"If it looks too good to be true it usually is!" - That's what I'm thinking here.
Again another trailer carefully edited.. In the video he gets the guy to spread that cliche invisible deck and name ANY card, those were his exact words.. name a card. Then the envelope is opened and a single card removed, it matches. Really!
My gripe is the trailer gives a false impression as he states name ANY card, this implies 52 different cards CAN be named... I'm guessing here (and I could be wrong) I bet that's not true and if the 2 of clubs is called something else needs to be done.
We shall see!

Mark Lemon is a legend. Great thinker and performer. Kind person!
He is one I trust and iam sure he will not take your money and run.

The same impression with any card to pocket from E. Yes I feel the spread of the inv deck and name any card, may have been done/scripted with some preshow not seen. I like Mark Lemon's stuff, but $45 I feel it the price for people thinking they are getting EXACTLY what they see. The video, I feel is taken from the standpoint of what the spectator would recall happened.

Curious myself, but The Royal Road to Mentalism project on Ellusionist by Mark Lemon and Peter Turner was a big disappointment. Maybe that was because of Mark/Peter's fallout with Ellusionist midway through the project, but it felt like both were just calling it in in order to finish their commitment of 12 episodes. I didn't find any of the effects that stunning.

I am guessing the process has to be like Inferno from Josh Jay only no burning of the cards patter .

I saw this at the session and I have to say that I really like it. I’m not going to go into method about what I will say is that it looks really pure. From a magicians perspective I knew what was going on with the first part but absolutely loved it. The envelope made me go hmmm because there was no faffing or fumbling and the full sized full thickness card was removed from the envelope.

I would say that this isn’t designed to be a magician fooler but I did see quite a few magicians at the session have that same hang on a minute reaction to the card being removed from the envelope.

Mark

Mark, I do think that this has potential. Though, in my opinion, the price tag really overshadows the end effect while the overreaction belittles its true potential.

I can’t speak for the reaction but I think the price is perfectly reasonable. Personally I think any physical product effect under $30 is too cheap. Perhaps it is because as a creator myself I understand the economics of being a creator and particularly an independent creator.

In this case if you forget the value of the idea itself, and ideas most certainly have value. The card gimmicks are on plastic cards to last. Small runs tend to be far more expensive. To give you an example Totally Free Will Collector’s edition is out of print for good because I can’t justify the same volume for the second edition and the price per book of a small run is more than Murphy’s pay me per book so I would make a loss on a second run even if it sold out. With any release there is a risk you won’t sell enough to break even.

Once you have spent out for the props, including prototypes if necessary (even a gaffed card may take a few print runs before you are confident that the supplier going to deliver the quality you need). You also then need to film trailers and tutorials and even if you have all the required camera’s, mics, video editing hardware and software you will more often than not have to pay a venue to allow you to film there. I know for the Enigma trailer for example, not only did Christian have to pay the venue to film but he also paid to lay on refreshments for those that came down to take part in the trailer.

Once you have your product, packaging, trailer and tutorial you then have to factor in that for a U.K. creator 20% of the price goes to the government in sales tax (VAT). Here we haven’t even factored in the value of the time spent doing all this and the time dealing with post and packaging on each sale or the costs of the e-commerce solution and hosting for your web store. Then if you sell through retailers you will get 50% of the 80% left after VAT if you sell direct to the retailer or 30% if you sell to a wholesaler like Murphy’s. Finally after all that 20% of your profit will go to the taxman unless you are lucky enough to sell so many that you move into the 40% tax bracket.

For an independent creator there is generally a cost below which it becomes not worth the bother of releasing/producing an effect. A perfect example is my Chandaulopes, I get countless requests for these but for what I can reasonably charge for them it simply isn’t worth my time and trouble to make them. I did do a large run a few years back but I calculated that the time it took me to make them at the required quality I would have been far better off flipping burgers in McDonalds. In fact I’d have made more money in a single shift at maccy d’s than I made in 2 weeks of solidly making Chandaulopes, and I would have been fed into the bargain.

Another factor is that products generally have a relatively small sales window because the market as a whole is focussed on the next big thing, dare I say it, the Latest and Greatest. Sales tail off fairly quickly when the next thing appears and so your window for recouping your investment is short lived. Sell too cheap and that window might not be long enough. Good effects will always sell but after that initial window you are looking at dribs and drabs.

Companies like Murphy’s and Penguin can put out quality effects at pretty low prices because of economies of scale. Not only can they print large numbers of say a gimmicked deck but they likely get favourable rates with the suppliers due to the volume of different products they put through the suppliers.

So for me it comes down to will I use it or not, if I will use it I am happy to pay a fair price factoring in the value of the idea and the creators time as well as the cost of any props/gaffs provided. If I won’t use it then even $5 is too much.

Mark

Thank you for the insight Mark.
You have shared a perspective that is unrecognized to many of us on this side of the counter. Your last paragraph sums things up nicely too.

I love Mark and his level of thinking.

So I couldn't pass up the opportunity to stock this at Ellusionist too... as it's something (as a team) we would/will use.

We have the stock - but all shops can't ship it out until Friday (Murphy's rules) so I've put a little freebie for pre-order customers to give you added value while you wait.

https://ellusionist.com/products/portal-......ion-ptsd

Mentioning indexes really leads one to think that this is a replacement for indexes, which is disingenuous. Canon by David Regal is a much more convincing prediction IMO and it's the same price.

Kudos to Ellusionist for their honesty:

Well this project looks interesting and even if my assumptions are correct I'd still gladly pay for the gimmick!

That being said: I already own Mind Games, dang!

Really great project. I found Mind Games to be very good & inspiring. It's classic Peter Turner (& Mark Lemon) riffing long-form video stuff, so you'll know how that suits you, but for me this was some of the best!

So I guess I'm saying if you are on the fence for PTSD I can add that Mind Games is, for me, certainly a big bonus.

This has got to be the most deceptive trailer I've seen in a while. Several of the spectator reactions scream "acting" to me, even setting aside the obvious dishonesty about the lack of equivocation.

This is not a replacement for Indexes, this is a way to have someone name “any” card and pull it from an envelope that’s been in full view the whole time. Personally I like this much more than Canon. It is easier and overall more direct. You have one envelope on view from the start, they name a card and you immediately remove it from the envelope.You don’t have to spread a deck of cards and locate the named card before producing your prediction from a second card box and there is no palming involved. Getting them to name the card is very quick and pretty direct, not quite as direct as Canon but closer than you might think. It’s the best way that I have seen to use the core principle behind the selection.

This is probably closer to Inferno but with an extremely streamlined route to the selection and an instant removal of the prediction wilts no switches.

Mark

Inferno is 100 times better, in my opinion, and was advertised honestly.

What's disingenuous?

I'm personally saying it's more practical. Less pocket space. 1 envelope. That's it.

Them naming any card and them 'thinking' they could have named any card is the exact same effect to your audience. I personally don't need them to literally have a free choice of 52.

I just need them to believe they could have had a free choice of 52. To a spectator, it's the same thing.

If you like an index, that's fine. But it doesn't make what we said disingenuous.

1 envelope, in plain sight, no switch. No going to your pocket...

If an index suits your needs, use that, but I love the practicality and slimness of this solution by Mark.

There are no wrong answers. Some people will prefer pocket space. Some people won't.

"There are no solutions, only trade-offs." - Thomas Sowell

I can’t speak for the reactions but the trailer is accurate regarding the equivoque. As stated there is no boring drawn out equivoque. Sure the tiny bit of process is cut from the trailer because that is part of what you are buying, that the envelope and the gaffs.

The route to the selection is very quick and direct. Pretty much every time I saw Mark demonstrate it at the session they bought it. I must admit I didn’t bite from the trailer but when Mark demmed it at the session it was a case of the old “That’s going into me EDC” cliche. Although it’s a cliche it is also true.

Mark

I love inferno but I prefer this and I have both so am in a position to judge based on direct knowledge. This won’t completely replace inferno for me because they both have their merits and each has a different feel. This will be in my EDC though and will be my go to rather than inferno. Inferno has two routes to the card, one direct, the other more drawn out. In this case both routes are equally quick. I wouldn’t say either is inherently better or worse they are simply different and, as they say, one man’s meat is another man’s poison.

Mark

This is an infomercial-style advertising ploy. This combined with the selectively edited or faked performances heavily implies that "no boring, drawn out equivoque" means "no equivoque." The statement is meant to be misleading while also being, in a sense, technically true. It's deceptive, and deliberately so.