Sign up Latest Topics Chat
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment  
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #1 
Hi everyone,

I’m really interested in learning an effect of maybe seeking help in the method or of were I could purchase the needed gimmick / prop.

Below is a link to a video we’re at around 1 Minute and 9 seconds the magician produces a live mouse from seemingly, empty hands.



I have a theory on part of the method, but was hoping someone could help me, not only that are we ok to discuss methods or possible methods here or is there another specific part of the forum for that?

Thanks,
Paul
0
Senor Fabuloso

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 190
Reply with quote  #2 
It's just magic [wink]
__________________
"If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." ( A lesson from childhood often missed or ignored.) Your opinion, may be met with one of equal disdain?
0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 2,426
Reply with quote  #3 
Paul,

Generally speaking, we keep discussions about specific methods to the Session Room, which requires a password. While there is an arbitrary minimum of 100 posts to be admitted, we admit new members as soon as they've shown a basic knowledge and enthusiasm for magic. Give us a few days to get to know you better, cool?

In the meantime, go ahead and share your theory - after all, that's why we're here, right?!

Av 
0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #4 
Ok, my initial theory is along the lines of the Mouse is in some kind of pouch that is attached to a pulley ( similar to The Raven Gimmick) that’s attached to the inside, bottom right side of the waist coat.

The reason I’m thinking a pulley is after the production, the coins gone ( probably a magnet that’s attached either on the bottom of the pouch or further in on the pulley ) and the magician maintains the position of his hands as he draws them back towards him.

That’s the best I can think of at the moment, the disappearance of the mouse may be the wooden box is Gimmicked with a mirror on the inside to make it seem empty with a secret compartment that’s accessible through the top with either a sliding piece or a soft flap that resembles hard wood.

The reappearance of the mouse from the egg could be a duplicate mouse that’s housed and sealed inside the egg, with numerous air holes to keep it ventilated to allow it to breath.

That’s the best I’ve got lol the irony of all this is I genuinely have a phobia of rodents but I’d be more than happy to face my fears to achieve a similar or the same effect. I used to be afraid of Moths until I learnt Creation by Paul Harris 😀

Thanks for allowing me to join the group & express my theory
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #5 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Vinson
Paul,

Generally speaking, we keep discussions about specific methods to the Session Room, which requires a password. While there is an arbitrary minimum of 100 posts to be admitted, we admit new members as soon as they've shown a basic knowledge and enthusiasm for magic. Give us a few days to get to know you better, cool?

In the meantime, go ahead and share your theory - after all, that's why we're here, right?!

Av 



Hmm, I'm not sure I agree Anthony.

Here's how I look at this type of question -

The guy in the video has an effect. I haven't seen nor heard of this particular trick before. Sure, I've seen productions of a mouse before, but not this particular trick or handling. It could be assumed that this is something this guy has come up with himself, presumably for his own use in his street shows.

Now, we are magicians, and will obviously speculate and discuss tricks we may have seen. There is nothing wrong with this, generally speaking.

However, to try to work out (back engineer) someone elses pet trick, for the purpose of performing that piece ourselves is very bad form.


Paul,

If you are really interested in this piece, why not contact the guy on his YouTube channel ? Say hi, introduce yourself, let him know you are interested in the piece and ask if he would be ok with you performing it. If he's happy with it, I'm sure he'll point you in the right direction.

Or why not come up with a different production for the mouse altogether, taking inspiration from the video ?



Jim


0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #6 
Don’t get me wrong I would love to learn it but I would never use it myself in a professional capacity either in the street or at a paid gig, mainly to show respect to Diobo and the fact I don’t want to copy other people’s work, I’m just very interested in the Effect & would love to learn if only for my own enjoyment. Besides I don’t think my Mrs would let me own a pet mouse, she’s scared to death of them lol.

Out of respect of the creator / magician please feel free to delete this post if required.

Thanks,
Paul
0
Anthony Vinson

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 2,426
Reply with quote  #7 
Disagree with what exactly, Jim? Paul specifically stated that he was willing to purchase the effect, but also that he wanted to discuss theories. I see nothing wrong there. Nor do I have any problems discussing theories here in general, so long as we stay away from specific explanations for specific tricks or effects. That said, your personal advice was both sound and helpful. Hope Paul's listening.

Av
0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #8 
I totally agree, what can I say? Otherthan I love Diobo’s trick & would be honoured to learn it. It’s the first time I’ve been super excited over seeing magic since I first got interested. But I have to agree, it would be shameful & disrespectful to use someone else’s routine. I just thought I would enquire just in case it’s available like most magic but if it’s his bread & butter and not released I’ll graciously bow down
0
Senor Fabuloso

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 190
Reply with quote  #9 
I'm with you Jim

To much reverse engineering and pirating going on, in the craft. Suggesting to take "inspiration" from the video is not only good advice but in line with, common magical thinking and ethical behavior.

__________________
"If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." ( A lesson from childhood often missed or ignored.) Your opinion, may be met with one of equal disdain?
0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #10 
The main interest for me is how he achieves the production, the seemingly bare handed gesture and the immediate appearance is the best I’ve ever experienced. I was mainly curious about that part of it. I could never perform with a mouse anyway as I have a phobia of rodents lol
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #11 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony Vinson
Disagree with what exactly, Jim? Paul specifically stated that he was willing to purchase the effect, but also that he wanted to discuss theories. I see nothing wrong there. Nor do I have any problems discussing theories here in general, so long as we stay away from specific explanations for specific tricks or effects. That said, your personal advice was both sound and helpful. Hope Paul's listening.

Av



Anthony, Paul stated in his original post that he was interested in learning the piece being discussed - I naturally assumed that the point in learning it, was to perform it.

Paul then stated that he had a theory on the methods of the effect and asked if he could post it. You gave permission for Paul to post his ideas on this magicians routine, and said that is what we are here for - this is what I disagree about. Surely we are not here to help back engineer someone elses work ?

Yes, Paul said he was interested in purchasing the effect, but as far as I'm aware (and I could be wrong), the routine has not been released.
If it is released, then any theories are potentially exposing a marketed effect. If it's not "out there" then any theories are potentially exposing someones unpublished work - both unethical.

You also mentioned in your above post which I have quoted that "nor do I have any problems discussing theories here in general, so long as we stay away from specific explanations for specific tricks or effects".
That's fair enough. But in this case it isn't theories in general - IT IS specific explanations for a specific trick/effect.

However, Paul has stated that he simply wants to learn this for his own pleasure, and has no intention of using it in a ahow - and that is fair enough.


Jim

0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #12 
Sorry guys for not being more clear about my intentions, im interested in how he does the seemingly, bare handed production more than anything else and if there’s a gimmick prop on the market that’s available to achieve it. Please feel free to delete my post on the theory of the entire routine. It was only intended to prove to you all that I have a complete obsession with magic, that and the fact that I would love to learn the production
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulV
Sorry guys for not being more clear about my intentions, im interested in how he does the seemingly, bare handed production more than anything else and if there’s a gimmick prop on the market that’s available to achieve it. Please feel free to delete my post on the theory of the entire routine. It was only intended to prove to you all that I have a complete obsession with magic, that and the fact that I would love to learn the production



No apology needed Paul.

My good friend Mark has given good advice at the bunny. Look into misdirection, specifically stage manipulation acts with doves. Study the steals and how the misdirection is used. The same psychology applies to other small animals and objects.

And probably the most important aspect of this type of thing - learn to care for the animal, and how to keep it safe and comfortable during the routine and transport.


Jim

0
Tom G

Inner Circle - Moderator
Registered:
Posts: 1,011
Reply with quote  #14 
Total agreement with Jim on caring for the animals.  Seeing dyed doves and such is too much.  I've seen a couple acts (dove) that produce a sick bird or one that's been confined too long and they lose the audience.   Most likely the answer to how he produces the mouse will be the simplest.
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,281
Reply with quote  #15 
I used to produce 4 doves during my manipulation act. Three were body loads and one was on a perch behind my table (John Mendoza "The Book of John"). I took great care of my birds and resisted trimming their feathers to restrict flight. Birds are noisy, make a big mess but also make a huge impression when produced. Like any animal they warrant utmost care.
0
Senor Fabuloso

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 190
Reply with quote  #16 
My doves hated each other and one, would peck the head of the other. It would sound like he was saying "ouch". Eventually I gave them to the humane society and stopped, working with birds.
__________________
"If you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all." ( A lesson from childhood often missed or ignored.) Your opinion, may be met with one of equal disdain?
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,281
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulV
I totally agree, what can I say? Otherthan I love Diobo’s trick & would be honoured to learn it. It’s the first time I’ve been super excited over seeing magic since I first got interested. But I have to agree, it would be shameful & disrespectful to use someone else’s routine. I just thought I would enquire just in case it’s available like most magic but if it’s his bread & butter and not released I’ll graciously bow down


Paul, it is not shameful or disrespectful to use someone else's routine UNLESS it is unpublished or otherwise not in the interests of the overall magic community to do so.

Otherwise, we're all guilty because we buy books, download ebooks or learn through video, routines that we then go out and perform.  That is the acceptable way to do it.  The purchase of the material repays the originator and so long as they intend it to be used by you, the purchaser it then gives you license to use it.

The difference is intent.  If you watch a magic trick and reverse-engineer it and perform it, two things happen.  First, if it is a marketed trick, you just bypassed the creator and now the work they did to invent it goes unrewarded.  Too much of this and the creator stops creating.  Not good for us as a whole.

Secondly, if the effect is not marketed, you are now guilty of taking someone's creation without permission.  In my opinion, it becomes even worse when the effect is a "signature" effect, something that the performer is "known for".  Simply copying a move or something, while still technically wrong, in my world doesn't rise to the level of appropriating something for yourself which the performer uses to distinguish him or herself from other magicians.  The mice are a good example.  

There are time-honored traditions in magic just as there are in any pursuit.  It seems that nowadays many are looking the other way or otherwise remaining silent.  Some of us try best we can to pass on the torch.  Sometimes we are made fun of for it.  We're told that we are living in the past.

I believe we need to respect magic and respect the old ways.  Sure, with technology things are different, but secrets are secrets.  The mere fact that you were able to share the video with us is evidence of how easy it is to take a video and watch it repeatedly until the misdirection is gone and the reverse-engineering begins.

It seems you now understand.  I'm glad and I appreciate that.

Take care,
Ray


0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RayJ
Some of us try best we can to pass on the torch.  Sometimes we are made fun of for it.  We're told that we are living in the past.

I believe we need to respect magic and respect the old ways.


Indeed Ray. I once spoke out on a thread at the cafe, and was subsequently "attacked" by several members and told to get off my "high horse". The general consensus over there was that if a routine uses known sleights, then that routine is free to use as long as you can work it out.
I was made out to be the ass for speaking out.

I remember one time on another forum, I was contacted by a VERY well known mentalist, and asked to reveal the methods in Jon Thompsons Naked Mentalism books (which I didn't even own). The guy used a fake name etc, but it was blatantly obvious who it was.
I messaged Jon and sent him a copy of the guys message. It turns out Jon was well aware of this guy and his antics.

The sad thing is that this is nothing new. Mention Brainwave to most magicians and they instantly think of Vernon. Dig a little deeper an we realise that the trick wasn't Vernons at all. What Vernon actually did was use the then new roughing method instead of the original wax, and market it under his own name.

The thumbtip bill switch was for years synonymous with Mike Koslowsk, turns out it wasn't even his to release, and was essentially stolen from another performer.

So pilfering in the craft is certainly nothing new, Its just more common (and easier to do) in the internet age.



Jim


0
PaulV

Member
Registered:
Posts: 9
Reply with quote  #19 
I see what you mean Jim, it’s same with the Ellusionist release of Face Off & the Penguin Magic release Siamese Watlz. Both are virtually the same but neither one credits Daryl who created it beforehand.

I love moves & methods but I would never blatantly copycat or steal someone else’s creation for financial gain & I feel the reason it’s a problem in this day and age is down to the responsibility of some of the higher Professionals and Companies that find it acceptable by encouraging all this through the sake of making money.

I learnt an Effect called Starcle by Dan Harlan & came across a version that David Penn does where at the end he uses Flash Paper as a finale. I saw another well known magician copy his act / routine word for word and move for move.

I decided to go my own route and add a kind of Snowstorm ending to mine as the way I do Starcle it doesn’t turn out looking like a Star, instead more like a Snowflake 😊
0
Bmat

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 325
Reply with quote  #20 
Years ago I was at a magic club meeting, it was competition night I was horrified when one of the competitors used a stolen routine. Stolen from one of the magicians of the club!  And a very well respected magician so I shall not mention his name (very unlike me).  I went up to the magician who was stolen from and expressed my shock.  He too was shocked because he was helping this magician in order for him to hone his own act, not in a million years did he think the guy would steal his act. 

Imagine my surprise when a year or so later I was telling this story to another magi.  His response,  serves the guy right to have his routine stolen.  Now he knows how the creator felt when it was stolen from him. 

__________________
bmat10@wordpress.com
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,281
Reply with quote  #21 
Quote:
Originally Posted by PaulV
I see what you mean Jim, it’s same with the Ellusionist release of Face Off & the Penguin Magic release Siamese Watlz. Both are virtually the same but neither one credits Daryl who created it beforehand.

I love moves & methods but I would never blatantly copycat or steal someone else’s creation for financial gain & I feel the reason it’s a problem in this day and age is down to the responsibility of some of the higher Professionals and Companies that find it acceptable by encouraging all this through the sake of making money.

I learnt an Effect called Starcle by Dan Harlan & came across a version that David Penn does where at the end he uses Flash Paper as a finale. I saw another well known magician copy his act / routine word for word and move for move.

I decided to go my own route and add a kind of Snowstorm ending to mine as the way I do Starcle it doesn’t turn out looking like a Star, instead more like a Snowflake 😊


--------------------------------------------

Paul, you bring up the issue of copying.  You've probably also seen the people on youtube perform an effect and use the exact patter and mannerisms from the video they learned it from.  I've even seen guys laugh like Daryl, along with his infamous "snicker".

Sad isn't it?

So what you did is you added a touch to the ending of an effect in an attempt to make it your own.  That's great!  That is what we are talking about.

What we are not talking about is a well-known provider of magic merchandise releasing someone's 4 ace effect but changing the aces to kings and calling it "different".  Nope.

Thanks for your contribution!
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,281
Reply with quote  #22 
Quote:
Originally Posted by jim ferguson


Indeed Ray. I once spoke out on a thread at the cafe, and was subsequently "attacked" by several members and told to get off my "high horse". The general consensus over there was that if a routine uses known sleights, then that routine is free to use as long as you can work it out.
I was made out to be the ass for speaking out.

I remember one time on another forum, I was contacted by a VERY well known mentalist, and asked to reveal the methods in Jon Thompsons Naked Mentalism books (which I didn't even own). The guy used a fake name etc, but it was blatantly obvious who it was.
I messaged Jon and sent him a copy of the guys message. It turns out Jon was well aware of this guy and his antics.

The sad thing is that this is nothing new. Mention Brainwave to most magicians and they instantly think of Vernon. Dig a little deeper an we realise that the trick wasn't Vernons at all. What Vernon actually did was use the then new roughing method instead of the original wax, and market it under his own name.

The thumbtip bill switch was for years synonymous with Mike Koslowsk, turns out it wasn't even his to release, and was essentially stolen from another performer.

So pilfering in the craft is certainly nothing new, Its just more common (and easier to do) in the internet age.



Jim




Jim, I will continue to point out the things that I think are wrong.  Some might be offended, but I'm hoping if they think about it they may begin to see what we are saying and at least consider the impact of their actions.  

There are always going to be gray areas.  And you are right, theft has been going on since there were two magicians and one trick.

But it has reached a fever pitch.  There are internet sites where you can upload your entire library, magic and otherwise and for a monthly price, get access to hundreds of current books as well as old ones too.  I don't blame the site.  I blame the magicians that buy dozens of books and then upload them.  Nobody forced them to do that.  

So in the end, I just think it is prudent to evaluate what you are doing.  Everyone else doing it isn't a reason to continue.  It being so, so easy isn't a reason to continue.
It saving you tons of money is also not a reason.  Tempting as it may be.

The industry will continue to evolve.  There will come a time when creators will have some comfort that their creations won't be ripped off.  I don't know what it will look like, but it has to happen or else creators will stop.  Why invest in developing something just to have it stolen?

If you don't agree with me, that's fine.  But do our community a favor and at least think about it, please?
0
RayJ

Avatar / Picture

Honored Member
Registered:
Posts: 1,281
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blathermist


Is this true?

Back in the long ago, I saw dealer adverts for Dai Vernon’s "Brainwave," but was this marketing actually Vernon’s? Or merely the dealer, using Vernon’s name.

Seeking information here. Not disagreeing.



https://geniimagazine.com/wiki/index.php?title=Brainwave_Deck

Vernon is credited with creating it.  I doubt he made much money off of it.
0
jim ferguson

Inner Circle
Registered:
Posts: 143
Reply with quote  #24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blathermist


Is this true?

Back in the long ago, I saw dealer adverts for Dai Vernon’s "Brainwave," but was this marketing actually Vernon’s? Or merely the dealer, using Vernon’s name.

Seeking information here. Not disagreeing.




Hi Mr Mist.

The link Ray provided gives some information and background.

Judson Browns A Super-Reverse Problem, was already in print. This was a gimmicked deck in which any named card was found to be reversed in the deck (face up in a face down deck). The cards were in pairs, face to face, the pairs being held together with a spot of wax.

As mentioned in the article Ray linked to, it was Paul Fox who later came up with the idea of pairing red and blue cards together. This gave the trick the kicker ending of the named, reversed card having an odd coloured back - this is what we now know as the Brainwave deck.

Vernon then applied the roughed card principle to the trick instead of using wax, and marketed the effect.



Jim




0
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation:

Easily create a Forum Website with Website Toolbox.