|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts 
|
Quote:
On Mar 22, 2019, Melephin wrote: Unless you choreograph the Flushtration Count so that the spectators are looking away from the cards every single time you thumb the top card into the taking hand, then it’s not a guaranteed move. It can’t be. It relies on a discrepancy. I agree that attitude, timing, gaze management, context, and a dozen more presentational factors are critical to the move’s success. But it’s silly to argue that they make the move totally bulletproof. One more time for the cheap seats: If the spectator sees the take of the top card, the move is subject to failure. |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 27, 2019, lynnef wrote: Point of order: Just because a move offers convenience in handling doesn’t mean it’s a good or worthy move. |
|||||||||
The Burnaby Kid Inner circle St. John's, Canada 3158 Posts
|
Point of personal privilege: Oodles of green noodles make blue poodles jump der shtroodle.
JACK, the Jolly Almanac of Card Knavery, a free card magic resource for beginners.
|
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 27, 2019, The Burnaby Kid wrote: Hold on let me put that to a beat. |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
The idea that every sleight within an effect must be 'best in its class' is a fallacy and can make for artistic mud. I believe it is a philosophy given rise by the youtube generation who view all card magic through a lens and perform to a lense whereby every move must be "bullet proof".
This is a horrible way of thinking. The whole is greater than the sum of its parts. The magic must bewilder. It is a piece of performance art. Not a series of moves. Things should flow. Most sleights have a time and place. The expert knows where, how, and when to use them. |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 27, 2019, magicfish wrote: Where did I say that? I simply pointed out the (seemingly self-evident) fact that a discrepancy cannot fool everyone and will not "work perfectly," as stated above. |
|||||||||
EllisJames52 New user Pittsburgh PA 51 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, Rupert Pupkin wrote: Discrepancies can fool everyone. The performer needs the right attitude and the right misdirection. Audience's aren't cameras. They can't rewind, pause, or zoom in. |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
Bingo.
|
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, EllisJames52 wrote: As stated above, if you choreograph the Flushtration Count so that the spectator is looking away every single time the take happens -- thus eliminating the visual discrepancy -- then sure, it's foolproof. This isn't rocket science. Quote:
Audience's aren't cameras. Correct. They're thinking adults with miraculous brains that are capable of interpreting millions of vanishingly minute bits of information. At the end of the day you're flashing the bottom card over and over. We can only do so much to hide that (let's be honest, boneheaded) fact. Quote:
Discrepancies can fool everyone. An incredible sentence that requires no further comment. |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
"An incredible sentence that requires no further comment."
I disagree. I feel it could use further comment as there may be some here who doubt it. Discrepancies can indeed fool everyone. And they do. Some make very good livings with them. |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, magicfish wrote: The floor is yours! |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
"At the end of the day you're flashing the bottom card over and over. We can only do so much to hide that"
Correct. And sometimes it doesn't need to be hidden at all. |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, magicfish wrote: This... isn't an argument? |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, magicfish wrote: Like when? |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, Rupert Pupkin wrote: I'm not sure what you mean? |
|||||||||
|
Rachmaninov Inner circle 1076 Posts
|
Ellisjames52, your post goes right into my notes…thanks…
|
|||||||||
|
jason ladanye Loyal user 254 Posts
|
I'm only here for the comments...
::eats popcorn:: |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, Rupert Pupkin wrote: Like when the audience believes you have a packet of identical cards. See Ortiz' writings about conviction. The flushtration count casually, subtly, shows them what they already know. You're almost doing them a favour by giving them a final glimpse. Take Williamson's genius action of moving a coin around his upturned palm with his opposing thumb. If he used it to say "look, there is a coin in my hand" it wouldn't fly. But that is the case. When we see him pretend to move the coin we believe it because we just saw it go in there. We are already convinced there is a coin there so his subtle repositioning is psychological bamboozlement- not unlike the flushtration count. |
|||||||||
|
Rupert Pupkin Inner circle 1452 Posts
|
Quote:
On Mar 28, 2019, magicfish wrote: None of that makes the discrepancy go away. It only works to reinforce its deceptiveness. |
|||||||||
|
magicfish Inner circle 7016 Posts
|
Who said anything about making the discrepancy go away?
|
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Sleights that wont fool anyone (26 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Mar 27, 2019 08:42 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.02 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 < 
|