The Magic Café
Username:
Password:
[ Lost Password ]
  [ Forgot Username ]
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » WOW! This guy came up with a different method for the Origami Illusion! (8 Likes) Printer Friendly Version

 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3 [Next]
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 3, 2016, jcmagicman wrote:
Just finished showing this video to a lay person and her remark was " where'd she go?"


See?

It ain't the best trick in the world, far from it... but it works.

Thanks for that jmagicman. Smile
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Ray Pierce
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
2442 Posts

Profile of Ray Pierce
Yes, it probably appears as the same basic "effect" to a lay audience but it just isn't near as good for a multitude of obvious reasons. I can't really fault the "performance" alone as he appears at least as good as many so called illusionists I've seen on some compilation TV magic shows. It seems pretty clear that he just wanted to copy the traditional origami but had no idea how it worked so he made up a method and built it to fit. It isn't an improvement by any means so that does make it an inferior Origami knock-off in my mind.
Ray Pierce
<BR>www.HollywoodAerialArts.com
Chris Stolz
View Profile
Inner circle
Mississauga, Ontario
1957 Posts

Profile of Chris Stolz
Yeah, I agree with much of what was already said. The elements didn't come together at all.

They could have easily re-themed the whole thing and done Umbrella box instead of just a couple swords - it looks to be about the same size. They can also cut that stupid useless carpet he keeps putting on there. Nah forget it, no matter how hard I try to think about how to fix it, it just makes more sense to build something entirely new and start over.
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 4, 2016, Ray Pierce wrote:
Yes, it probably appears as the same basic "effect" to a lay audience but it just isn't near as good for a multitude of obvious reasons. I can't really fault the "performance" alone as he appears at least as good as many so called illusionists I've seen on some compilation TV magic shows. It seems pretty clear that he just wanted to copy the traditional origami but had no idea how it worked so he made up a method and built it to fit. It isn't an improvement by any means so that does make it an inferior Origami knock-off in my mind.


I can agree with that.

It is different, but not really an improvement.

But for whatever reason, I like it. Smile
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 4, 2016, Chris Stolz wrote:
Yeah, I agree with much of what was already said. The elements didn't come together at all.

They could have easily re-themed the whole thing and done Umbrella box instead of just a couple swords - it looks to be about the same size. They can also cut that stupid useless carpet he keeps putting on there. Nah forget it, no matter how hard I try to think about how to fix it, it just makes more sense to build something entirely new and start over.


I think it's the other way around. He took the sword/umbrella box principle and made it to kinda look like the Origami.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
George Ledo
View Profile
Magic Café Columnist
SF Bay Area
2885 Posts

Profile of George Ledo
To me, this was another example of "lookit what my box can do." Granted it was done as a circus act and all, but I didn't care for any of it.
That's our departed buddy Burt, aka The Great Burtini, doing his famous Cups and Mice routine
www.georgefledo.net

Latest column: "Sorry about the photos in my posts here"
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 5, 2016, George Ledo wrote:
To me, this was another example of "lookit what my box can do." Granted it was done as a circus act and all, but I didn't care for any of it.


From that perspective, even Copperfield's performance of the Origami was a "lookit what my box can do". He started it with " I have something very special to show you. It's a special little box. Swords pass through it in every direction. Front to back, side to side and even from top to bottom." Check YouTube.

Given that his was way better choreographed, but still... It's about the box.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Sealegs
View Profile
Inner circle
The UK, Portsmouth
2578 Posts

Profile of Sealegs
I think this discussion is as interesting as the clip of the illusion that has created it.

The discussion begs the question, what makes a good illusion? Or what makes for a deceptive illusion?

I would suggest that there are two elements... There are all the factors that the performer brings, or potentially can bring, to the props... and there are all the factors of the build, mechanics and function of the prop itself.

Looking just at the prop itself, does the build, mechanics and function of this illusion/prop allow or create something impossible/astonishing/puzzling/etc?

Whether it is less good than the original Origami is another matter, as is if it's less good than a myriad of other illusions. Whether it's ethically sound to use someone's idea and reproduce it in another way is also another matter. Both these questions are interesting topics for debate... but they don't have any bearing on whether this can be seen as potentially a 'good illusion'? Or maybe a better and more useful way of putting it is... Is the illusion this prop creates (or can create) sound and robust? Do the build, the mechanics, and the function create something that looks impossible/astonishing/puzzling/etc?

Personally I think that ultimately it does. I think natmagic's comment, "The final deception looks convincing. Overall its terrible and makes no sense", most closely mirrors my own thoughts.

If a sword box like this one or UF Grant's Victory Carton Illusion are considered to be good illusions that looks impossible, astonishing and puzzling (which I think would generally be accepted to be the case) I can't see how, in terms of the prop and the effect it finally creates, that this isn't also capable of being considered a 'good illusion'.

My opinion on this comes with the caveat that it is the performance, rather than the function of the props, that is responsible for the awkward and clunky handling in the clip.
Neal Austin

"The golden rule is that there are no golden rules." G.B. Shaw
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 6, 2016, Sealegs wrote:
I think this discussion is as interesting as the clip of the illusion that has created it.

The discussion begs the question, what makes a good illusion? Or what makes for a deceptive illusion?

I would suggest that there are two elements... There are all the factors that the performer brings, or potentially can bring, to the props... and there are all the factors of the build, mechanics and function of the prop itself.

Looking just at the prop itself, does the build, mechanics and function of this illusion/prop allow or create something impossible/astonishing/puzzling/etc?

Whether it is less good than the original Origami is another matter, as is if it's less good than a myriad of other illusions. Whether it's ethically sound to use someone's idea and reproduce it in another way is also another matter. Both these questions are interesting topics for debate... but they don't have any bearing on whether this can be seen as potentially a 'good illusion'? Or maybe a better and more useful way of putting it is... Is the illusion this prop creates (or can create) sound and robust? Do the build, the mechanics, and the function create something that looks impossible/astonishing/puzzling/etc?

Personally I think that ultimately it does. I think natmagic's comment, "The final deception looks convincing. Overall its terrible and makes no sense", most closely mirrors my own thoughts.

If a sword box like this one or UF Grant's Victory Carton Illusion are considered to be good illusions that looks impossible, astonishing and puzzling (which I think would generally be accepted to be the case) I can't see how, in terms of the prop and the effect it finally creates, that this isn't also capable of being considered a 'good illusion'.

My opinion on this comes with the caveat that it is the performance, rather than the function of the props, that is responsible for the awkward and clunky handling in the clip.


Sealegs, much thanks for a well thought out post. Smile

I actually agree with most of what you are saying, especially "it is the performance, rather than the function of the props, that is responsible for the awkward and clunky handling in the clip".
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
nathanernest
View Profile
New user
80 Posts

Profile of nathanernest
I think it only looks convincing because of the lighting and bad quality of the video. I'm sure to see this during a live performance, the trim would be much more noticeable.
---------
Nath
Bill Hegbli
View Profile
Eternal Order
Fort Wayne, Indiana
22593 Posts

Profile of Bill Hegbli
Do we actually know that this illusion being discussed does not pre-date Steinmeyer's Origami. There is no reason why this could not have been a precursor to Origami, instead of the other way round.

Looking back at history in magic, and how magic effects and tricks, jump the oceans very easily, even back when there was not air travel, and ships took 3 to 6 months to cross the oceans, and land travel was by train, and horse.
jcmagicman
View Profile
Loyal user
221 Posts

Profile of jcmagicman
Interesting perspective Bill. I don't see why this also couldn't be a valid possibility.

In the eyes of the audience, the illusion comes across as a sword basket effect. In the eyes of magicians, yes that may very well be the origami illusion but with his own presentation approach.

In Illusionsesame (on page 168) there is a method of sawing a lady in half utilizing a base design that seems to be popular with a lot of illusions. This same base design is revealed by Dan Harlan in "Tarbell 45: Illusions, as a different take on this principle. What I am getting at is that the performer in the video is presenting the origami in his own preferred style by choosing to eliminate the mirror. So to answer the original post, no its not a new method; the presentation is slightly altered. With that said, I don't see why he can't utilize the same base design and present the illusion.

His stage movements are obviously not graceful like Copperfields but I think he gets the job done regardless. He's not revealing anything that would do harm to the art of magic. Lets stop being so critical and spend more time bringing new ideas to the table.
Bill Hegbli
View Profile
Eternal Order
Fort Wayne, Indiana
22593 Posts

Profile of Bill Hegbli
I was thinking, why couldn't it have been possible for Steinmeyer to have traveled to Europe at some time, and happen to see this illusion and it sat their in the back of his mind. Time passes and he creates the Origami illusion, and with similar designs. It could very well have happened.

The only thing I seen as far as performance, is that the magician did not utilize his assistants correctly, and why was that cloth so small, had he never performed the trick before in a Circus setting and this was a last minute adjustment. Which, would explain why he did not have those 2 men assistants cover the prop with the cloth. I actually seen no reason for the yellow grid board to be put on or off. It had no purpose. Or, could the mirror been broken or damaged in transport, and as you all know, the show must go on, and this was his last minute repair he came up with.

So many possibilities, so many unanswered questions.
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 8, 2016, Bill Hegbli wrote:
I was thinking, why couldn't it have been possible for Steinmeyer to have traveled to Europe at some time, and happen to see this illusion and it sat their in the back of his mind. Time passes and he creates the Origami illusion, and with similar designs. It could very well have happened.

The only thing I seen as far as performance, is that the magician did not utilize his assistants correctly, and why was that cloth so small, had he never performed the trick before in a Circus setting and this was a last minute adjustment. Which, would explain why he did not have those 2 men assistants cover the prop with the cloth. I actually seen no reason for the yellow grid board to be put on or off. It had no purpose. Or, could the mirror been broken or damaged in transport, and as you all know, the show must go on, and this was his last minute repair he came up with.

So many possibilities, so many unanswered questions.


Thanks for the input, interesting thought although I think you answered your own question.

The reason I believe this comes after Steinmeyer's Origami is because he is using the yellow collapsible board that does almost nothing. (I do think that there is a purpose here.)

He wanted to mimic the Steinmeyer design. Exactly because Copperfield has had it in his repertoire. Again, he has to perform it upbeat, because it's a Circus act. Not saying it was good though.

For this to predate Henning's performance of Steinmeyer's Origami Illusion, this performance would have had to have a seventies look and feel. However, the music, clothes, hairstyles and quality of video all point to it being a bit further into the 90's at least. That is my observation though.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 8, 2016, nathanernest wrote:
I think it only looks convincing because of the lighting and bad quality of the video. I'm sure to see this during a live performance, the trim would be much more noticeable.


Maybe, we'll never really know. However, he does have distance to the audience on his side. I think it would still work, just not the best version of such an illusion.
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 8, 2016, jcmagicman wrote:
With that said, I don't see why he can't utilize the same base design and present the illusion.

His stage movements are obviously not graceful like Copperfields but I think he gets the job done regardless. He's not revealing anything that would do harm to the art of magic. Lets stop being so critical and spend more time bringing new ideas to the table.


I prefer to believe that he actually did not want to copy Steinmeyer's design with the base. This way he is safe as it really isn't a rip off.

And I think the technique works, that is why I am bringing this to the table. (Pun intended Smile )
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
the Sponge
View Profile
Inner circle
Atlanta
2536 Posts

Profile of the Sponge
Quote:
On Mar 30, 2016, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
Quote:
On Mar 30, 2016, the Sponge wrote:
The method is different????? um, okay, if you say so.


Technically, it is. Smile

He went the more classic and common way for effects like these, giving a slightly different look on the whole box and table.

But it WORKS!

(Kinda nice having the table that thin. Well, at least for me it is.)

I have seen the Origami in its "normal" guise as I know guys who perform it in my country, knock offs though, sadly.

(I was actually expecting a snide remark like that sooner or later here... Sooner it seems. Don't you just love the Café? Smile )


The DESIGN is different, but again, even though it is not that t****, he is still using a t**** B*** as part of the method. So.... METHOD is still basically the same.
Smile
s
Pakar Ilusi
View Profile
Inner circle
5715 Posts

Profile of Pakar Ilusi
Quote:
On Apr 8, 2016, the Sponge wrote:
Quote:
On Mar 30, 2016, Pakar Ilusi wrote:
Quote:
On Mar 30, 2016, the Sponge wrote:
The method is different????? um, okay, if you say so.


Technically, it is. Smile

He went the more classic and common way for effects like these, giving a slightly different look on the whole box and table.

But it WORKS!

(Kinda nice having the table that thin. Well, at least for me it is.)

I have seen the Origami in its "normal" guise as I know guys who perform it in my country, knock offs though, sadly.

(I was actually expecting a snide remark like that sooner or later here... Sooner it seems. Don't you just love the Café? Smile )


The DESIGN is different, but again, even though it is not that t****, he is still using a t**** B*** as part of the method. So.... METHOD is still basically the same.
Smile
s


If you say so. Smile
"Dreams aren't a matter of Chance but a matter of Choice." -DC-
de rome
View Profile
New user
UK/NORWAY
71 Posts

Profile of de rome
I just love MAGICIANS,

must be millions all round the world,
and its the only profession where as you try your best,
and everyone loves to pull you down

Everyone seems to think they are the best
everyone seems to think they are right
everyone seems to think all the other magicians are crap

Yep Im proud to be a magician
you will never find a better quality HEAT / HOTSPOT / HYPNO HEAT as mine anywhere else, ITS REALLY GOOD... here is a link to the effect NEW WEB SITE AND TO ORDER
http://www.cdrmagic.com/heat
Ray Pierce
View Profile
Inner circle
Los Angeles, CA
2442 Posts

Profile of Ray Pierce
I just love Magic.

I'm passionate about magic and trying to make it the best it can be. I'm proud of it as a craft and an art form. Because of that, I have a varying degree of feelings about the broad range of people claiming the title of "Magician". Yes, there are many that share my feelings and deires to elevate this art form and preserve this craft with a reputation it deserves. Not all do however.

If you went down and bought a saxophone, you probably wouldn't dream of calling yourself a real musician after learning to play three notes.. Magic seems to be different in that many people purchase an effect and call themselves a magician. It sometimes can be a catchall for those without any talent or personal skills to bring to the craft. That's just the reality. This isn't to say that these people are wonderful in their own way and have other amazing gifts to bring to the world.

In many occupations the only way to learn from the past is to deconstruct and analyze it. In theater, at the end of many productions either good or bad the production company will do what is called a postmortem where they analyze the strengths and weaknesses of any particular show and find ways of correcting the problems to learn from it. Is this because they don't like actors? Is this because they think they are the best? Is this because they think they are always right? I would postulate that it is because they want to be the best and they want to grow and create something better for future generations.

Yes, there will always be jealousy, bitterness, and !@#$%y comments from some people. It is true that many can't be better try to take others down. I fully understand that. We do have to however differentiate those from the people who are striving to make magic the art it deserves to be and elevate this art for future generations. I will always side with this group.
Ray Pierce
<BR>www.HollywoodAerialArts.com
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Grand illusion » » WOW! This guy came up with a different method for the Origami Illusion! (8 Likes)
 Go to page [Previous]  1~2~3 [Next]
[ Top of Page ]
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2020 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