Does anyone know how David Blaine does that trick where he says think of a person that is real close to you. She says Meagan, he says think of a number and she says 31. Blaine says open your book to page 31 she opens it and a big flame pops out and burns the letter M on page 31. Please let me know

I think it was done using editing. He is notorious for that. We owe him a lot, as he has really got magic back in the main stream again, but his specials are a bit on the TV and motion picture FX side.

Some of what he does in them is not possible to perform in real time. If I am wrong about the book flame thing, I would love to know how it is done, as it was very strong.

I think it's called "pre-show" work... combined with "Creative Editing" of course... DAVID CHEATS! Seems to be a common thing with magicians named David on television...

My oh my.. what do you mean??
Not DAVID NIXON however...

I was disappointed to see Copperfield use "camera magic" on his latest special.

His skills are such that he doesn't need to "cheat" this way...

Are you talking about "Tornado of fire"? In this case, in which part could you see "camera magic"?

All the best,

Pablo Tejero

In the latest special, he used a bit of camera magic for his outdoor levitation of the sofa.

Also, if he truly did the "lasered in half" illusion closeup like that, the spectators would most likely see the gaff.

Even in his full stage show sitting halfway back, my girlfriend leaned over to me and whispered the exact working of the effect because basically it's very "angle-y" and she saw the workings quite clearly. It would never fool in bright sunlight at super close range.

Like blaine's specials, you see a lot of "creative editing" of spectators reacting, but you don't really know if they're truly reacting to what they are intercut with.

I did not put attention to it, because they were Copperfield's small details, which were complementing a bit, the great spectacle that he did really in the special.

What differentiates Copperfield's deception to that of Blaine, it is that DC "cheats" showing two details of the whole spectacle, doing them in the street. Whereas DB is deceptive at the moment of showing what is the major game that it is supposed that he does and its the reason of the video Street Magic, which is the levitation. When only the levitation is well looked, it turns out that is a lie.

I believe that the difference between the use of camera of one and of other one it is so far. While one uses it to add two details, to all 6 or 7 miracles that he has done in the special one, other one uses it to cheat at the moment of showing his best game, and what is the claim of the special one.

Bad or good, here is my opinion.

All the best magic,

Pablo Tejero

If you want to see Copperfield's best demonstration of why "Creative Editing" is stupid, check out the Statute of Liberty special and watch the audience in the studio during the levitation very closely!

That levi used 3 completely different systems and from what I've been told, 6 or more audience groups... one group would see the girl go up and down on the high end nearest the curtain... one group would see her move down stage, along the runway to the end and back... one group would see a short 3-4 ft. levi up and down at the end of the run way... everything was then edited and spliced to look like one single illusion system on the special... the audience is constantly changing however

I think that sometimes video editing is needed to preserve the integrity of magic, or the effect. If an effect was shown complete, without editing... how long would it take for your to put the VCR on slo-motion and find the secret?

Also, since Fox's "Magic Secrets Revealed" shows, I think a lot of people are used to seeing magic and saying, "Look, you can see how it's done." Or something similar. Television is very tricky in that people can record it and scrutinize it over and over. But take an effect that's been camera edited and make it look totally IMPOSSIBLE, then no matter how many times they play it in slo-motion, or scrutinize it, it will always seem like you did the impossible.

I just wouldn't base all my tricks on editing.



This could have also been done without editing, using pre-show preparation and a "stooge."

~Priest~

My favorite Blaine edit is an auditory overdub, where the dead fly is resurrected.

We all know how to put a fly in a catatonic state, so I won't get into secrets, but if you watch the routine, you'll hear Blaine say "Here officer, here's a fly that you killed with your own hands. . ." There is a remarkable loss of ambient street noise during this preface, and I gurantee that NYC cop never heard those words. The real world trickles back in immediately.

This may raise a few hackles, but I owe david blaine nothing. I feel I am very good at what I do, and it is the quality of my act that gets me the gigs--and thus perpetuates the phone calls.

I am not entirley resigned to the fact that magic needs "awareness ambassadors." I can prove it by pulling my cups out of the bag, asking the entire room what they think these are for, and the answer is nearly unanimous--all without the help of Mr. Blaine's dubious and irresponsible handlings of the classics.

--Ron

You mean he really can't levitate 3-4 feet off the ground. Say it isn't so!!!! My magically world has been SHATTERED!!!

Most magically yours,
WR

Camera Tricks? No.....They Would Not Even Think Of Doing That Would They?

All I know is this:

The year was 1982 or 1983. I was a very magically enthusiastic young magician, Copperfield was my "role model".

I thought I hit the jackpot when I was able to get a ticket to the see Magic of David Copperfield being taped at CBS! Maybe some other magicians can help me out there. This was the special that Ricardo Montalban (a great actor ) hosted.

After two hours watching David and Ricardo retape introductions, it became very clear that all the magic I was going to see was how David's smile reappeared over and over again with each retake.

The whole taping went on for probably 3 1/2 hours. I saw no stage illusions.

Later when the special really aired, I was overcome with the feeling all the magic was done in front of "another" audience, because I saw nothing but the audience during the taping I witnessed. Certainly not the show that became the final product.

I was really disappointed and consequently have not been all that impressed since.

It seems incredible how a conversation can turn out if it starts about anything of David Blaine...

When David Blaine uses camera 'editing' he doesn't actually do the whole trick with camera editing. What he does is he just takes a couple of tricks and combines them together to give a greater effect. From the people's view he is doing proper tricks. He has never once used camera trickery for a whole trick. Like the levitaion. Although he used the artificial version too with the camera he still performed a good real(balducci or whatever its called) levitation to the live viewers but he just changed it to give a greater effect. David Blaine never does a whole effect just by camera trickery. I hope someone aggrees with me.

With Blaine's "creative editing" he often leaves out phases of effects in order to make the final kickers seem more astonishing.

As far as the Balducci and other effects, do you really think he got it perfect the first time?

With the ability to reshoot and re-edit, he can blow an effect, then later cut and paste in the editing room to make it look like a complete miracle.

The problem is, is that there is an unwritten law in the mind of the spectators--that states that any employment of the camera as a means to an end is outside the artistic code. That includes editing out the billet section of a mindreading effect, hanging from a crane, filming it, and editing it so that the visceral screams appear to be reacting to you when you are 21/2 feet off the ground, as opposed to 4 inches.

I do not in any way discredit Blaine's odd intrigue, nor do I think any recorded reaction is false. I just happen to think it wrong to figurativley insert a six-pack where a pot belly resides--in the cutting room, if that makes sense.

By the way. Take a camera to southern California, and point it at some wannabe starlets, tell them you have a deal with Buena Vista, and perform a vinegar/baking soda merger while acting like some monotonous shaman, and they'll start screaming like Rain Man getting ready to board a plane.

But I doth protest too much.

--Ron

Just another thing:

I do not believe that itis fair that someone is, during the whole emission of a video, announcing the game he stars, the levitation, and when finally David Blaine does the levitation, it is a lie, it is a trick of camera. He do uses a trick of camera in his principal game.

I don´t mind if his name is
Blaine or another else, for me, what he does with the levitation it is an enormous deception, because hismajor miracle for the profane public, turns out to be also his major lie.

I think it is very easy to understand.

All the best magic,

Pablo Tejero

Does anyone know where I can get instuctions to the mindreading David Blaine was doing. It is a great trick.
The spectator should think of a number or a card and Blaine is watching their eyes and tells them the number or card that they think of.

I would love to learn that trick

pierre

I believe that this game about which you speak is a new demostration of David Blaine's " magic ".

I can be mistaken, but for me the game this totally prepared, and he is a pal who think the card. Or before, there has been some part of the game that they have not extracted on video, editing it in such a way that the effect was so miraculous, that it looks like that is cheating the people.

I do not believe that this way of doing magic is just either with the spectators or with the other magicians.

The magic needs skill, presentation, elegance, a lot of work and sacrifice. IT is not magic, they are special effects, deceptions, and so on. But the magic is an art, and to cheat the people it is not an art.

If you quarrel since this effect is realized say it to me, because it could be made us gods.

That´s my opinion. All the best magic.

Pablo Tejero