do you think is more practical, producing a glass box from your pocket and giving it to your spectator to hold, then place back in your pocket at the end, or carrying that wooden suitcase with you, and carrying it with both hands to the next table?

In terms of impact, a card which has been seen in full view the whole time and in the spectators hands which undoubtedly could not have been switched makes for a stronger impact. I observed this when switching from kennedy's mystery box to mark southworth's the box.

Thanks.

I do indeed use my Destination Box for walkaround. From the two options you gave, the more practical is the glass box. However, seeing as my Destination Box is not the size of a suitcase and does not require two hands to carry it round, it go with the one that doesn't come from my pocket, taking up more pocket space. You call my box a suitcase for which you need to use both hands which is funny. Just how small are you?

As for impact, this is purely subjective. Whenever people say X is stronger than Y, if they have genuinely worked both X and Y for laymen and discovered that X is stronger then nobody can argue against their experience. You wrote that my Destination Box is sub-par compared to David's one but you have not used either?

On Nov 2, 2014, jconstantine wrote:
Why is anyone listening to Craig anyway. With his last dishonest outright theft RED. Since that I have pretty much sworn off WMS all together. I hope I don't magically (pun intended) get banned for expressing my opinion. As far as the thread subject, go with paperclipped. Nothing is fairer and the switch is perfect. Also if need be the prop (paperclip) can be examined. I'm sure the box cannot be examined.

On Nov 2, 2014, jconstantine wrote:

Why is anyone listening to Craig anyway. With his last dishonest outright theft RED.

On Nov 2, 2014, jconstantine wrote:

As far as the thread subject, go with paperclipped. Nothing is fairer and the switch is perfect. Also if need be the prop (paperclip) can be examined. I'm sure the box cannot be examined.

On Nov 2, 2014, Ustaad wrote:
. . . . but no harm in waiting for a good, honest, impartial comparative review (like I said earlier - IF it ever comes) so as to help the consumer select the right suitable prop for his need. Right?

On Nov 2, 2014, Craig Petty wrote:
I thought you weren't going to argue.

That didn't last long!

The fact that you used the Coarity Box means you purchased it. So at some point you must have thought that having a clear box was better than Destination Box as you stated that you used Destination Box for 5 years and Clarity Box is a recent product. By spending money on something you must have at least liked the idea. I imagine that having performed with the clarity box you decided Destination Box is better - why was that?

Oh and Jamie, thanks for the welcome.

Craig.

On Nov 2, 2014, Angelo Carbone wrote:
Why is any box a problem? The more card to/in box products are out there, the more choice there is for the consumer. X is better than Y, Y is better than X. It doesn't matter. Buy what you like and use what you want. Simple. We all don't want to be performing with the same props at our gigs, so choice is good.

On Nov 2, 2014, jconstantine wrote:
Why is anyone listening to Craig anyway. With his last dishonest outright theft RED. Since that I have pretty much sworn off WMS all together. I hope I don't magically (pun intended) get banned for expressing my opinion. As far as the thread subject, go with paperclipped. Nothing is fairer and the switch is perfect. Also if need be the prop (paperclip) can be examined. I'm sure the box cannot be examined.

On Nov 3, 2014, Craig Petty wrote:
Don't you know I bullied a cripple. I expose illusions to Corporate audiences. I run a children's magic company that's ruining the children's entertainment industry and taking work off real magicians.