Okay - calling all coin experts. I've been cutting my teeth on some great new coin assembly routines, courtesy of Dean Dill’s DVD’s (thanks Dean!). I am having trouble ditching the shells at the end of the trick. Any suggestions on ways to get the shells off of the coins unobtrusively so the coins can be offered out for examination? I’ve tried tossing them into classic palm and then doing a shuttle pass, retaining the shell and tossing the coin, but it doesn’t look right. It’s even more difficult when there are several shells in play.

Any thoughts?

I don't know how useful this is likely to be to you (there are coin workers on this forum far better qualified to call themselves "experts" than I am), but I've recently been experimenting with using Kainoa Harbottle's Steeplechase Discrepancy move (from Curtis Kam's Palms of Steel 1) to unload a ]. Basically, I just leave the ] in fp as I bring the coin out balanced on the thumb in the first action of the move.

This seems to give a very convincing display of empty hands, while still bringing the ] cleanly and silently out of play.

After the move, I usually l-p the gaff, or load it back onto a coin directly from fp as I gather them up again after examination.

Hope that helps.

Cheers,

Cy.

Cy, I think that's inspired. But what do I know, I hang out with Kainoa.

To my fellow Esq,I'd suggest the method described by Hofzinser and others, it seems to work. The ['d coin begins on the second and third fingertips, or, if it's natural for you, simply balanced on the middle fingertip. As you turn the hand over to table the coin, the [ is first presssed into classic palm. This can be fast and relatively angle friendly.

See the David Neighbors sources for more exotic approaches.

Please refrain from offerring the props for examination on a regular basis. At the end, they should want to touch You.

I use a technique very similar to the one Curtis mentioned, however, it differs slightly in that I spread the coins out in my right hand, the ] is in open classic palm, upside down, and the shelled coin is exposed. Then it's a matter of simply turning the hand over, letting all fall to the fingers (except the ]), setting them down on the mat, and spreading them out. Of course, for a single ] this is easily done with a very natural look. For multiple ]'s (which I rarely use in a routine), I take each coin from the left hand, into the right, and pretty much do exactly what Curtis descibed, retaining one in classic, and one in either thumb clip or finger palm.

I'm not a big fan of handing out my props at the end of a routine, so this isn't a big problem for me typically. There are many ways to sell the coins as being "real" without giving away the farm

Best,

Mike

But I'm a shell of the man I used to be so that's not possible.

I find that pushing into classic palm from 2nd and 3rd fingertip balance works perfectly. There's really no need to do anything fancier.

The thing Ross Bertram described via Stars of Magic... having a coin stick to the base of your fingers... works quite well for me. Coins just stick there. So... no shell or coin ditching issues here. They just stick to my hand and I move on.

HOWEVER, to be certain... probably worth putting the thing on a line to your holdout. That way, when the time comes... the goodies go away and the system keeps stuff in place till next time. MUCH more organized than traffic management in your pockets. A clink at the wrong time can kill a magic moment. Better to be safe and sure than clever and sorry.

I like to have the coins examined before I use them, saying, "I'm going to perform something that will look miraculous, and I don't want you to think I'm using trick coins".
Nobody asks to examine anything at the end of the trick, because they already did. Also, many routines end with coins in the spec's hands, so there isn't an issue.

Eric

Personally, I would refrain from using the expression "trick coins". One would hope that the layperson is completely unaware of the existence of gaffed coins, and the last thing you want to do is suggest to them that such things exist. What I'll usually say is something like, "Have you ever seen coins like these before? Here -- take a look at them." This way, you're giving them an opportunity to examine the coins without explicitly trying to prove that they're real.

I think laymen know of the concept of magical props, otherwise there would be no such thing as magic shops. Why else would a person EVER ask to examine ANYTHING, if there were no such thing.

Why do even the best magicians, at times, give props out to be examined?

I don't believe that using the term "trick coins", especially said with the right attitude, would ever be any type of epiphany to a spectator.

Eric Grossman

I think that in most cases, spectators want to examine props because of an innate distrust of the world, especially of magicians. Someone may or may not know of the existence of "trick coins", but the simple fact that we approach them (or they approach us) to watch a magic trick, turns their suspicion meters on high. People don't want to be fooled, or made to look stupid, so the immediate defense mechanism is to unveil the secret... to show everyone how clever they are. On the other hand, most people really enjoy leaving the boundaries of the norm, and seeing an amazing magical effect. It creates a notable inconsistency. If at all possible, I try to develop a comfort level and trust factor prior to flying into a routine. This seems to make what I'm doing OK with the spectators, lowers their defenses, and allows them to enjoy what they see, instead of taking me as a challenge to overcome. This is how I get away with not having to show my props most of the time.

Best,

Mike

Eric, I wasn't trying to slam you in any way and I apologize if I gave you that impression. I was merely suggesting that we don't go out of our way to tell people that there are gaffed coins out there. I totally agree with you that, if said with tongue in cheek, most people wouldn't even make the connection.

However, Bobo's book is my personal bible when it comes to coin work, and in it, he stresses (forgive me if I don't know the exact page number) that the existence of gaffed coins should be one of magic's most closely guarded secrets. I tend to agree.

A stage magician hands out props for examination because it's easy for an audience to just assume that it's a trick box or a trick sword or whatever. With coin magic and close up in general, your audience has to believe you're using ordinary objects or there's no magic. When a spectator closes their hand around a silver coin and finds it changed to copper when they open their hand again, it's important that they think you're responsible for the change; otherwise, they'll merely shrug and say, "Big deal."

Only at the start of the effect, if I felt the need, I would simply display the coins to the spec. (w/ the ]palmed), commenting on how interesting old coins look and if they desire to hold a walker or barber, I would let them. (Not many people other than numismatists or magi handle/see these coins).
After the magic, they will have no clue.

Just a thought

Routining your effects plays a very important role as to whether the spectator wants to examine the props or not. Whenever I perform, I always start out with some card or coin tricks where the laymen are either shuffling cards or holding the coins. In either case, they have held the props...the fact that throughout my routine I am switching gaffs in and out doesn't matter. They already held the props! Also very important is how you handle the audience...never "work for them"...become part of them...have fun with them...be as amazed as they are as to what just happened. Most important...be sincere!!! It's a simple little plan...but you know what...when you do this...they will never challenge you. One last note...you don't have to end "clean"...you just have to look "clean"...it's all in your attitude!

Mike

Since you are doing Dean Dill... what does he do and/or suggest?

Don't run when you are not being chased.

Never mention "trick coins" etc.

Smile more.

Rob,
I didn't take your remarks as a slam, at all. I wasn't trying to be defensive. I thought you raised a valid point, and I just wanted to voice my way of thinking, as a possible response.

By mentioning that "I don't want you to think I'm using trick coins", I really don't believe I'm giving anything away.

As you pointed out, if said with tongue in cheek, it's no more dangerous than the ever popular and cliched mention of smoke, mirrors, or trap doors. Not to mention the old, "nothing up the sleeve" remark.

Eric Grossman

I would tell 'em "I use trick hands, specially made just for this routine."

Thank you all for your posts and for your lively debate on letting spectators handle the props.

I suppose, like many things in magic it is mainly a matter of personal preference. In my (limited) experience, I have found that if I place the coins down after the routine and gesture to them, tacitly saying that they can be examined, a spectator might pick up one, turn it over in a cursory manner, and then put it down satisfied. If I don't offer it out, I often get a suspicious "can I see the coins?" If I ditch the ] at that point it's a bit trickier: any false transfer or purse palm I do it that point, looks all the more suspicious.

Pete – In the videos Dean Dill often replaces the ] on the coin, shows his hands clean, and the routine ends.

Wildstone - I have experimented with palming multiple ], one in each hand. I wasn't happy with the way this looked, since the routine uses four coins in addition to the two ]. I'm currently trying to work the ditching by placing one ungaffed coin on the fingers of each hand, and the ] coin in the palms. I then turn the hands over, letting the palmed coin drop from the still-palmed shell, and letting it clink onto the other coin, both now in finger tip rest, al the while keeping the now empty shells palmed. I then slap down the coins on the mat for the spectators to handle. My handling doesn't looked naturally yet, I'm hoping it's just a matter of more practice.

By the way, does anybody know if they make steel ] that can be vanished with the Raven? I don't want a shim my shells, as that may make them stick to the coins.

Since your [ has to match the coins you are using - unless you are using steel coins, you won't get a steel [

You need to get a shimmed shell - why do you say a shimmed shell will stick to your coins?

A shimmed shell just has a thin layer of steel inside. This will make the shell not cover the coin as completely - but it should not affect its ability to cover or uncover a coin.

That last move that you described, where you CP both shells and slap both hands down with the coins on the table... This is just my opinion, but I don't think that's a very natural move, which may be why you're having trouble making it look natural. Forget the ]'s, just do that move with the coins in your hands, I think you may find it looks awkward and forced, like there's some underlying reason that you're putting the coins down that way. I would think that CP-ing one and clipping the other as you transfer the coins from one hand to the other, and then to the table, would be a much more natural way of setting them down. Again, IMHO.

Best,

Mike

Wildstone - I just tried your handling. Much better, thanks!

Dan - I'll give it a shot, I have some shimming material. I use Johnson hald dollar ]s, and I've found that they cover the coins so exactly that even minor variations in humidity cause them to stick. Incidently, I've found that recent vintage halfs, such as 1990s and later tend to have less metal and thus are less prone to getting stuck in a ].