|
|
KenRyan Elite user 465 Posts |
I just had a post taken down because it constituted exposure. At first I thought I understood why, but the more I think about it, the more I realize that I do not understand exactly what it was about my post that pushed it over the line into exposure.
Without going into specific detail - I was excited yesterday morning because my wife showed me something on TV with someone doing some card magic, and I had JUST read about most of the moves he was doing. In my post I mentioned those moves by name. I also mentioned the name of the magician. HOWEVER - the magician himself explained to his host how he did the trick! He went step-by-step to explain how he was able to reveal the correct card. And this was on national TV. So if all I did was repeat what the magician actually said on national TV, what was it about my post that made it exposure. I just want to know what to avoid in the future so I don't do it again. Thanks! Ken |
MagicKingdom10 Veteran user 316 Posts |
How could you expose something that has already been publicly exposed? Some misunderstanding from the moderator I think. Don't worry about it Ken, mistakes happen
I Love You God
|
frankvomit Elite user 485 Posts |
Yeah misunderstanding .
|
KenRyan Elite user 465 Posts |
Thanks everyone!
Ken |
RedHatMagic Loyal user UK 239 Posts |
Why would this NOT be exposure? For me exposure is: If someone read the explanation would they be know how the trick was done? If the answer is yes then that is exposure. That someone else has exposed it somewhere else is irrelevant. Personally I did not see the show therefore from my perspective the person who is exposing the trick is you. If I had seen the show the person exposing the trick is still you - and also the magician you mentioned.
Let the Entertainment Commence!
|
MVoss Veteran user Boston, MA 372 Posts |
It is exposure because you are openly talking about method in a searchable thread. Once you get 50 posts you can use the secret forums for stuff like that. In this case I think it might be a judgement call from a Mod. But, if you are going to block some exposure you have to block it all, you know? I don't think you broke ant cardinal sins lol.
|
MagicKingdom10 Veteran user 316 Posts |
I don't believe that one could "expose" anything that has already been openly exposed in publicly accessible websites that are free of charge such as Youtube or Google. This especially applies to the classic sleights, effects, and moves that do not belong to any contemporary magician from our generation. The classic sleights include double-lifts, top changes, snap changes, false shuffles, passes, forces etc. The classic effects include Triumph, Ambitious Card, Out of The World, Jumping Gemini, Chicago Opener etc. They are not under the sole ownership of anyone. One could study all of these sleights and effects freely without ever stepping foot onto our forums.
YouTube provides a colossal disposal of magic video tutorials unrestricted to anyone who simply knows how to type. No paid emails necessary, no premium subscriptions, no need to even be able to understand English, it is simply a website providing free knowledge and in an extremely user-friendly way ie through videos. It is always going to be the number one website of choice for anyone wishing to learn magic secrets. I personally find the fear of exposing classic effects that are readily available on YouTube downright laughable. Ninety-nine times out of a hundred a layperson would rather watch a free video tutorial of an effect than read texts in our forums anyway. Millions and millions of people from all over the world watch magic tutorials on YouTube, compare that to the number of people who visit our forums. Check out the astronomically large fan bases of "YouTube magicians" such as Mismag822, Disturb Reality, 52Kards, Scam School, FernandoP1 etc. Their fan bases completely dwarf the number of people lurking around here. The only way people will try to search our forums is when there are absolutely no existing exposure videos on YouTube. Our forum is not the first choice destination for learning tricks, it is YouTube. Guess how many people you think are reading my post presently, compare this to the number of people watching magic exposure videos on YouTube right now, it is simply no comparison! A handful of English speaking forummers and lurkers versus an entire world population from all countries with different languages and cultures. While we are busy fretting and worrying about "exposing" our Hermann passes and riffle forces, the YouTube magicians are busy happily revealing and teaching all the possible classic effects and sleights under the sun. Thankfully, these factors do not bother a serious professional magician in the slightest! The issue though arises when one starts exposing commercial effects and books belonging to present-day magicians who rely on the sales of these products as source of income, and by exposing them these conjurers lose potential sales. That would be unethical.
I Love You God
|
55Hudson Special user Minneapolis 984 Posts |
This discussion has been debated in depth a number of times over in Right or Wrong. You should look there for arguments for and against exposing magic secrets.
Hudson |
charlie_d Loyal user 247 Posts |
It's just about not repeating the offense. It's sometimes hard to figure this stuff out, especially on an open, googleable forum where we're discussing methods. I often see stuff that I'd call exposure and no doubt I often post stuff that other people would call exposure.
If you reveal the method, it's exposure. It doesn't matter if the method has been revealed previously, you are still revealing the method, so it's still exposure. In just the same way, someone stealing something doesn't give everyone the right to steal. "But my car was stolen in 2012" isn't a defense that works in court. Now, there's a whole extra argument about how much magical discussion forums reveal about methods... generally the Café is pretty good about deleting stuff but there's an awful lot of exposure-to-magicians (where the description of the method wouldn't make sense to a layman but does to a magician) especially when a spectacular new trick comes out and everyone piles in trying to determine how it's done. The problem with this kind of exposure is that it hurts the creators. Both kinds of exposure are bad; for me, the second kind is worse. |
frankvomit Elite user 485 Posts |
Guys if some of what you say is true then there'd never be magic in print and the art would have been lost long ago.
|
charlie_d Loyal user 247 Posts |
Teaching in return for payment is different. Books, DVDs, downloads and apps all fall into that category.
I'm just saying - someone else exposing something doesn't make it ok for everyone to do it. Same as stealing, or whatever. |
Bill Thompson Elite user Mississippi 422 Posts |
Quote:
On Nov 28, 2014, KenRyan wrote: First of all, I think this whole thread belongs on the Right or Wrong forum... I'll wade into this one, though... Exposure is when a trick is explained simply for the purpose of explaining it (exposing the secret method of it) to someone who has no plans to ever do the effect or really cares about magic in general (Masked Magician et. al.). This could be to heckle a magician, ruin the effect for the spectator or to satisfy the desires of the exposer in some twisted way. An example of this would be a magician is invited to a party by his "so called" friends and asked do a trick. As he is performing, someone uses their phone to google the method and shout it out to the party goers who are watching the perfomance, in order to embarrass the perfomer and subject him to ridicule. The googler now feels immensely proudof himself for this childish act. However, if the exposure is to further a trick and perhaps send the spectator down the rabbit hole then it really isn't exposure... see for example Vernon's explanation of the ball vanish during his Cups and Balls routine. What Pen and Teller do with their Cups and Balls routine isn't exposure either, because after they explain it, they proceed to do it with aluminum foil balls and clear plastic cups! Laymen can't follow it and it still looks magical to them. Same with their "exposure" of the hankerchief vanish... it is a comedy act and the laymen don't for a minute think you could use the utility device exposed to fool anyone, therefore you can still get away with using it (if you are using it correctly) to fool even someone who has seen the act and should be aware of it. I don't have a clue who the magician you saw is, or what trick he showed, so I can't comment on that. As far as these forums go, methods are not to be tipped in any forum other than the secret sessions. That is why your post was taken down most likely.
"To let understanding stop at what cannot be understood is a high attainment.
Those who cannot do it will be destroyed on the lathe of heaven." - Chuang Tse |
frankvomit Elite user 485 Posts |
Quote:
On Dec 2, 2014, misterbill wrote: |
krowboom Loyal user Chicago area 233 Posts |
In my opinion once an effect is commercially available it has been exposed. Those that want to guard their original effects shouldn't make them available to the general public. Frankly in my experience most people have no idea how tricks are done even if it is on youtube or been "exposed".
|
Mortimer Graves Special user New Orleans, Louisiana, U.S.A. 556 Posts |
Most professionals I've known have performed classic effects as a mainstay, because they're easily recognized by the public. And most of these effects use methods known to the public for centuries.
Though I don't believe in simply throwing secrets around, I do think that fear of exposure reveals an awful insecurity on the part of magicians. If you're using the real tools of magic in your performances, even if they know for sure how it works, you'll still amaze them. You can do a classic effect so well it baffles people and makes them think you're using completely different methods than the classic methods. I did the linking rings for years before meeting Jim Cellini. He turned my insides to water with his linking rings, using the same methods I had been using, and when he revealed that our methods were the same, it blew my mind. The secrets aren't the real secret. The real secret cannot be exposed, even if we try. I know this, because I've taught several students over the years and only one of them ever got the real secret, and he figured it out on his own, just like I did. Even trying to explain it to people can't reveal it, no matter how I've tried. You either get it or you don't.
'Tis an ill wind that blows no minds.
Hastur, Hastur, Hastur! See? Nothing hap- ...and if we rub each other the wrong way, let's try going in another direction. - Pokey the Porcupine |
Paul Draper V.I.P. Las Vegas, Nevada 245 Posts |
X Files Stars Mitch Pileggi and William B. Davis chat with Paul Draper about "The Masked Magician", "Skepticism", "Moon Landing Denial", "The Magic Castle" and more in front of an audience of 5,000 fans at Salt Lake Comic Con FanX. Watch him squirm.
https://youtu.be/4yekwfE-SHU |
Brad Burt Inner circle 2675 Posts |
Exposure: You not only name a sleight, but you give a description of "how" it is done.
Not exposure: You name a sleight. It's really not that tough. If you tell the "HOW" of it, it's exposure. But, saying the name of something? If that was the case, then saying, "Look, see that Train over there?", would constitute exposure of how a 'train' works.
Brad Burt
|
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » New to magic? » » What Constitutes Exposure? (5 Likes) |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.04 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 < |