|
|
|
|||
| Go to page [Previous] 1~2~3~4~5~6~7~8~9~10~11 [Next] | ||||||||||
danHumphrey Veteran user 333 Posts 
|
Quote:
On Jan 18, 2024, dirtyfoucault wrote: I don't think that's the case. He teaches a specific approach to simplify and streamline the equivoque - showing this in the performance video would be revealing the method. |
|||||||||
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4192 Posts
|
As pointed out already by myself, part of the process is cut from the video. Sure you could class it as preshow in the case of the video. This is because this route is one of the things that sets this apart from previous versions of this plot which have pretty much all used Mark Elsdon’s equivoque. The other part of course is the envelope and how you can instantly remove the card without looking.
The first part, any magician seeing that would immediately be able to perform that part. For me that part was a head slap moment. When Mark demmed it my first thought was why didn’t that route ever occur to me. It is brilliant in its simplicity. Unfortunately for creators there are some things that to include in trailer would mean very little to a layman in performance but would be a tutorial for magicians. So your choice is either don’t release it at all, or edit the performance in the trailer so not give half of it away for free and whilst that part requires no props it most certainly has value. Mark |
|||||||||
|
dr.nick New user 30 Posts
|
Thank you Mark for all of your insights and clarifications. It really is tiring a lot of this nitpicking. It seems mostly argument for argument’s sake. For many I’m sure, the point of all of this would seem to be to entertain others. Since I really appreciate and enjoy a gobsmacked spectator, I have made the purchace. And if you’re the sort who likes to pick nits, please continue…Nick
|
|||||||||
|
dirtyfoucault Special user UK 735 Posts
|
Just be upfront and advertise "super streamlined clever equivoque" as a positive rather than pretending the product is something it isn't. Wanting a clear and transparent non-misleading description of a product isn't nitpicking, it's basic standards.
|
|||||||||
|
Axman Elite user 403 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jan 18, 2024, dr.nick wrote: Right. It's also so they can get the innovative parts without paying, usually disguised as moaning about 'false advertising'. |
|||||||||
|
AutarchicFlux Special user 601 Posts
|
I don't have any desire to get anything without paying, because this trick is terrible and there's nothing innovative about it. Just pointing out that the advertising is total BS and full of deception, which I will stick by no matter what Mark says. He's defending a dog here, and some very dodgy advertising. I've said what I need to say though - if you want to buy this laughably bad, totally unoriginal trick, by all means go ahead. I have more respect for my spectators than to think they could be fooled with this.
|
|||||||||
|
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4192 Posts
|
All said from the perspective of having not bought the effect, seen the instructions or handled the props or knowing much about the actual methods involved.
Mark |
|||||||||
|
AutarchicFlux Special user 601 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jan 18, 2024, Mark_Chandaue wrote: Nonsense. Anyone with half a brain knows what's going on here. Stop being ridiculous. We both know I could lay out the entire method if it was allowed on the Café. |
|||||||||
Kaliix Inner circle Connecticut 2000 Posts
|
Fine, you don't like it, you've said your piece, now move on so others who do like this and think it has value can discuss it without you reiterating your point ad nauseam.
I am personally interested in how the equivoque differs from Elsdon's and improves upon Inferno. Quote: On Jan 18, 2024, AutarchicFlux wrote:
The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance; it is the illusion of knowledge.
~Daniel J. Boorstin |
|||||||||
|
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4192 Posts
|
And yet you said
Quote:
Mark, it's not "cut" from the performance towards the middle of the trailer. This is a full, unedited performance from start to finish in which the spectator is asked to think "of ANY card." It's deceptive. Unequivocally, and obviously. Please stop defending it and go look for yourself. It's a BS, fake performance designed to mislead. If you had this you would know that the full uncut unedited video of this performance is included in the tutorials which shows the part that was indeed cut from the trailer. So having been fooled into thinking that the trailer is a full uncut performance I think it is safe to say that you are not as clever as you would like us to believe. Sure you can guess there is some process to limit the selection but I doubt you have any idea what the process iooks like or it would be obvious what was cut. Likewise I doubt you know how the envelope works without asking someone who has this or has been shown it. Light travels faster than sound, which is why some people look clever until they open their mouth. Mark |
|||||||||
|
dirtyfoucault Special user UK 735 Posts
|
See, I wasn't denying the equivoque is very clever or that the project has value. There is plenty here that would sell it on its own merits (although the price is on the high side)
It's the unnecessary deception in the marketing and encouraging people to deceive other potential buyers that irked me. Defending that is defending something we surely don't want in our industry. |
|||||||||
|
GeraintClarke Special user 718 Posts
|
All this back and forth on the claim of a deceptive performance or not - I just wanted to give my perspective.
This is the hardest part of marketing magic. Back in the old days, before the iPhone was released, I used to order magic from a Davenport’s magic catalogue. I was happy a lot and disappointed a few times, but social media didn’t exist at this scale, so nobody ever heard about my disappointment. Inside was a brief description of the effect. The ‘effect’ meaning what the audience will experience and NOT ‘what the magician is actually doing’. Somewhere along the way, as online magic trailers buried catalogue sales, the method and the effect became one in the buyer's mind. Experienced buyers began to feel burned by the claims. e.g… “You borrow a coin from a spectator and bend it at your fingertips.” That line, of course, explains the effect, what the audience will remember or experience. But some buyers felt duped when they purchased the product and the method is revealed — and it’s just a switch. “It’s not a borrowed coin at all!” “So many lies in the trailer.” This opens up a really hard dilemma. Do you sell the effect, or do you sell the method? Most magic companies choose the former. Yes, it is deceptive, in the sense that it’s working really hard to hide the secret from you — because, despite people’s claims of honesty, a trick will bomb if the secret is exposed. aka. If people know how it’s done, they’re less likely to buy it. This proves that buyers place the value in the method rather than the effect. You can point to outliers like gaff/marked decks or smoke devices, things that people can’t make themselves… But the rule is pretty consistent that creators can only make money from their effects if they hide the method from buyers. I know, because we’ve tested it many times. We’ve exposed good effects after people have begged us for ‘uncut performances’ — and we’ve tried the opposite. Of cutting the performance angles to mask the switch, and it’s sold through the roof… Not surprisingly. Switch or not, the reaction is the same, and the effect the audience of laymen experiences is the same — but the cut is seen by some magicians to be shady, or deceptive in its marketing efforts. This contributes to some magician's disdain for marketing within magic. Of course, this isn’t to say that it’s all the customer’s fault. Not at all. Not even close. Instead, it’s just an occupational hazard. The collateral damage from selling secrets. Making the impossible sound desirable is a tough line to walk that is never appreciated. The artist or retailer is selling the effect. The buyer is buying the method. It's that conflation that causes issues. And it's a battle that you can never win. I just wrote a blog post over at Ellusionist that goes into this in more detail. You can read it here... https://ellusionist.com/blogs/news/the-m......-paradox But to wrap this reply up, Mark Lemon produced that trailer to demonstrate the effect, which it definitely does. The cut doesn't hide anything other than a lovely piece of scripting (10 seconds or so) at the start that is part of the method being sold. |
|||||||||
jbadman Special user London 987 Posts
|
Beautifully put, Geraint.
I think the key to this is that many magicians, mostly hobbyists (where, let's face it, is where the real money is) often buy the method rather than the effect. And by choosing to sell the effect rather than the method, magic creators feed this hunger. The problem comes with the gap between the expectation of the method and the reality, which is often far simpler and/or basic than anticipated. The greater this gap, the higher the level of disappointment if buying method vs effect. Magic creators elevate this urge to acquire the method by throwing out a list of challenge conditions to the potential buyer like 'no thread', 'no magnets', 'no rough and smooth' etc. And this can sometimes become ambiguous too, like 'no complicated hookups', 'no awkward magnets', 'no convoluted equivoque'... and that's fine, I think: That's always been the case and probably always will be. If a magician gets upset by this then they must be new to the game, since this is hardly novel. Someone here nailed it when implying much of this apparent 'disgust' and 'dismay' is often a ploy to dig deeper in to what is actually happening, in an attempt to feed that 'method hunger' they need to satiate. We, as magicians, need creators and they, as creators need us magicians. If everything were laid out openly there'd really be nothing much to purchase and we could, if we were unscrupulous and immoral, figure stuff out for ourselves and no bother buying the secret (because the hunger would no longer exist). It's a symbiotic relationship that we need; insisting on complete openness and an entire lack of guile from creators is, I think, unreasonable. That said, I think Mark's method here is now partially understood - certainly more than he intended. I don't think it should be probed further, though I will say... I saw this at The Session and immediately purchased. I kind of knew what I was getting, except when Mark explained the finer detail, it soon became apparent that no stone was left unturned and there were subleties in construction and handling that could only have been developed through painstaking performance and testing. This is partly what is being purchased here - the many hours of fine tuning to get this effect to the heights it has now reached. Yes, there are similar effects in existence, however I genuinely feel this is the finest, largely due to these fine details. It's not that cheap, however it depends how you gauge value - if you divide the cost of an effect by the number of times you use it, then over time this will become dirt cheap - almost free. Compare to some of the relatively cheaper items you purchased, learned the secret, then stuck unused in a drawer and you'll realise the price isn't so bad after all.
http://www.underground-collective.com - check out our new DVD now!
|
|||||||||
|
AutarchicFlux Special user 601 Posts
|
Quote:
On Jan 18, 2024, Mark_Chandaue wrote: Mark, that IS a complete performance, after pre show. I wasn't fooled in the slightest, which is why I pointed out it was deceptive. Is all you've got against people who call out lies calling them stupid? That's not very mature or smart of you, you know. Talk sense to a fool and he calls you foolish! You've lost all credibility for me, Mark. Don't bother replying to me again, unless you want to trade more quotes about stupid people. I'd bet I have more of them than you do. Honestly, if you were any slower, you'd be going backwards. Some people are so far behind in the race, they think that they're ahead! |
|||||||||
|
Mark_Chandaue Inner circle Essex UK 4192 Posts
|
As I said the full uncut unedited footage of the trailer shows your assumption to be incorrect. There is no preshow there is simply part of the full performance not seen. Anybody with this can confirm what I am saying is true. The footage does not show the uncut interaction from start to finish but from the participant’s perspective it was one unbroken interaction, simply part of that interaction is cut from the trailer but is included in the tutorial which shows the full interaction from start to finish. Likewise the tutorial discusses filming for social media which would look like the trailer on your social media but would still be a single performance that lasts maybe 20 seconds longer than it would appear on video. I am guessing 20 secs but next time I am at the computer I can actually see the exact timing.
Mark |
|||||||||
|
Tony Miller Loyal user 233 Posts
|
Because people come to the cafe to enjoy the drama I would like to offer a short monologue. Ahem.
PTSD appears, I say appears as it hasn’t been in my hands, to be well received by spectators and that’s all that should really matter. I use the word Should though because we all have to have something to complain about and I am no different. The marketing I have seen uses PTSD not P.T.S.D., this is supposed to be an acronym not a word. The imagery next this is a brain made to resemble grenade complete with pin and spoon. I find this to be in incredibly poor taste and cannot support it. 
__
"If you want magic in your life, start thinking like a magician." - Scott Grossberg |
|||||||||
|
dirtyfoucault Special user UK 735 Posts
|
TLDR: if we didn't deceive people we'd sell fewer units.
I feel sorry for small independent magic shops who stock these sorts of products, advertised with carefully-edited-to-sell-more-units trailers and copy. They're the ones who have to waste time and effort, with limited resources, dealing with customers who feel duped. Quote:
On Jan 18, 2024, GeraintClarke wrote: |
|||||||||
|
gumbimagic Veteran user Too busy performing to have more than 316 Posts
|
I am fairly certain I know what is going on with this effect. The envelope, the gimmicks, the equivoque etc. I see nothing deceptive here. I see nothing wrong with the imagery used to advertise this. Those who have issues with these things seem triggered very easily in my opinion. The real value of this would clearly be in the routining and teaching. The nastiness from some on this forum is just completely uncalled for. Post in your real names and lets see how much nastiness you spew then. Anonymity seems to allow nastiness that would ruin your real lives in the real world if you posted from a real name.
Those posting from their real names have conducted themselves well, as opposed to those posting anonymously. Again, opinions vary… |
|||||||||
Kjellstrom Inner circle Sweden, Scandinavia, Europe 5207 Posts
|
I hope I will like it and use it. I bought it from Vanishing...
|
|||||||||
Nathan Alexander Inner circle 2042 Posts
|
One thing that struck me, and it was a subtle realization to me, was how he reaches in without looking, digging, fumbling, etc. He casually and quickly grabs the card.
It may be subtle, but I think it sells it far more than similar methods. |
|||||||||
Posted: Jan 18, 2024 01:35 am 