What is a perfect coins across?

Discuss your favorite close-up tricks and methods.

Postby Guest » 03/08/06 08:38 AM

I have been working on coins across routines for approximately 45 years.

I have recently heard the term "Perfect Coins Across"

Is this just a title to get attention?

Have the authors of said title defined a standard to judge a perfect coins across.

Just cruious.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Randy » 03/08/06 10:38 AM

It's only perfect if their coins end up in my pocket :p
Randy
 
Posts: 140
Joined: 03/13/08 01:41 PM

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/08/06 10:46 AM

Is this in reference to the item on the "coins across" DVD set?

If so, cool trick if you are a Centauri or like "that sort" of company at the table.

http://www.sadgeezer.com/babylon5/centauri.htm
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 03/08/06 01:21 PM

That item was a joke item on their DVD.

What you see is literally two open hands, they close, without any movement a coin travels across. This is repeated 3 more times until one at a time all the four coins traveled without the hands ever coming together, no counting, etc.

The hands simply open and close.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/08/06 03:53 PM

You mean like when my 5 year old niece shows a coin and holds it behind her back and says, "Coin gone!"
Thanks.

I read stuff around here and there about how incredible and amazing all this NY stuff is.

I wish there was someone sane I could ask a simple question of.

Thanks.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/08/06 03:58 PM

Originally posted by Al Schneider:
...I wish there was someone sane I could ask a simple question of...
Al, was there something unclear in the reply I sent to your listed email address early this morning?

Or are you expressing something else?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 03/08/06 04:13 PM

Well, the confusion is because I have spent some time on what I call Perfect Palms. I have developed three of them so far. A Perfect Palm is where the audience can burn your hands while you do palm a card. The audience actually watches your hands move and has no clue what is going on. This would be the criteria for a "Perfect Palm"

Also. The card guys go nuts over dong a perfect pass. There is a great deal about this subject on this very forum. This subject goes on and on.

I guess I am simply not in the loop.

When I heard several references to a perfect coins across I celebrated the idea. I wanted to know what the criteria for the concept. I wanted to see if I could do justice for such a concept.

Then I get slamed into a wall.

Perhaps I am just having a senior moment?

With all due respect to all involved, thanks.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Randy » 03/08/06 05:01 PM

Mr. Schneider,

Sorry to hear that you feel your were "slammed into a wall" by some of our responsed. I can only speak for myself when I say that I greatly respect your work and in no means was trying to be flip or disrespectful. Just a small joke. Anyway, back to your original question. My guess would be that any "perfect" presentation, whether it be coins accross, cards accross, etc, would be one where it appears to be real magic. There have been many who have spent their life eliminating moves. What if you could really make coins invisibly jump, one at a time, from hand to hand? You you really need to "re-count" the coins after each has traveled or would you just close your hands again like in the posted video earlier in this post? I think that the Osmosis clip you have on your site is a great example of your very question.

Anyway, I again thank you for your obviously thought out and beautiful routines and apologize if my ealier post rubbed you the wrong way.
Randy
 
Posts: 140
Joined: 03/13/08 01:41 PM

Postby Guest » 03/08/06 07:19 PM

No problem.
It is just a context switch.
Once explained I feel the fool.
Often people think that I am well read.
Actually I am not.
For example, I have never seen a Three Fly routine nor have I read an explanation of what it is. I gather three coins are held at the finger tips and they go to the other hand.
Just be kind to me and I'll be OK.
Like it says on my DVD's, I'm from the underground.

Al
Guest
 

Postby Mike Rubinstein » 03/08/06 07:39 PM

Al, I will be happy to answer your question. There is an effect in the Bonus section of our new DVD on COINS ACROSS, entitled "Perfect Coins Across". It is in the Bonus section because it is a gag as Dan has explained, there to provide a light moment which will leave viewers scratching their heads until they forward to the explanation. Then, I hope they will smile. The rest of the DVD contains different practical approaches and presentations to the classic effect, which should give the coin worker a nice selection of routines from which to choose, based on ability and performing situations. I have no idea what the heck JT is talking about, nor do I understand the web site reference he provides.
Mike Rubinstein
 
Posts: 159
Joined: 08/20/08 08:19 PM
Location: New York

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/08/06 08:10 PM

Originally posted by Michael Rubinstein:
There is an effect in the Bonus section of our new DVD on COINS ACROSS, entitled "Perfect Coins Across". It is in the Bonus section because it is a gag as Dan has explained....I have no idea what the heck JT is talking about, nor do I understand the web site reference he provides.
All of which was discussed above Mike.

For the rest of the facile and pre-google folks here, the "Centauri" are characters from a recent and well known TV series "Babylon 5" which have extra "appendages" and so would be able to do the trick themselves as shown. The other option I mentioned though did not spoil for the readers here for doing the trick as shown is more feasible though perhaps less attractive to the timid. :)

I usually find this level of boastful ignorance less prevalent on this august forum. Anyone else wonder if this is all leg pulling?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Mike Rubinstein » 03/08/06 08:19 PM

Well actually Jon, it was NOT discussed above, which is why I felt the need to clarify Dan's statements. As for your own comment, I think you were trying to say something else.
Mike Rubinstein
 
Posts: 159
Joined: 08/20/08 08:19 PM
Location: New York

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/08/06 08:47 PM

Originally posted by Michael Rubinstein:
... As for your own comment, I think you were trying to say something else.
Mind reading usually requires rapport. Reading a person can be more difficult than reading text.

Usually easier to ask questions.

The anatomy of the centauri is discussed on that site linked above. From that, one can infer the use of extra appendages used in the method...

Thus it truly does plainly follow where led, though not so many make it to the bridge, much less cross on their own. <<== yes that might take some puzzling over. :D
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Bill Duncan » 03/08/06 09:11 PM

Originally posted by Michael Rubinstein:
There is an effect in the Bonus section of our new DVD on COINS ACROSS, entitled "Perfect Coins Across".
I hope you credit Mike Close. He presents that same handling in his "Closely Guarded Secrets" lecture, via (if I recall correctly) a PowerPoint presentation. But his "handling" isn't in print.

:)
Bill Duncan
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: 03/13/08 11:33 PM

Postby Mike Rubinstein » 03/08/06 09:36 PM

Bill, I do not credit anyone for the gag. I am not the first (or the last) to figure out this method. In fact, I am sure that the method in one way or another has been used for many, many years. But it sure looks cool!
Mike Rubinstein
 
Posts: 159
Joined: 08/20/08 08:19 PM
Location: New York

Postby Pete Biro » 03/08/06 10:49 PM

I guess you could do some real frying with a two ended FK Holdout. I've see Fitch do some stuff that is really magical... I mean REALLY MAGICAL.

He is a master with the HO.
Stay tooned.
User avatar
Pete Biro
 
Posts: 7124
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Hollyweird

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/09/06 06:15 AM

Pete, have you seen that clip of coins across on the NY Coin Symposium DVD set?
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 03/09/06 07:15 AM

Here's the Coins Across I've been doing for over 20 years. Is it perfect? I think so and my audiences do to. Magicians will find it boring. That's okay, I don't perform for magicians.

I only use three Half Dollars and one Washer. I always felt having four coins travel is too much. Three coins traveling is the perfect number (it answers the Rule of Three).

I show the three halves and the one washer and prove they're not magnetic by tapping them together. I place the three half dollars in my right hand, getting one ready in classic palm (the washer is still on the table).

I say, "One at a time, these three half dollars will be attracted to this washer by static electricity." As I say "these three half dollars," I close my right hand, turn it back upwards (classic palming one coin) and jingle the two coins. As I say "this washer," I toss the (two) coins from my right hand to my left hand (retaining the classic palmed coin in the right hand), so I can point to the table washer with my right finger (good reasoning to transfer the coins from right to left).

I pick up the tabled washer with my right hand closing it into a fist (be careful not to have the two coins clink together). Both hands are closed with back of hands upwards. I let the classic palmed coin drop onto the washer so it makes a clink. With backs of both hands still upwards, I open my right hand placing the two coins (washer and half) onto the table, then open my left hand placing the two halves onto the table. I then turn my hands palm upward to show them empty.

I pick up the half dollar and washer with my right hand (placing the half in classic palm), then pick up the two halves with my left hand secretly pushing one coin out the heel of my hand so it hangs out (backs up hands upward so no one sees this exposed coin).

"I'll do it again" I say as I move both hands apart but nothing happens (meaning no sound is made like the first time). "Did you hear it go?" They'll say "no" (not like the first time when they heard a sound). I say, "That's because it hasn't gone yet." I open my right hand to show one half and washer (half is in classic palm get-ready) and move my closed left hand to in front of my body. I perform a Hang Ping Chien turning my right hand palm down letting the washer fall to the table while retaining the classic palmed half simultaneously letting the right hand coin (the one hanging out the heal of your hand) drop to the table (with the washer) and moving my left hand to the left out of the way. It looks as if you showed your right hand coins (the washer and half) and dropped them onto the table. All this is done as I say, "That's because it hasn't gone yet."

I pick up the table washer and half (another half is classic palmed in the right hand due to the Hang Ping Chien), move my hands apart and release the palmed coin to clink against the others so a sound is heard. You might get people saying, "I heard it that time." I open my right hand to show two halves and one washer (placing them on the table) and open my left hand to show one half dollar. I keep the left hand half dollar in my left hand (not putting it on the table).

I show the coin to the left saying, "This is the hardest to go" as I transfer it to my right hand showing it to the right "because now the static is almost gone. But again, this coin will travel because of the static in the washer." As I say "the washer," I place the last half dollar back into my left hand (retaining it in right hand classic palm) so I can pick up the washer in my right hand. (good reasoning to transfer the last half dollar from right to left). I continue to pick up the two tabled half dollars with my right hand (one half classic palmed) keeping both closed hands backs upward.

"And the last coin travels over" I say but I do NOT make a clinking sound as I open my right hand (back of hand upward) and drop the two halves and washer to the table keeping the one half classic palm. I act as if it worked without looking at the coins. People will call me on it saying, "No, it didn't work." I look at the tabled coins, surprised to see only two halves, then pick up the washer and two halves with the right hand, make the clinking sound (both hands are really far apart at this point). I make the clinking sound and open my right hand to show three halves and one washer. Everyone rivets their eyes to my left hand because it just can't be...I open my left hand slowly to show it empty.

That's it. I've been doing it the exact same way for over twenty years. You could, of course, exchange the washer for anything: a piece of candy, their ring, a small stone. I've also done this routine borrowing three quarters and a penny. It's very versatile.

Bob Infantino
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/09/06 08:13 AM

I gather from above that the gag is not using trick camera work.

I gather it is using a couple HOs.

If so this is not a gag. I, personaly, wil go to any end to produce a superior magical effect. I have not seen it but is sounds as if this presentation is good if it looks cool.

If this is true, then my initial quest seems to have fruit. My initial quest was to seek a criteria for a perfect coins across. It is sounding to me like this is it.

Infantino, your routine is sound. I seek however something extra to heighten or create a stunning magical effect. Bear in mind, as I have written elsewhere, I do not care about entertainment. My primary desire is to create the illusion of magic in the mind of the spectator.

I do not want to entertain them. I want to scare them with the possibility that what they are seeing is real.

I suspect if I see the "gag" I might see a solution to the perfect coins across.

Notwithstanding all of this, I have grown. Thank you all.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Jonathan Townsend » 03/09/06 08:37 AM

Originally posted by Al Schneider:
If so this is not a gag. I, personaly, wil go to any end to produce a superior magical effect. I have not seen it but is sounds as if this presentation is good if it looks cool.

I do not want to entertain them. I want to scare them with the possibility that what they are seeing is real.

I suspect if I see the "gag" I might see a solution to the perfect coins across.

Notwithstanding all of this, I have grown. Thank you all.
Al Schneider
Al you are free to work with an assistant under the table when you perform.

As Mike mentioned it's a time tested method.
Mundus vult decipi
Jonathan Townsend
 
Posts: 6609
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Westchester, NY

Postby Guest » 03/09/06 02:02 PM

When I first saw the term Perfect Coins Across in print or on screen, I thought that the heavies had set up some kind of NY criteria to challange the other parts of the universe.

I visualized that the Perfect Coins Across must use normal coins. Perhaps extras were allowed.

Or perhaps the criteria demanded the coins go only in one direction or that the last coin really be gone with no funny HPC.

I was concerned that the criteria might be that the last coin go to the spectator's hand.

I am actually relieved to hear what it is.

Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Mike Rubinstein » 03/11/06 08:20 AM

Outside of the joke on our DVD (which you can all buy at www.newyorkcoinmagic.net , sorry for the blatent plug), I feel that whenever I do a coin effect, I try to make it as "perfect", i.e., as magical as possible. In order to do this, I analyze the effect, and see if it answers the following criteria that I set for myself. In regards to Coins Across, I think, Can I eliminate any part where the hands come together? Can I eliminate any obvious transfers? Can I eliminate any movements that look suspicious? Can I improve the routine by eliminating moves, or the suspicion of moves? If I were a layperson, would I think that the routine looks magical? Do my lay audiences give me feedback in that regard? Have I created an impossible situation in the minds of my audience? Did they enjoy it?
I can not say that I always succeed with these criteria, and in fact, most of the time I do not (which is what separates sleight of hand from real magic). Sometimes I develop a routine, then in time, as my magic matures and I learn or discover more, I find ways to improve them, to get closer to the criteria I set for myself.
The routines that are found on the New York Coin Magic Seminar COINS ACROSS DVD are not "perfect" routines. However, each of the performers has strived to create effects that attempt to satisfy as many of the above criteria as possible, using different methods and sleights to accomplish that (27 total methods, not including the "Perfect Coins Across". We hope that you enjoy our selections, and find uses for them in your own magic.
Mike Rubinstein
 
Posts: 159
Joined: 08/20/08 08:19 PM
Location: New York

Postby Richard Kaufman » 03/11/06 08:50 AM

Very simple question to answer: the "perfect" Coins Across is clear to the audience and magical in effect.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine
User avatar
Richard Kaufman
 
Posts: 20472
Joined: 07/18/01 12:00 PM
Location: Washington DC

Postby Bill Duncan » 03/11/06 03:26 PM

Originally posted by Michael Rubinstein:
Bill, I do not credit anyone for the gag. I am not the first (or the last) to figure out this method. In fact, I am sure that the method in one way or another has been used for many, many years. But it sure looks cool!
Gag? Trick photography is a valid method. Geo. Melies used it didn't he?

Michael's method isn't trick photography, but a "related concept". And he doesn't present it as a gag, but rather to make a point about how magic SHOULD look.
Bill Duncan
 
Posts: 1359
Joined: 03/13/08 11:33 PM

Postby Guest » 03/12/06 03:37 AM

I would like to pose a question.

Part of this is out of respect for INFANTINO's classic presentation of the coins across.

Part of this is because I have spent a significant part of my life trying to improve my coins across routine.

The question is this, "Which is senior, method or effect," and "Can method improve an effect?"

I have struggled most of my life to come up with better methods to create a better effect. I have had well known magicians tell me I was wasting my time on working on better methods. These people include Jay Marshall, Karrel Fox and Ali Bongo.

Yet I have continued working on better method. Because of it I seem to be fairly well known in the magic community.

Is it the effect that is important irreregardless of the method?

I say the effect depends on the method.

A Finger Palm Vanish is a good move and accomplishes the task of getting a coin to disappear. Should one work on getter or doing a better vanish? The argument on the side of method is that using a pull to vanish a coin is significantly more spectactular. Those that support effect say that it does not matter for the effect is that the coin disappears.

If the effect is the same in both, why does using a pull seem so much better?

Then there is always the argument that it is the entertainment value that counts. In a vanish with a false transfer and with the pull isn't the inherant value of entertainment the same? After all, in both a coin was simply caused to disappear. However, with the pull the response of the audience is much stronger.

In my mind the answer is clear. However, some responses above are contrary to my way of thinking.

I open this discussion to hear what others think.

Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/12/06 06:04 AM

Small error in the decription of my Coins Across above:

"I perform a Hang Ping Chien turning my right hand palm down letting the washer fall to the table while retaining the classic palmed half simultaneously letting the LEFT hand coin (the one hanging out the heal of your hand) drop to the table (with the washer) and moving my left hand to the left out of the way."

Sorry for the mistake.
Bob Infantino
Guest
 

Postby Leonard Hevia » 03/12/06 02:44 PM

Hi Mr. Schneider-I also believe that method affects the effect. Have you read Jamy I. Swiss's articles "Gaffs Vs. Skill" and "The Method Is Not the Effect" in Antinomy?

As you mentioned, why is a pull more magical than a fake transfer to vanish a coin? Because you're hands are left clean with a pull. I believe that a coin vanish utilizing a fake transfer out of the context of a routine cannot stand on its own. Haven't we all been busted at some point when we tried to vanish a small object with a fake transfer, only to hear "It's in the other hand." Well, where else could the object possibly be if the magician has not shown the empty palm of the other hand? This is where enthusiastic beginners begin to realize the limitations of sleights performed without careful thought.

Fake transfers, when done well of course, hold up much better when couched in routines such as the Cups and Balls because the audience's attention is continually guided from point to point. There isn't much time for the spectator to think "Wait a minute, did the magician really put that ball in his other hand?" because attention is briskly focused on to the next phase of the routine.

Any exceptions? Yes, you can perform the last vanish of a Coins Across with a Rentention of Vision Vanish, or perhaps the Spider Vanish. When executed well, the RoV can be a powerful weapon because it creates the image of the coin in the receiving hand up to the last possible moment. (When will we see the Mickey Silver DVD on the RoV?) The Spider Vanish throws 'em off guard.

The Vernon/Mora Wand Spin Vanish also looks magical because it doesn't seem possible to the spectators that the magician can sneak the object out of the left hand while simultaneously twirling the wand with the other. The Professor understood the brilliance of this.

All three of these vanishes contain an element of conviction that magicians require to relax the the spectators before the magical revelation short circuits their minds. Without this layer of conviction, the magical effect we desire begins to diminish. Didn't Tommy Wonder mention in his Books of Wonder that we can increase the power of the magical effect if we increase the conviction?
Leonard Hevia
 
Posts: 862
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Silver Spring, Md.

Postby Guest » 03/12/06 07:35 PM

We've gotten into some complex problems with the "pull" question.

First, an unmotivated transfer begs obvious questions.

Second, the mechanics is not the effect, and may operate at some distance in both time and space from the effect as perceived by the audience.

Now as to the pull itself, I got tired of carrying a ring flight key case in my back pocket. Also, having a coin attached there kind of limited its use to vanishing just that one type of coin. It got interesting when someone said "wow! do that again, here, use my coin".

Then there are the "pride of method" type issues which tend to distract us from audience perspective.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 03:10 AM

My 2 cents on the perfect coins across concept.

VCA - coins across
Well, 3 coins visually from the fingertips travels from one hand to the other by "magic" without the hands coming together and everything examinable before and after - thats the perfect coins across. We got the VCA effect started by Jonathan Townsend from where it developed into some different 3-fly concepts. I think we do have the perfect VCA already, however we are all struggling with "the last coin" and/or the extra or the [ - and there are bold methods around for the last coin that to my experience works perfect. Being perfect, Show 3 coins and only 3 coins, roll up your sleeves and do the VCA, and end clean with 3 coins. It can be done with very little extra moves if you steal the 4rth, and dumps it prior to the ending. However, at some point you have to live with your hands coming together - maybe the audience will forget that - meaning "its perfect".

Coins across - in the hands.
Perfect if the hands doesn't come together - and thats not possible - sorry. However, it can be done without an extra coin. My favourites are Sankey and G. Wilsons almost similar handlings using the backclip/goshman pinch (I think its called) - it's killer magic. However, what I love the most is actually Al Schneiders slow motion routine using the wonderfull easy move (see his DVD's). Only problem here again is the last coin and I know a lot of magicians don't find the Hang Chien Pin (spelled wrong I suppose) a perfect ending. It's difficult to do a perfect in the hands coins across - with no extras or ['s - because the hands must come together, but I think Al Schneider found the perfect solution for this in his handling of the slow motion coin routine because here it is natural for the hands to come together.

As for the concept of perfect coins across in the hands. 3 coins, examinable, start clean end clean and the hands doesn't come together at any time, no funny moves (excludes multiple sleevings). So I guess perfect would be real magic, I can settle for less, but that requires good acting.

Mr. Schneider, thanks for you DVD's. I became a better magician from studying them, and you gave me the "perfect" in the hands slow motion routine.

Thanks
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 05:31 AM

My initial purpose in this thread was to find out what this Perfect Coins Across routine is.

That has been quite successful.

My attempt at this subject can be seen on my web site www.worldmagiccenter.com

It utilizes a move that appeared in Genii some time ago I call Al Ping Chen. It divides the HPC into phases.

I am not sure this routine is meeting my goals. It is a little slow in delivery and tends to be a bit boring. I suppose it could be jazzed up with patter an so on.

I am looking forward to seeing the NY DVD and see the concepts they have to overcome the "Last Coin"
problem.

I also appreciate the comments offered on this thread.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 06:05 AM

Toward perfection... motivation question.

I've been wondering what motivates a person to use their right hand to put coins into their left hand.

If someone has coins on the table, and wants them in their left hand, and their left arm is not disabled..., then what's going on?

Just wondering.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 07:18 AM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
Toward perfection... motivation question.

I've been wondering what motivates a person to use their right hand to put coins into their left hand.

If someone has coins on the table, and wants them in their left hand, and their left arm is not disabled..., then what's going on?

Just wondering.
Hi Jonathan - I follow you. But I also think we tend to overanalyze (here of course in the light of being perfect - and in that context handing a coin from the right to the left hand doesn't make sense).

In the Routine by Al Schneider the motivation is simply and funny enough to display to the audience that everything is easy to follow and totally fair. And thats the ironi and the beauty of the routine, building motivation for fairness, and during the fairness actually doing the "unfairness" - the real question is - can you do it, perform it and act it, without laughing at the same time. Don't think to much about what you are doing and saying, because the ironi will hit you right between the eyes and make you laugh, and that wont suit the presentation.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 07:38 AM

Al's handling where coins sink into the well of his fist has an appealing visual aesthetic. I will have to try it again and watch how non-magicians react. This to check that they see what we see, as sometimes we tunnel in our attention into enjoying minutia that our audiences almost never notice.

Originally posted by Vraagaard:
...Jonathan - I follow you. But I also ...
The word rationalize comes to mind here.

There's a nice "riddle" about the word "but" on the caf in the "words we use" section.

It's a challenge to motivate transfers and fussing in a way that makes sense to the audience. There were and are some masters of this craft who use character and feints to set up what would otherwise be pointless handling. In the case you cited, about showing fairly;

1) They can see, so no reason to show.

2) If you used your left hand there would be no reason to emphasize.

In violating an obvious economy of action, the "what would I do" type thinking that we all do, we set ourselves up for some problems and may wind stretching our audience's credulity.

Without great audience buy-in, what is obviously inefficient and quaint (also condescending) quickly becomes self evidently false and suspect.

But you already knew that and were just fooling, right?
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 08:04 AM

Hi Jonathan, Thanks. Yes I know - the perfect coins across routine would trust the spectators to have eyes and you would pick the coins up with the left hand. However, the not so perfect CA routine trust the spectators to have eyes as well as retention of vision and retention of memory. So lets look at some other questions as to the perfect coins across?

How to get the perfect audience, or how to maneuvre them into the perfect state of mind and vision to buy in on the near-perfect coins across illusion. Sticking with the Al Schneider routine I always ask the spectators to follow this closely and that I will do it very slow (the motivation is that I tell them that most coin routines are fast so I will now do it super slow - based on Al's original patter - no need to change that). During this I ask them after putting a coin or 2 into my left hand "is it fair" (again just like Al - sorry for copying - respect of the masters) and they respond "yes". So in my psychology book it lures the spectators into the fairness state of mind (e.g retention of vision and retention of memory - they said "yes"). And they get to see it 3 times, ultra slow - could it be more fair? Not in their eyes and mind, in the magicians mind YES, from a theoretical point of view and in search of the perfect coins across routine - it could be much more fair - of course you already knew that.

Well I managed to write a post without using the "but" word - good practice. Is it springtime in NY Jonathan?, because here in Copenhagen we are frezzing our butts of.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 08:21 AM

Most impressive Mr. Vraagaard. Bravo!

This discussion succeeded in bringing me back to first reading read Al's book and then doing his coins across... a twenty five year time warp, wow. I can almost see the tables and group at the Governor cafeteria as I write this. Why then did I abandon that wonderful handling in favor of Roth's approach in late 76?

Looking back, here are the impulses that moved me to my current path.

First, I don't want to make any point of being fair. I want all of my actions to be mundane until I do the special things which effect the magic. Likewise for telling the audience what they can see, much as I like the Count from Sesame Street.

Second, I felt the left hand "well" was becoming a magic place and the other hand would be the wrong place for coins to appear after being openly handled. Too close for comfort was my feeling. The methodology inspired me to take the effect itself in a different direction.

And so with no disrespect to Al's published routine, I offer a little flashback... using that same methodology (plus lapping and a c/c coin) to also put the copper in the well and have the silvers vanish one at a time. The HPC (or Al Ping Chen -> APC?) allows you to put a silver coin in your hand and NOT add in the copper but just wave it over your hand for the last vanish. :D I'd be surprised if bright folks like Al had not already explored this line of thinking.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 11:03 AM

Makes a lot of sense Jonathan. I missed to exchange thoughts and ideas with you and others. It's been a while since I was active in the forum. I'm unfortunately not an expert within coin magic, I'm more of an all rounder, but most of what you stated can be used in other parts of magic as well.

Oh, I love the effect of lapping, unfortunately I allways perform standing. It's rarely I have a chance to sit down during table hopping etc. So I think its time to get that topit in my suit, it makes magic experiences with very little effort.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 11:06 AM

A long time ago a friend of mine asked me to do magic at her child's birthday party. The kids were 5 years old. I did coins across. When I put a coin on top of my hand and said "one" all the kids said one. This continued with two and three. When I opened my hand and there were only two coins there, the reaction of the kids was amazing. There were 7 kids surrounding me. The body of each child snapped in shock. Their eyes got big and round. They had faces of complete amazment. That was one of my best audiences ever.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/13/06 09:08 PM

Originally posted by Jonathan Townsend:
I've been wondering what motivates a person to use their right hand to put coins into their left hand.
I used to think the answer to that question was "because the method requires it", and on ones level that is the answer. But it disregards the fact that such actions, while seeming to lack any sensible reason, DO in fact FEEL perfectly reasonable not just to us, but to our audiences.

I spend A LOT of time trying to determine why that is

What I finally decided is that when you pick up coins that are to your left, with your right hand and place them into your left hand the audience reads that illogical action as if your left hand is a container and your right hand is the agent by which things are placed into the container. In a coins across this works because the coins are moving from inside the closed container of the left fist, to another place.

If youd like to test this theory try this: perform the actions of a routine of this type but produce the coins at the fingertips of the right hand, one at a time and drop them into a second container like a purse or a glass or just place them aside as if you were done with them. If you notice a stronger response, it might be because this adds even more clarity to the effect. Or maybe just because its pretty to look at I dont know for sure.

I went another way with my coins across and simply took out the moves (well, all but one).
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/14/06 02:28 AM

Hi Bill,

Thanks for this insight. It really puts things into context for me. I think you are right on the money, and it explains to me why the audience simply buys into the logic and accepts it as totally fair. I like Al's example of the children counting along - I never considered coins across as a children effect - but the slow motion coins across might just very well be, because of the method of "fairness" and because everybody can count along.

I will definately try it next time my friends bring their children along - simply put - if it works great with children, then you have an effect that baffles both the adults and the children - strong visual magic for all ages.
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 03/14/06 06:40 AM

I like Bill's explanation.

Although I never expressed it like that, I do treat my left as a container that is being filled with the right hand.

There is another point here that applies. I will try to keep it short. We as magicians create reality for the audience. We can do this based on our novel training and the methods we employ. This includes changing our personal behaviors so the audience percieves them as real. It is quite complex.

One last word, is "Slow Motion Coins Across" as good as the term, "Perfect Coins Across?"

Sorry, I am vain but it sounds cool.
Al Schneider
Guest
 

Next

Return to Close-Up Magic