|
|
|
|||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts 
|
Https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qvKSGDczUpo
Here is one variation I created, the revelation of the aces is quite different than the normal way and comes with a twist I have not seen in other versions. Method vice I would say it is on the same level of difficulty as the original, there are no difficult sleights to do especially if you omitt the stuff I do at the beginning. Tell me what you think. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
I am afraid you may take this wrong but I see lots issues.
It is very “procedure heavy”. Kind of “now I’m going to do this, now I’m going to do that” sort of thing. When you are getting the 7’s in order you flash the 7 of spades and then that becomes your lucky card. Kind of a bad thing. Plus it looks like you are doing WAY more than looking for queens. I know magicians look past all that and claim nobody will notice but they do. Just because a person can’t specifically name the move, in no way means they can’t see it or worse yet “feel” something happened. If they believe they have a solution, they do. I believe our goal is to leave them with “how could that possibly have happened?” No solutions at all. The biggest thing to me though is it becomes confusing as can be. It uses the queens, it needs a “lucky card”, then count down 7 cards and find a queen. Then you have piles for some reason, and you find the other “lucky cards. THEN you don’t count down 7 cards as before you just turn over the top cards of the outside piles and the entire middle pile. For a spectator this is really confusing. It is hard to track and make sense of. It is overload of procedure. Heck it is overload of effect. Are you finding queens or 7’s? Why does a 7 help you find a queen exactly? It is very muddled effect wise and procedure wise. I hope this helps. I know it sounds critical and I am sorry if it comes across that way. I don’t mean it to be.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jun 23, 2024, Dannydoyle wrote: Do you feel similarly about the normal sequence of finding the aces in the normal way of doing the Christ ace trick? As in the normal way you also have the seven face up and you count to get the ace. The next ace turns over but the third one is spelled. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
Why does that matter? That is a straw man argument. We’re talking about your presentation.
I don’t know if I’m familiar with the original because I find these tricks too procedure heavy and boring in general. If it is motivated I doubt I have a problem, if not then you probably do.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
R.S. Regular user CT one day I'll have 194 Posts
|
Yeah, I'm not a fan of using the 7s that way to find the queens. At any rate, every thing else can be cleaned up with a little tweaking. I too find the Henry Christ 4 Ace trick somewhat procedure heavy. That being said, some spectators might be fine with a good presentation of it. Good luck, and thanks for posting.
PS: Michael Ammar's version: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4fWy14IYrbU
"It is error only, and not truth, that shrinks from inquiry." Thomas Paine
|
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
I asked to get an idea if its my version that you have an issue with or if you dislike the original as well. Nothing to do with a strawman argument because it was not an argument in the first place just a question because I am interested in what kind of effects you like or dislike in general.
In your case I am actually more interested in effects you like. Do you like any four ace tricks? |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
I dislike, in general there are exceptions, effects in which the spectator is unnecessary. SO many cards tricks are about running through the magicians scales of card moves and the spectator is irrelevant.
I’d have to think more than I want to right now but I can’t name an effect I do that doesn’t in some way involve, fairly heavily, the audience. Magicians WAY overestimate how much entertainment value is in Magic alone. The audience needs to be engaged. I am not a fan of “more I’m going to do this” magic. And no in general I’m not a fan of 4 ace effects. There are innumerable effects that involve spectators.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
I see. I think I agree on some level because when I perform for people I never do these types of effects to them. I always do effects that involve the spectators.
What effects do you like that use cards? Im asking to get an idea of an effect that would fit into your criteria of being a good effect as well as one that you personally like. |
|||||||||
|
Nikodemus Inner circle 1343 Posts
|
I like effects that leave spectators thinking "WHAT??? THAT"S IMPOSSIBLE!!!" rather than "ho hum, very clever".
I wasn't familiar with the Christ's Aces effect, but I just watched a couple online (including Michael Ammar's). I think they all suffer from being too procedural, and lack of spectator involvement, as mentioned by Danny. The version you have created is interesting as an exercise in creativityi - but, in my personal opinion, a variation of something that is inherently rather boring. If you want to do an effect with Aces, then I would suggest there are many Ace productions that are much more immediate and entertaining (although generally no audience involvement). Or you could do Spectator Cuts The Aces (which obviously involves the spectator!) Or there is a Jennings effect where the performer and spectator take turns to cut Aces into the deck, but all four magically come back to the top - i.e losing and re-finding the Aces, which is similar in overall effect to the Christ effect. If you want something somewhat procedural, from a shuffled deck, then Pre-Prefiguration is (for me) more powerful, direct and clear than the Christ Aces. I hope this is helpful. PS. It seems to me the most suspicious thing when you are looking for the Queens is the cheesy running commentary. Trying to verbally justify your actions just draws attention to them. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
What it comes to for me is more the performance, than the effect. I am a fan of routines, any routines, that involve and engage an audience.
It occurs to me so often that in magic things disappear all the time, and there is never any sense of loss. Nobody cares. Engage an audience. Card to impossible location works great. But have them shuffle, have them select cards have the cards do whatever but engage an audience. (And do tricks “for” or “with” people, not “to” them.) At the heart of it magic is a performance art. It comes to that. This can take many forms, and it can be done in different ways. If performance for you means that people sit and watch you go through procedures, then there is not a single thing wrong with this. (It simply is not how I do things.) It can mean something different to everyone and everyone can be right. I think in my entire one hour plus close up show I do one demonstration effect. Dice Stacking, and it still engages the audience. As for cards one of my favorite card effects to engage the audience is the multiple selections. I close the show with it and it literally involves everyone at the table. (Usually 14 or so.) The way I do things is by no means the only way and I am not even claiming it is the right way. (Not sure the IS a right way anyhow.) It is however the right way for me. The observations I made of your performance may or may not be valid for how you do things in the situation you find yourself working in. Take it all for what it is. In the end just one more opinion. Ok I have seen versions of this trick, I am not a fan of it at all. I do not like tricks at all that involve spelling and the double cut. Ugh.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
I personally like effects with procedures, I like the christ four ace trick myself. But I also don't think its that strong for spectators so I don't perform it to them. Its one of those things where my personal taste in what I find fun to go through and practice does not align with what I think most spectators find most enjoyable to watch.
You are right Nikodemus, this was "an exercise in creativity". Spectator cuts to the aces is one effect that I do perform for spectators, that gets a good reception. Danny, I am curious about the way you do multiple selections. That is one effect that I have put off for myself from doing because to me the impossibility of the effect hinges on the spectators thinking that the cards really are lost in the deck. If they think the cards are already in control and I know where they are, then the revelations become less impactfull. Do you have a way to get to that point? I personally have thought that for this effect I would need the spectators themselves put the cards in the deck and shuffle the deck afterwards which I don't have a way to do unless I use a heavily gimmcicked deck. Duplicates also would maybe work to add onto the deck afterwards. But most versions of this effect I see I think after the first few revelations the spectators already suspect that you have the cards stacked somehow if they even believe they were really lost in the first place. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
This is a good book on that subject. https://www.vanishingincmagic.com/magic-......-routine
The entire routine comes to presentation. If you are not engaged with the audience all is lost.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jun 24, 2024, Dannydoyle wrote: I havent read that one but I will buy it to study the plot. I have seen Docs version that he used to perform, I assume you are also familiar with it? Its certainly entertaining, but do you feel like it satisfies this condition that you wrote earlier "I believe our goal is to leave them with “how could that possibly have happened?” No solutions at all."? Going from memory in docs routine a riffle type selection of the cards is used and I feel this is justified because it makes the selection process easy and fast instead of having each card physically taken out by each spectator. The part that makes me doubtfull however is what happens after that. The cards are handled and mixed by the magician. I think most people know that magicians can control cards so would the spectators just think that it was clever manipulation and keeping track of the selections instead of thinking as you say "how could that have possibly happened"? Contrasting that with another version where the spectators each get a card, the magician hands the deck to the spectators and each spectator puts their own card into the deck and gets to shuffle as much as they like before handing the deck back to the magician. I feel like this latter way of handling the return of the cards is what I would like to have. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
Yea you think like a magician. According to your logic nobody should do card tricks because people know you can control cards. Again I repeat it is in the routine! If they are watching you thinking “how” you do it you have already lost the battle. This is my point of saying if they are not engaged all is lost.
Once more than 2 or 3 cards are selected, the idea that somehow you controlled all 14 of them is out the window. It actually works FOR you if they know you can control them because they will NEVER imagine how you can control 14 of them. If the selection process seems fair and if it seems as if they are taking them from different parts of the deck there is no problem. Again it is the engagement of the audience that matters. Once you start the revelations you do them from the top and bottom and the deck is constantly shifting they have no way to backtrack. You keep them moving and entertaining and more energetic until the end. My last revelation is the card on the wall. Deck splatters all over the place and trick done. Really you are overthinking this. If you can find a way to have each spectator freely select a card and put it back in the deck freely and shuffle the deck and then do the routine go for it. I await progress on this and the entertainment value it contains. In all of your questions you don’t really seem to consider entertainment value. This routine started at bars (As far as I can remember, I could be wrong.) and was intended to be worked along the bar. As the cards are selected people are drinking and having fun. Nobody is trying to track what is being done and nobody can really see because you are moving. Nobody is burning the deck. I get it. The mechanics of what we do can be important. They are essential to accomplish what it is we need to in order to claim “magic”. But getting caught up in it thinking it matters more than it does from the spectators point of view can be crippling. My point of view is purely from an entertainment perspective. Magic is not my hobby. I have never done magic for any reason other than being paid. That perspective is quite different from many.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
Yea you think like a magician. According to your logic nobody should do card tricks because people know you can control cards. Again I repeat it is in the routine! If they are watching you thinking “how” you do it you have already lost the battle. This is my point of saying if they are not engaged all is lost. Im not saying not to do pick a card tricks, its more nuanced than that. For example you and me both don't like the double undercut. If I remember correctly you have said that you think its unnatural and spectators will notice that. But you also say that if the spectators are having a good time and enjoy the presentation you can get away with things because they arent burning your hands or trying to figure things out. So there is some middle way here which is kind of what I am trying to find. For example if one card is selected and you merely find it, I think this effect in itself isn't that great. Of course you can still make it entertaining but if its just a simple control and revelation, its not maybe the most magical thing one could do. But if the way that single card is put back and the conditions are really fair, it elevates the magical effect. As an example in my own deck I always have a corner short and if I can I will classic force that card, give the deck to the spectator and have them shuffle it in themselves. That makes it in my opinion better than if I were to take that card myself and shuffle it into the deck. Quote:
Once more than 2 or 3 cards are selected, the idea that somehow you controlled all 14 of them is out the window. It actually works FOR you if they know you can control them because they will NEVER imagine how you can control 14 of them. If the selection process seems fair and if it seems as if they are taking them from different parts of the deck there is no problem. Again it is the engagement of the audience that matters. Once you start the revelations you do them from the top and bottom and the deck is constantly shifting they have no way to backtrack. You keep them moving and entertaining and more energetic until the end. My last revelation is the card on the wall. Deck splatters all over the place and trick done. Really you are overthinking this. Do you use the riffle method that Doc also uses to have the cards selected? Quote:
If you can find a way to have each spectator freely select a card and put it back in the deck freely and shuffle the deck and then do the routine go for it. I await progress on this and the entertainment value it contains. I have a few different ideas for this. Having the cards forced would be the easiest way, then doing an add on of dupes when gathering the deck back from the spectator. But it would not work with as large number as 14. I think around 6 cards would be okay. Another idea I had would let the choosing of the cards be free but requires the deck be switched after the cards are selected before they are put back into it. Quote:
In all of your questions you don’t really seem to consider entertainment value. This routine started at bars (As far as I can remember, I could be wrong.) and was intended to be worked along the bar. As the cards are selected people are drinking and having fun. Nobody is trying to track what is being done and nobody can really see because you are moving. Nobody is burning the deck. You perform for sober people also? Have you changed the routine method vice or taken it into account then to account for your audience not being in the same state that people in bars are? Quote:
I get it. The mechanics of what we do can be important. They are essential to accomplish what it is we need to in order to claim “magic”. But getting caught up in it thinking it matters more than it does from the spectators point of view can be crippling. My point of view is purely from an entertainment perspective. Magic is not my hobby. I have never done magic for any reason other than being paid. That perspective is quite different from many. I asked because in your original analysis of my effect you pointed out things like when I cull the queens it would be noticed by spectators. The cull was not that well done in the video and the reversal of the card also not a move you want a camera to burn your hands as you do it. But if I were to perform this effect for real people the same thing would apply, they would not be burning my hands when that card gets reversed. I did it for the camera to show that the setup that needs to be done is easy to do. But in real situation getting there would be different. This is what I mean when I mentioned by the middle way, that there are things that we overthink when the spectators don't notice but as you also often point out spectators do notice more things than we might think. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
I believe the double undercut, as used in general magical card practice, should be removed from polite society. I think there should be a Constitutional Amendment banning it along with Astro Turf, the designated hitter, instant replay for the officials, 12 round championship boxing matches, The Ascanio Spread, spelling tricks, the four robbers, the shootout in overtime hockey and the Banana Bandana trick.
As for if you have a card selected and then merely find it well… if that is how you do magic that is on you. I never do things like that. I indeed use a riffle method. I work in the real world and time matters. As for your idea here is what you seem to miss. IF THEY THINK that the cards are freely selected, then THEY ARE. This is my point about engaging them. Don’t appear to care where they stop. Don’t let it look like you care in the least what is going on with the deck. Forget about the deck and so will they. You want to have some silly self imposed whatever so you want to cut down more than half the effect. Serious question here. Have you ever heard spectators tell stories about things you do after you have done them, and they describe things you never did? This works in your favor. This is why you engage them. You control that perception. In the end they THINK you did all those things you want to do, and you don’t have to actually do them. It is how magic has been done from the beginning. Why change it? It is why eyewitness testimony is so unreliable. People just can’t remember. So why not take advantage of that instead of imposing some ridiculous conditions on yourself that you can never live up to. In Poker you don’t need for aces if they THINK you have 4 aces. Work smarter not harder. Now if you want to fool your family or friends or buddies at the magic club maybe the rules are different. I have no idea. Do I perform for sober people? Dude NOT everyone at a bar is drunk. As a matter of fact yea I perform for people who spend $250 per ticket and not too many are drunk at all. If you believe everyone in a bar is drunk you need to get out more. As you are culling you are, as pointed out above using kind of boring cheesy patter. Nothing to do but to look at your hands. You are describing that you are looking for the queens, you are babbling about a lucky card so OF COURSE they will burn your hands. Then you flash the set up prior to the reverse so you can get ready. I’m sorry but the entire presentation is “now I’m going to do this, and now I’m going to do that” and it just naturally makes them look at the cards.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
Serious question here. Have you ever heard spectators tell stories about things you do after you have done them, and they describe things you never did? This works in your favor. This is why you engage them. You control that perception. In the end they THINK you did all those things you want to do, and you don’t have to actually do them. It is how magic has been done from the beginning. Why change it? I have yes. The reason why in particular I am thinking of wanting to have the spectators shuffle the cards into the deck when doing a multiple selection routine is because I feel like it will make a difference. I feel like people do notice and think that if they get to shuffle the deck it matters and makes it more impossible. But that's just my gut feeling. Quote:
As you are culling you are, as pointed out above using kind of boring cheesy patter. Nothing to do but to look at your hands. You are describing that you are looking for the queens, you are babbling about a lucky card so OF COURSE they will burn your hands. Then you flash the set up prior to the reverse so you can get ready. I flashed as in one of the sevens was showed being near the face of the deck for a longer duration than necessary because I missed one of the sevens I was culling so I had to go back in the spread to recull it. I really doubt that spectators would notice a single seven showing in the spread and then connect that later to the seven that shows up. I don't think they take note of the cards like that especially when there is no reason to notice once card like that when its not significant to what is happening. But yeah it was not the smoothest cull but done better there would be no flash there. It wasnt a flash of a move in that sense that there was anything else to see than that seven showed up in the spread for some time because I separated the deck at that point. Nothing about the lucky card was mentioned at that point so I don't think they would be looking at that seven at that point. I originally wanted to start the effect from the setup already being in place but I chose to do it on the camera so that it shows its not a difficult setup where the cards need to be in all kind of weird places in the deck for the trick to work. Quote:
I’m sorry but the entire presentation is “now I’m going to do this, and now I’m going to do that” and it just naturally makes them look at the cards. I understand, but the setup I did on camera was never something that was meant to be burned and showed to the spectator in the first place. Quote:
Do I perform for sober people? Dude NOT everyone at a bar is drunk. As a matter of fact yea I perform for people who spend $250 per ticket and not too many are drunk at all. If you believe everyone in a bar is drunk you need to get out more. I know. But you said the people there are different and more lax etc. not burning your hands and that is why you can get away with different things and don't have to worry about people burning your hands so much. So I asked if you perform the effect differently if you don't perform under that same type of atmosphere. When performing for a camera there is no one to interract with. There is no way to misdirect from stuff. The camera sees everything there is to see. Its not like that in the real world. The double undercut you mentioned as one thing you dislike. But what about riffling and fiddling with the back of the deck? You use your thumb to get a break for a double on camera and people say its obvious you are doing something. Similar thing happens with the riffle force method, if I remember how Doc uses it there is a need to use the thumb at the back of the deck to release a card after every force and retake the break afterwards. If you do that to a camera while still not having people to interract with, of course it will look bad. But like you said its different when you are performing and can move around and interract with people. Its nothing like having a still camera burning your hands while you yourself are still in the frame. |
|||||||||
|
Dannydoyle Eternal Order 21560 Posts
|
You certainly have a lot of excuses lol. Why ask questions? Just keep doing what you are.
Also please for the love of everything stop saying “more impossible”. It is such a magician thing. Singing is impossible or not. It is an absolute state and not subject to gradation. Once the spectator thinks something is impossible, exactly how do you think it gets more so? If it can it wasn’t impossible in the first place l was it? I really think you worry too much about magical thinking. I don’t think I said people are more lax at a bar. I really don’t. People are made more relaxed by your performance where you just don’t seem to want to understand this. So let’s be done. No more questions. You’re not going to listen anyhow.
Danny Doyle
<BR>Semper Occultus <BR>In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act....George Orwell |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
You certainly have a lot of excuses lol. Why ask questions? Just keep doing what you are. I asked because you said the routine was specifically made for bars. I wanted to know if you have modified it or do something differently in non bar enviroments. But aside from that I asked questions because I am interested in particular in the types of effects that you feel like are worthy to perform for you. Quote:
Also please for the love of everything stop saying “more impossible”. It is such a magician thing. Singing is impossible or not. It is an absolute state and not subject to gradation. Granted, I guess my doubt is that people really feel that a multiple selection and then location effect is "impossible" in the first place. [/quote]I really think you worry too much about magical thinking. Quote:
I don’t think I said people are more lax at a bar. I really don’t. People are made more relaxed by your performance where you just don’t seem to want to understand this. I was responding to this: "This routine started at bars (As far as I can remember, I could be wrong.) and was intended to be worked along the bar. As the cards are selected people are drinking and having fun. Nobody is trying to track what is being done and nobody can really see because you are moving. Nobody is burning the deck. " If you had not brought up the bar in the first place and mentioned that people are drinking and having fun and no one is burning the deck or tracking what is being done I would not have asked that question. Quote:
So let’s be done. No more questions. You’re not going to listen anyhow. I do listen Danny. |
|||||||||
|
1tepa1 Inner circle 1330 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jun 25, 2024, 1tepa1 wrote: |
|||||||||
| The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » The workers » » Henry Christ four ace trick variation (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
| Go to page 1~2~3 [Next] | ||||||||||
Posted: Jun 23, 2024 05:46 pm 
| [ Top of Page ] |
|
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.1 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 < 
|