Out of This World - which version?

All beginners in magic should address their questions here.

Postby Guest » 07/12/02 12:59 PM

Hi,
I have been working with Paul Currys great trick Out of This World. I have been experimenting with two versions one which I believe is the original and the other is a modification by Eugene Burger (p150 Mastering the Art of Magic). Which version do you recommend?

The first version, the magician shuffles cards (set up deck), but thereafter the spectator does all the work.

In the Eugene Burger version the spectator shuffles the deck, the magician then lays out the first 16 or so cards according to the spectators wishes. The cards are then mixed by the magician before the spectator separates the next 16 or so cards into two piles. The remaining un-separated cards can be shown as mixed.

I like the Eugene Burger version as it is impromptu. But on showing both versions to my wife she preferred the original as she did all the magic herself.

Thanks for the advice,
Stuart Chalmers
Guest
 

Postby Jim Maloney_dup1 » 07/12/02 01:11 PM

The routine you are referring to as Eugene Burger's is actually, I believe, U.F. Grant's. It's a great method.

I think you need to look at each routine and examine the strengths and weaknesses of each. For example, U.F. Grant's version is impromptu, as you mentioned, therefore you can do it with a borrowed, shuffled deck. In that situation, it would be best to use that version over the original, because you can't do the setup easily.

On the other hand, you pointed out that your wife liked the original because she did everything, even though it was you who shuffled at the beginning. This is a strong point and suggests that, perhaps, you should use the original in situations where you can have the deck prepared beforehand.

I think it really comes down to how you plan to use the effect. Grant's version is perfect for just sitting around with a bunch of friends and they ask you to show them something. You can then just borrow a deck and go right into it. I think the strength is that the deck is borrowed -- something you wife didn't know was possible, I assume.

I think the key is to go out and try both several times and see which gets better reactions FOR YOU and what works best in the situations YOU work in.

-Jim
Jim Maloney_dup1
 
Posts: 1709
Joined: 07/23/01 12:00 PM
Location: Northern New Jersey

Postby Rennie » 07/12/02 02:07 PM

The Burger method sounds very similar to Harry Loraynes version called "Out of this Universe" which also uses a borrowed shuffled deck with no preparation at all, but you have to start dealing the first few cards before you hand them to the spectator, but this is my favorite.Daryl also has a good version called " Out of this Hemisphere" which does not use a complete deck but is the same effect.Sounds like there is a lot of " Out of this _________" card tricks out there huh ???
The effect is the important thing, how you achieve is not !!
User avatar
Rennie
 
Posts: 817
Joined: 01/23/08 01:00 PM
Location: Manteca, California

Postby Guest » 07/13/02 03:31 AM

It was my impression also that, after reading the Lorayne version, it was simply the U.F. Grant version (as attributed by Eugene Burger).

Is there any difference, however sleight (pun intended), between the U.F. Grant impromptu version and Lorayne's "Out of This Universe"?

I believe the impromptu version is infinately stronger, provided you allow the spectator to shuffle the cards!
Guest
 

Postby David Acer » 07/13/02 05:10 PM

For an alternate approach, you may want to try J.C. Wagner's wonderful "Prediction Out of This World," from The Commercial Magic of J.C. Wagner (Maxwell, 1987).
Now tweeting daily from @David_Acer
David Acer
 
Posts: 733
Joined: 02/09/08 01:00 PM
Location: Montreal, Canada

Postby Jeff Pierce Magic » 07/13/02 11:16 PM

Here's the approach that I came up with. It eliminates one spectator having to deal all the cards (which cuts the time involved in half), and eliminates the midway switch. It also adds a nice display of the seperated cards at the end.

Feedback would be appreciated.

TWO DEGREES OF SEPERATION by Jeff Pierce

CREDIT: Paul Curry for Out of This World.

SETUP: Separate the deck by colors, with all the blacks except two on the top of the red
cards. Insert two black cards toeards the bottom of the red stack. Bend
the top black stack with a downward bend to facilitate cutting the cards latter.
NOTE: This routine will work best if the 2 spectators are sitting next to each other.
You will want to be standing between them at the end.

PRESENTATION: Give the deck a few false shuffles as you ask Spectator 1 and 2
(pick a mother, daughter boyfriend girlfriend, or husband, wife team) ask them if they
believe in intuition. say, "We're going to conduct a little test of your intuitive powers.
Spread through the deck with the cards facing you and remove 2 black and 2 red cards.
(Don't let anyone see the faces of the rest of the deck and make sure there is a
seperation between each pair of cards.) Explain that these are their leader cards as
you table them face up in red black order in front of each spectator.

Tell the 2 spectators that they will work together to test their intuition. Cut the deck
where the two colored stacks meet and hand the black stack to spectator 1 on your left side,
and the remaining red card stack to the spectator on your right. Tell the spectators that
they are to deal the cards face down onto either color, but to deal them onto the color that
they think their partner would choose. Have them deal their cards face down on either the red
or black leader cards until they exhaust their stacks.

HERES WHERE YOU SHOULD BE: You are standing between the two spectators, each have a red
and a black card face up in front of them with a number of face down cards on each stack.

THE FINAL DISPLAY OF SEPERATION: Standing between the two spectators, reach down and pick
up both the face down stacks on top of the face up red leader cards, leaving the leader cards
on the table. Place the right hand stack ontop of the left and drop the stack face down on
the table. Repeat with the remaining stacks on the black leader cards. Drop this on top of
the face down stack on the table.

NOTE: You will notice that you picked up the 2 supposed red stacks together, then the 2 black
stacks and placed these together on table. What we need here is some time misdirection.

Reach down with both hands and slide the 4 leader cards together in a row in the
center between the 2 spectators. Make sure the there is about 3 inches between
each of the leader cards. They should still be in red black red black order.
Pick up the tabled deck and table spread the cards from left to right below
the 4 leader cards. The deck will display in red black red black stack order.
This is quit a visual display of separated colors.

2001 Jeff Pierce Magic
visit my website at:
www.jeffpiercemagic.com
Jeff Pierce Magic
 
Posts: 619
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby M. Sibbernsen » 07/14/02 04:02 PM

Jeff,

Just a quick thanks for posting your work on the OOTW plot.
M. Sibbernsen
 
Posts: 96
Joined: 03/14/08 09:46 PM

Postby Jeff Pierce Magic » 07/15/02 03:50 PM

You are welcome Michael, thanks for noticing.

Jeff
visit my website at:
www.jeffpiercemagic.com
Jeff Pierce Magic
 
Posts: 619
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby Guest » 07/15/02 04:55 PM

Thanks everyone for the advice.

Jim Maloney, I think your idea of selecting the version for the situation is good. I am trying to develop a list of 6 effects that I can develop to performance level, but there's no reason both versions of OOTW can't be one of the six.

RENNIP - I did not know about these other versions, I'll check them out sometime and see how different they are.

Muscarella - I feel the impromptu version is stronger, but I thought it might be my desire for an impromptu version that was stronger, rather than the effect being stronger.

David Acer - The Wagner book sounds interesting. It may be my next purchase! (Well, maybe after the Book of Wonder - vol 2).

Jeff Pierce - I second Michael Sibbernsen on thanking you for your plot of OOTW. I think it could be very powerful in the right hands. I not sure about the "deal them onto the color that they think their partner would choose" - it's not clear to me what this means. My other concern is -what is the motivation (other than the secret one) for collecting all four piles? If the spectators had really separated the cards into two color piles - would you not just turn the cards over? I feel the original OOTW avoids the motivation problem by having 2 sets of cards delt in one pile that need to be tidied. These are small concerns. I think it is a great effect especially as it involves two spectators. I can just imagine the two spectators just looking at each other in disbelief- "how did we do that?". Cool.

Thanks again,
Stuart Chalmers
Guest
 

Postby Guest » 07/15/02 06:08 PM

Stuart (and others),

Juan Tamariz' "Neither Blind Nor Silly" (which was published and is also on his "Lessons in Magic" videos) is a great lead-in to "Out of This World". It requires a set-up, too, but when you're done performing the effect, the cards have been separated into red and black piles -- BUT THE SPECTATOR IS NOT AWARE OF IT. In fact, the impression by that point is that the cards must be pretty well mixed, the spectator having shuffled the cards himself! Throw in a false shuffle at the beginning of "Blind Nor Silly", and another just after (although it's not really necessary) and you're ready to do "Out of This World," with what appears to be a well shuffled deck.
Guest
 

Postby Jeff Pierce Magic » 07/15/02 08:04 PM

Jeff Pierce - I second Michael Sibbernsen on thanking you for your plot of OOTW. I think it could be very powerful in the right hands. I not sure about the "deal them onto the color that they think their partner would choose" - it's not clear to me what this means. My other concern is -what is the motivation (other than the secret one) for collecting all four piles? If the spectators had really separated the cards into two color piles - would you not just turn the cards over? I feel the original OOTW avoids the motivation problem by having 2 sets of cards delt in one pile that need to be tidied. These are small concerns. I think it is a great effect especially as it involves two spectators. I can just imagine the two spectators just looking at each other in disbelief- "how did we do that?". Cool.

Thanks again,
Stuart Chalmers
Stuart, thank you for your comments. Feedback is very important in the construction of my routines. I took all the comments others have made about OOTW and tried to address them in my routine including the time involved in dealing the entire deck, the switch half way through and the shifting of the packs. Is it better? No, just another variation among the rest.

I not sure about the "deal them onto the color that they think their partner would choose" - it's not clear to me what this means.

Since it is a test of their intuative powers, it makes more sense that they select the color they think their partner would choose.

My other concern is -what is the motivation (other than the secret one) for collecting all four piles?

The motovation is to simply move them off the key cards so you can slide them together in a line for display. Ideally each spectator is seated on either side of you so picking up the piles allows you to slide the key cards together.

I hope this answers your questions.

Thank You
Jeff Pierce
visit my website at:
www.jeffpiercemagic.com
Jeff Pierce Magic
 
Posts: 619
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Orlando, FL

Postby Guest » 07/13/05 07:29 PM

One of the Harry Lorayne books had a great method entitled "Impromptu Out of This World."

Perhaps a forum member can cite the particular volume?
Guest
 

Postby Oliver Corpuz » 07/13/05 08:55 PM

Originally posted by Brett McCarron:
One of the Harry Lorayne books had a great method entitled "Impromptu Out of This World."

Perhaps a forum member can cite the particular volume?
Impromptu Out of This World is found in Lorayne's "My Favorite Card Tricks" page 26.

Also, in his book Decksterity Lorayne suggests using OOTW as a memory stunt, Out of this World Memory. page 55.

On the subject of OOTW, I suggest taking a look at Bruce Bernstein's "Couples" found in his Classics notes. Paul Curry liked it so much he marketed the effect and said it was the best improvement to the original. Also, Jon Stetson has an outstanding handling for OOTW that screws with people that know the original handling, unfortunately this is not published.

- Oliver
Oliver Corpuz
 
Posts: 105
Joined: 05/09/09 08:33 AM

Postby Guest » 07/13/05 09:43 PM

Actually Harry Lorayne's original "Out Of This Universe" does not use a shuffled deck. Teh deck is prearranged. This great version can be found in his execellent first book "Close Up Card Magic" which has been reprinted and reedited in his new Classic Collection book.

I have been using both Lorayne's and Grant's versions at different times depending on the audience and they both have their strengths.

Grant's can be done from a shuffled deck. Lorayne's is longer but has its strength in the repeated shuffling DURING the effect. You do have to be able to hold their attention, though.

Many still believe the original Paul Curry routine to be the best, despite the many 'improved' versions.
Guest
 

Postby Richard Hatch » 07/13/05 10:07 PM

There seems to be some confusion in this thread between Lorayne's OUT OF THIS UNIVERSE (in CLOSE UP CARD MAGIC) and his "Impromptu Out of this World" from MY FAVORITE CARD TRICKS (as cited above). OUT OF THIS UNIVERSE is not impromptu, as noted, and is a different effect from Out of this World, though conceptually related (and possibly inspired by it). His Impromptu Out of this World is the same as the earlier U. F. Grant version. In performing the latter, I bill the first portion as an experiment in telepathy (transmitting the color from my mind to that of the spectator) and the second as an experiment in clairvoyance, since neither of us will know what colors the cards are... This change in experiment gives a logical excuse for marking the location of the change (to keep the two experiments distinct), which never seemed well motivated to me in the Curry original.
User avatar
Richard Hatch
 
Posts: 1590
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Logan, Utah

Postby Philippe Billot » 07/13/05 11:24 PM

Who can tell me in which book or magazine (or marketed trick) is the Grant's version, please ?
Philippe Billot
 
Posts: 938
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: PARIS - FRANCE

Postby Richard Hatch » 07/14/05 05:59 AM

I believe it was marketed as "Nu Way Out of this World", though I am working from memory and could well be mistaken...
User avatar
Richard Hatch
 
Posts: 1590
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Logan, Utah

Postby dwmagic » 07/14/05 08:22 AM

Richard you are correct . According to a collection of methods called "Out of this World - and beyond" published by Paul Curry in 1975, Grant came up with the impromptu method shortly after the original. in this 20 page booklet he prints the Grant method as the one used by Doug henning when he appeared on two nationally televised shows. This publications has many of the methods described in this thread.It says second printing on the cover but not who published it unless its just a self published tome.
dwmagic
 
Posts: 195
Joined: 01/20/08 01:00 PM
Location: Los Angeles

Postby Kevin Wiese » 07/14/05 03:30 PM

Originally posted by dwmagic:
... According to a collection of methods called "Out of this World - and beyond" published by Paul Curry in 1975...
Anyone know if this is still available anywhere?
Kevin Wiese
 
Posts: 75
Joined: 01/17/08 01:00 PM
Location: Richmond, Va.


Return to General