|
|
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] | ||||||||||
IanB Loyal user Derby 262 Posts |
El Mystico
If you have a complaint about the video demo then take that up with Mark Mason at JB Magic. Your complaint DOES NOT give you the right to expose the method. I am angry and bitterly disappointed that you chose to do so. Exposure of this kind is unethical and wrong. The demo is no more misleading than many other adverts in magic. Only laypeople and inexperienced magicians would not understand the context in what is being said and done. Your comment "In short, the only benefit of this approach is being able to show the cards mixed to begin with." Whilst you're entitled to your opinion you are incorrect and misleading in your assessment. The major benefits are:- The cards can be shown mixed at every step of the way. The cards can be shuffled by the spectator. There is no traditional switch of the packets as in the original version. (contrary to your comment). The demo clearly shows that. Again, your comment "But there is already a popular approach which begins with a shuffled pack (Lorayne and JC Wagner immediately spring to mind)" All current versions of OOTW that I know of do not have the clean appearance of "Perfect World". I personally love Harry Lorayne's Out of this Universe and I use it often. "Perfect World" is different and a real killer for laypeople. It never fails to get a strong reaction. The stucture and routining are different to any other version currently available because of its clean look. Yes it uses a gimmicked deck but so does the "Invisible Deck". Yes the principle could be considred old (what' new in magic?) but why trivialise it with these trite meaningless comments? "Perfect World" is strong enough to close any Close-Up routine. It's that good. I've seen this kind of poor posting too many times on the Café. I never thought that it would happen to me. |
|||||||||
tache magic New user 51 Posts |
Wow! this looks like a great trick
|
|||||||||
coops New user 97 Posts |
It's a pity that this topic has become a discussion about the marketing exploits of the dealers rather than a constructive review of the trick.
It is fairly obvious that it's a gimmick deck due to the price for what is primarily a 'deck of cards'. I would criticise JB Magic for their approach but I find this quite typical of them It seems a shame that they constantly refer to this being a regular deck and this has now overpowered this discussion. I am an admirer of Ian's magic and if we had the benefit of watching him perform the effect then I am sure we would have a different view overall. Don't worry to much about the comments on here Ian, I have come to learn its part of the norm! Regards Coops (Alan - LMC) |
|||||||||
El Mystico Special user 573 Posts |
Ian;
I'm sorry you feel that way about my review, but I understand why you do. I hope one day we get the chance to meet. Let me try to be clearer and maybe to clear the air a bit. There are two aspects - the trick and the marketing. The marketing 99% of my problem is with the way this is marketed. One comment above says that at this price, it has to be a gimmicked deck. I disagree - a) this assumes a good degree of familiarity with magic. But a beginner could easily stumble on the JB site. b) while one might anticipate more than an instruction sheet, and that some gimmick is involved, I think that after FOUR verbal references to it being an ordinary deck and one written reference,I think the average viewer would be forgiven for thinking that an ordinary deck was involved. To me this is a major issue, as a professional performer would be competely focused on the geddinta and geddouta of the trick. And having to ring in a gimmicked deck has a major impact on this. Ian compared the fact that the deck is gimmicked to the invisible deck. But even Penguin Magic says "The Invisible Deck, which does 99% of the work for you..." with the clear implication of the deck being gimmicked. Ian compains it is unethical to expose the method. Honestly, I really understand his gripe. You'll see my original post has been edited to remove references to the specific gimmick. But to be honest I was so incensed by the way this was marketed, that I wanted to bend over backwards to highlight how wrong the marketing was. It was the original marketing that was clearly unethical, and I don't notice Ian criticising that. As far as I recall I have never done anything like this before. And my only, paltry, excuse to Ian is that, even knowing how the deck was gaffed, very few people would be able to reproduce it. My sole aim was to let potential buyers know of a major issue with the trick. A number of people have commented, in effect "why be surprised at the lies?", but to my mind, unless we magicians take a stand against unethical dealers, we are all the losers. I would be interested to hear from anyone who disagrees with this. Ian - how do you feel about unethical adverts? Ian; I HAVE taken up my complaint with JB marketing. I did that first of all. To date they have not changed the way they have marketed your effect. Which is why, having warned them, I am publicising my criticism. I would not be doing it otherwise. 2) The trick Let me be clear - the trick itself has strengths, and there will be situations where it will be appropriate. But - these will only be situations where you can ring in the deck, or use it as your only card trick. Ian; You say your version is a killer - and I believe it. But - so is the original. So the issue is whether the benefits outweigh the deck switch. You say "The cards can be shown mixed at every step of the way." This is completely true, and to my mind the major plus of the effect. Although I think it would only be a benefit to people already familiar with OOTW. You say "There is no traditional switch of the packets as in the original version. (contrary to your comment). The demo clearly shows that." To be honest, I find this comment misleading. Now, I don't know how to handle this without exposing the method once again, but, to quote your instructions; "the remaining half is handled similar to the other except that once you've stripped out the kings and turned them face down the upper red king is placed back onto the face of the deck and the black one is placed into the centre. now turn the deck face up end for end and spread..." Now hopefully thst is sufficiently obscure for people not familiar with OOTW to have no idea what I am talking about, but for people familar with it to see that you are in the same situation at the end as you are with the traditional method. Let me repeat - I have no issue with Ian. I think he has come up with an interesting alternative to OOTW, which will be highly appropriate in certian situations. But I object strongly to the way JB are marketing this effect. I have heard many comments, but have yet to hear anyone describe it as "ethical". |
|||||||||
Review King Eternal Order 14446 Posts |
I saw the demo and didn't like it. The original version and some other takes on it look better. Anyone that knows a little about audience management and their craft can get past the discrepency issue of one of the piles.
"Of all words of tongue and pen,
the saddest are, "It might have been" ..........John Greenleaf Whittier |
|||||||||
stevenamills Veteran user 397 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-01-16 12:05, IanB wrote: Does anyone else find this more than a little sad? Later..... sam |
|||||||||
magik1 Regular user 114 Posts |
I feel I have to make a comment about what el mystico said. If you perform magic for a living or at corporate events etc then you would not be buying gimmick's or gimmicked decks because you should know that you can normally never use them. The perfect world effect is also too long to perform at a table in a real performing situation when you have maybe 12 to 20 tables to get round. If you really perform shows/gigs then you should know this as soon as you watch the demo video. Also there is normally not much room at a table so there is no way you would have room to lay the cards or deal them onto the table.
Even if the adverts says Regular deck you should also know that your not going to get a regular deck and instructions for £30. Also you mentioned that a beginner might stumble across the jb site and be mislead buy the comments " a regular deck". Most beginners would probably not buy a trick for £30 as a first trick althought this is just my opinion. I'm not saying I agree with false advertising but I'm just saying that you should know by watching a video demo that an effect can or cannot be used in a real performance situation. Magik |
|||||||||
IanB Loyal user Derby 262 Posts |
Dear all
Since some negative posts have been received re. the demo on JBTV I have spoken to them and they have removed it from the web-site and are going to re-shoot it sometime in the future, removing the references that have caused concern. They have also agreed to change some of the wording in the ad itself. I am disappointed that the thread developed negatively in the way that it did so hopefully Café members will see this as a positive move forward. I am very proud of Perfect World and I do not want anything to detract from that. Finally, a big thank you to all those who have sent kind messages of support. |
|||||||||
Jon Beetham New user Newcastle 71 Posts |
I am eager to see this effect, unfortunately couldn't see the movie at JB..
|
|||||||||
JarrodHenry Regular user 133 Posts |
Gotta admit, having watched the video and read the original marketing.. I'm not too convinced. The revised marketing doesn't do too much for me short of making me convinced that this is an out of this world. I also noticed that they removed the packet switch line, so I won't comment on that (because there IS a switch) , but I have to admit that I don't like the fact that its gimmicked.
Audiences nowadays tend to think all cards are gimmicked, and regularly I'm used to them having figured out Svengali gimmicks, stripper deck gimmicks, and rough smooth gimmmicks. If I hand this deck to a spec to shuffle, can he do an over hand or riffle shuffle with the faces visible? (Trust me.. it's come up) |
|||||||||
Paul Inner circle A good lecturer at your service! 4409 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-01-22 11:53, magik1 wrote: Interesting observation. NO version of Out of This World is suitable for table hopping (except maybe at a magic club with a reset break between tables). And yes, any pro. would know that. However, surely "real world" performing is simply performing for anyone live, whether it be family, friends, whatever. Truth is, pro. entertainers are not big buyers, the hobbyists and beginners are those that spend the most so may never be using an effect whizzing around banquet tables anyway. Some good tricks you save for the right occassion, anybody with any wit should be able to determine how best to use a trick and the best conditions to do it in. Ian himself is an experienced table hopper, award winning close upper and long time magician, (I think I've worked with him at least twice at larger functions) but certainly not used to marketing anything. How a dealer decides to market your effect, word an advert etc. is not something they generally discuss with trick originators before they post ads. After all this hoo ha it will be very interesting to see how Dean Dill and Mike's version gets reviewed here if expectations are so very high. Paul. |
|||||||||
El Mystico Special user 573 Posts |
As the chief critic on this one, I'd like to give a big thank you to both Ian and JB magic for changing the ad. It is a rare step to take, and makes them all round good guys.
I'd like to restate - my problems were never with the trick, but with JB' marketing. And I'm sure the original misleading statements were just due to overenthusiasm for the trick. Is it a Perfect World? Is it the best version? I think the answer depends on individual performing situations. Like most of us, I am very keen on the original version. however, this one does have the clear advantage of being able to show the cards mixed at every stage, before the climax. My biggest concern with the original marketing was the claim that the deck was regular; However in reality, if you were performing other card tricks with the deck, you would need to do a deck switch. Well, elsewhere on the forum is a brilliant deck switch which would work perfectly for this: using it would increase the practicality of the trick enormously for many. You'll find it here http://www.themagiccafe.com/forums/viewt......;forum=2 I'd also like to apologise to those who found my original exposure harmful. Dom |
|||||||||
Jon Allen V.I.P. England 1771 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-01-24 10:19, Paul wrote: Hi Paul, I have a version of Out of This World I do for walkaround and table hopping. There is no table required and it resets instantly. It's called "Executive Decision". Jon
Creator of iconic magic that you will want to perform.
The Silent Treatment, The Pain Game, Paragon 3D, Double Back, Destination Box and more. Available at www.onlinemagicshop.co.uk |
|||||||||
matthew leatherbarrow Loyal user 240 Posts |
Hello,
Jay Sankey also teaches a faster-paced version of Out of This World, I think it appears on the Three Ring Circus DVD. Typically of Mr Sankey, his version is very suitable for table hopping and it uses a regular deck. On another note, I am glad JB did not ‘mess-up’ the marketing for my effect. Marketing can clearly cause many problems; it’s a tricky issue I guess. Matt Leatherbarrow |
|||||||||
Larry Davidson Inner circle Boynton Beach, FL 5270 Posts |
Quote:
On 2005-01-24 11:55, Jon Allen wrote: U.F. Grant's method also requires no reset. Magik1, your comment that "professional magicians" don't use gimmicked decks is simply wrong. Some do and some don't, and those who do may or may not use a gimmicked deck(s) in a particular venue or situation. |
|||||||||
El Mystico Special user 573 Posts |
Completely back this up. Professional magicians will use the best technique for achieving the strongest end effect - whether that is sleight of hand, self workers or gimmicked decks.
Bear in mind that one of the greatest exponents of sleight of hand this century - Vernon - invented one of the finest gimmicked decks - the Brainwave. |
|||||||||
JarrodHenry Regular user 133 Posts |
Mystico:
Agreed. My main beef with gimmicked decks comes from the fact that a lot of the gimmicks out there today seem to be more focused on doing the work for the magi without any real patter. The brainwave (Which, admittingly I do not own) , seems to be more psychological (as Vernon LOVED psychological effects) and requires a good routine/patter. |
|||||||||
IanB Loyal user Derby 262 Posts |
JarrodHenry
The purpose of Perfect World is not to do the work of the magician but to add extremely strong convincers that amplify greatly to the overall effect on the spectator. I personally love Harry Lorayne's OOTU and I use it often. Some magicians love gimmicked decks, others hate them. C'est La Vie. |
|||||||||
JarrodHenry Regular user 133 Posts |
Can my spectator flip the cards over and look at them after they shuffle? Or can they shuffle to see the faces? You say that they won't turn it 180 degrees when they pick them up.. must be a UK thing, because seriously, it happens all the time over here, in most every card game I play and every card trick I do.. the deck gets flopped 180 degrees.
|
|||||||||
magik1 Regular user 114 Posts |
In my opionion brainwave deck and invisible deck are exceptions in a real performing situation as they are killer effects and automatically reset. They are also direct and quick to perform, I was pointing out that OOTW could not be peformed at a close-up show as the effect lasts too long and needs a table. I am aware that there are gimmicked decks out there that can be used in table hopping situations but there are not many of them, as most of the ones that are out there do not reset or cannot be examined unless switched. magik
|
|||||||||
The Magic Cafe Forum Index » » Tricks & Effects » » Perfect World - JB Magic (0 Likes) | ||||||||||
Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4 [Next] |
[ Top of Page ] |
All content & postings Copyright © 2001-2024 Steve Brooks. All Rights Reserved. This page was created in 0.06 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 < |