ERDNASE

Discuss general aspects of Genii.
Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » August 2nd, 2009, 12:26 am

"It couldn't have been ghost written, because it is clear the writer knew sleight of hand personally." Fundamentally, I agree with this argument. But in doing so, I have to ignore the fact that the illustrations were done (and quite competently) by someone who had no personal knowledge of sleight of hand. If the artwork could have been done by proxy, why not the writing?

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 2nd, 2009, 12:57 am

Bill,

The drawings were traced from photographs. This has been discussed earlier.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 2nd, 2009, 1:21 am

David Alexander wrote:Ah yes, there's the problem. If the book was ghost written, who was this masterful writer?

Those who know little about writing have put this silly idea forward as a viable theory.

I believe Martin Gardner (prodded, perhaps by William Woodfield) was the first to propose a "ghostwriter/editor" theory. I would hardly describe Gardner as someone who knew "little about writing," even at that early stage of his writing career.

Having said that, I personally don't think a ghostwriter/editor is necessary unless an otherwise compelling candidate can be shown incapable of writing/editing it himself. I don't believe that to be the case yet for the most interesting candidates.

Most MFA boosters do introduce ghostwriter/editors, with Busby/Whaley proposing Bill Hilliar, who knew about editing/ghostwriting (having written books for Thurston and Downs), copyright law, and sleight of hand, and was in Chicago prior to and at the time of publication and had a professional relationship with Drake, the company that acquired stock of the first edition in 1903 and began reprinting it in 1905. Sounds like a good match on the face of it, though I personally don't think he had anything to do with the book...
Peter Kane and Jerry Sadowitz favor Robert F. Foster, a professional writer on Bridge and games, who included information on cheating in his 1897 edition of Hoyle, as the ghostwriter/editor. He may have been in Chicago at the time the book came out, but I personally don't think he had anything to do with the book either. But in both cases the suggested ghostwriter/editors meet the minimal requirements of having writing skills and a knowledge of the subject.
Edgar Pratt suggested to Gardner that James Harto had helped contribute the legerdemain material, but I don't find that to have much credibility either, based on tracing Harto's career during the period prior to the book's publication (he was constantly moving from town to town with Wild West Shows during that period, a very demanding schedule that would have left little time for such a collaboration). There is credible testimony that Harto claimed to have known the author and one witness (Charles Maly) suggested that Harto and Erdnase may have been working on a sequel to the book. I find those claims worth considering, though not very helpful in establishing Erdnase's identity.

Glenn Bishop
Posts: 650
Joined: March 14th, 2008, 10:52 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Glenn Bishop » August 2nd, 2009, 5:29 pm

I don't think there was a ghost writer simply because Expert at the card table was - as I was told - a self published book by Erdnase who wrote in his book "he needed the money".

A ghost writer would have added to the expense of producing the book in my opinion.

So the ghost writer theory is just that a theory in my opinion.

Also in my opinion the story of Erdnase and Marshall Smith is one of the most interesting stories. Because they met in a Hotel room and they went from one drawing to the next - and in my opinion the story of them meeting in a hotel room the same way magicians used to session in the old days - to me that sparks of a time factor - of the drawings were one of the last things to get done before publishing.

Then the story of them doing one after the other to finish after Erdnase did some close up card tricks on a board covered with felt - makes for an interesting story.

To me it smacks of a man (a magician that did card tricks) trying to get a project done on a budget.

Just my opinion.

Nathan Muir
Posts: 136
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 1:48 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Nathan Muir » August 3rd, 2009, 4:41 am

David Alexander wrote:Bill,

The drawings were traced from photographs. This has been discussed earlier.


Discussed. Not proven.

AMcD
Posts: 24
Joined: May 24th, 2009, 8:34 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby AMcD » August 3rd, 2009, 8:14 am

Hi all.

Well, to me, basically, the fact that tracking back who Erdnase was has produced no convincing or definitive evidence for one century shows that simplicity and obviousness should be avoided at all cost.

This "affair" is likely to be more complicated than many think. See, about me, as I've written on another place, I even doubt is was a cheat...

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 3rd, 2009, 8:55 am

Nathan Muir wrote:
David Alexander wrote:Bill,

The drawings were traced from photographs. This has been discussed earlier.


Discussed. Not proven.


The logistics involved in drawing 100+ pictures "from life" don't work out as Smith did not remember a prolonged project that drawing from life would require.

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27054
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » August 3rd, 2009, 9:05 am

The consistency in the anatomy of the hands in the drawings would lead me to believe that they were drawn from photos, whether copied or traced.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

User avatar
Marco Pusterla
Posts: 516
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Suffolk - UK
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Marco Pusterla » August 3rd, 2009, 9:32 am

Richard Kaufman wrote:The consistency in the anatomy of the hands in the drawings would lead me to believe that they were drawn from photos, whether copied or traced.


Just one question, then...

If M.D. Smith was given a set of photos by S. W. Erdnase, why did he have to meet him at all? As far as I understand, Smith wasn't a photographer... If he was to meet Erdnase to collect the photos, he would have met him a second time to deliver the drawings and pick up the payment. Did Smith ever said he met Erdnase twice? Perhaps Erdnase may have popped in Smith's studio, delivered the photos and arrange for a meeting in a hotel to collect the drawings and pay.

If this is the case, then the person that collected the photos may not have been Erdnase at all but one of his associates... perhaps a magician... or the publisher of the book...

Just thinking out loud...
Marco Pusterla - https://mpmagic.co.uk

Ye Olde Magic Mag: magazine on magic history and collecting.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 3rd, 2009, 9:59 am

Also previously discussed...

The meeting was an audition so Erdnase could see if Smith could deliver the goods as an artist.

When he sketeched up a few drawings he proved he was sufficiently skilled. A deal was struck to convert the photos to line drawing from which cuts could be made and inserted into the book. This was far cheaper than trying to reproduce over 100 photos which would have required far more expensive paper and reproduction.

Smith was handed the photos. He retired to his studio, did the job and handed the completed job and reference photos to the printer who was near his studio. It seems highly likely that he was paid by the printer on delivery because the printer had collected money in advance from Erdnase, this being a self-published book.

Roger M.
Posts: 1598
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » August 3rd, 2009, 11:27 am

In the Gardner-Smith Correspondence the authors (Hatch, Randall, Gardner,) ponder the following:

Although Smith must have seen him on several occasions, he can recall only one meeting, but that one he recalls vividly....

I think Smith could have met with Erdnase a few times as well, and only remembered the longest, most detailed meeting.
If the one or two further meetings were just to accept a delivery, make a delivery, make payment, or some other short pleasantry, it's understandable that Smith could have either forgotten those meetings, or let them blend into his single (but famous) recollection of Erdnase's visit with him.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 3rd, 2009, 4:33 pm

Yes, Erdnase could have met with Smith more than once, but, as I just described in my last post, it wasn't necessary given what is likely to have happened. There was no need for the two to meet again unless the printer required Erdnase to pay Smith directly. He could have left a check with the printer, the cost of the job having been decided in the first meeting.

Given that the paper was rather cheap, Erdnase was not printing a book for the ages.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 3rd, 2009, 5:32 pm

David Alexander wrote:Yes, Erdnase could have met with Smith more than once, but, as I just described in my last post, it wasn't necessary given what is likely to have happened. There was no need for the two to meet again unless the printer required Erdnase to pay Smith directly. He could have left a check with the printer, the cost of the job having been decided in the first meeting.

Smith's recollection (as described in the Gardner-Smith Correspondence, was that when the job was completed, the author paid him with a low numbered check from a large Chicago bank. Though he did not recall the amount or the bank, he did recall that he was hesitant to accept a check from a stranger, but the check cleared and he never saw the author again. He speculated on several banks it might have been and Jay Marshall later checked with a few Chicago banks in the 1950's to see if they had records of accounts by Milton Franklin Andrews or several of his aliases, but without producing any results...

Nathan Muir
Posts: 136
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 1:48 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Nathan Muir » August 3rd, 2009, 5:48 pm

David Alexander wrote:
Nathan Muir wrote:
David Alexander wrote:Bill,

The drawings were traced from photographs. This has been discussed earlier.


Discussed. Not proven.


The logistics involved in drawing 100+ pictures "from life" don't work out as Smith did not remember a prolonged project that drawing from life would require.


That speculation may apply if we know that Smith only worked a small number of similar projects in his career, making this a remarkable occasion. But we don't.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 3rd, 2009, 7:48 pm

Nathan Muir wrote:
David Alexander wrote:
Nathan Muir wrote:
David Alexander wrote:Bill,

The drawings were traced from photographs. This has been discussed earlier.


Discussed. Not proven.


The logistics involved in drawing 100+ pictures "from life" don't work out as Smith did not remember a prolonged project that drawing from life would require.


That speculation may apply if we know that Smith only worked a small number of similar projects in his career, making this a remarkable occasion. But we don't.


Nathan - Do you have any idea how long it would take to draw the illustrations in Expert from life?

John Lovick
Posts: 201
Joined: July 14th, 2008, 12:11 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby John Lovick » August 3rd, 2009, 8:28 pm

The meeting was an audition so Erdnase could see if Smith could deliver the goods as an artist.

When he sketeched up a few drawings he proved he was sufficiently skilled. A deal was struck to convert the photos to line drawing from which cuts could be made and inserted into the book. This was far cheaper than trying to reproduce over 100 photos which would have required far more expensive paper and reproduction.

Smith was handed the photos. He retired to his studio, did the job and handed the completed job and reference photos to the printer who was near his studio. It seems highly likely that he was paid by the printer on delivery because the printer had collected money in advance from Erdnase, this being a self-published book.


You state all this as if it's fact. It's NOT FACT. It's an educated guess on your part. Some people think it's possible, but many more don't buy it. And though you have no evidence, you continually state this as fact, when it is pure speculation.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 3rd, 2009, 8:42 pm

The title page says the illustrations were drawn from life and that is what Smith recalled. When I asked Steranko, who knows a thing or two about illustrating, to examine them with that (and other things) in mind, he found some illustrations that looked like they might have been traced, while others supported the freehand theory. As an example of the latter, and Smith's recollection, consider Figure 16. Smith told Gardner that the author had performed the sleights on a small board. That was news to Gardner and in examining the illustrations in light of that information, he was able to find several, including Figure 16, that show the edge of the board, confirming Smith's recollection on that point. In this particular illustration, if we assume that it was traced from a photograph, then the board must not have been rectangular as if it were, the side of the board would be parallel to the side of the deck, since the front edge of the deck is parallel to the front of the table. It is not, suggesting a freehand illustration.

Larry Horowitz
Posts: 448
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: L.A.

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Larry Horowitz » August 3rd, 2009, 8:53 pm

Interesting point regarding the payment by check.

First, at that time in our country, how common were people to have and pay by check?

Second, a gambler in need of money (as he states) would he have a checking account? I am not sure where I read it, (possibly Hustlers, Beats and Others), but I recall a statement that gamblers tended to carry money folded in their pockets, not in billfolds or wallets. If so, this would also tend to lay doubt on a gambler paying by check.

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 4th, 2009, 12:37 am

Jeez Lovick, by this time on the thread with 102 pages and thousands of page views I would have thought that everyone understood that what we were posting were our best ideas, analysis, and "educated opinions" even though we do not preface each statement with the qualification. I would have thought that self-evident...but apparently not.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » August 4th, 2009, 12:44 am

1. The book says the drawings were "from life" -- if we can't trust the text on such a simple statement of fact, then there's no point in trying to analyze it.

2. It's difficult to give such credit to Marshall Smith's memory on such an incidental detail as the weather (and basing an opinion of the date of his and Erdnase's meeting on a specific memory), if you won't trust his memory as to whether or not photographs were used -- a fact that is key to the assignment.

3. On youtube, eoinmagi has overlaid figs 22 and 23 to make an animation of the movements in the bottom deal: HERE.
In that animation, the size of the sleeve (relative to the hands and the deck) jumps significantly. This would not happen if the drawings were traced from photos.

4. Likewise, the sleeve of the right hand changes size when going from fig 17 to 18. And in the sequence of drawings 52 - 54; and in 77 to 78. In Fig 90 the leftmost index is much too close to the edge of the card to have been traced from a photograph.

In looking at the illustrations, I notice that mostly the cards are low-valued number cards (lots of twos and threes). Erdnase's deck seems to have no face cards in it. (Which I take to be evidence that Smith was editing on the fly, rather than slavishly tracing from photos.)

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27054
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » August 4th, 2009, 12:48 am

Regarding Richard Hatch's statement about talking with Steranko--I have never seen one drawing done by Steranko that was traced from a photo. None of his drawings of hands are anatomically correct: they show what needs to be explained in the drawing, but they don't look like any hands I've ever seen. That's not to put Jim down: he's a brilliant artist, however his expertise is not in the exacting reproduction of hands performing sleight of hand.

While I am not an artist, but a mere illustrator, I've drawn about 10,000 hands from photographs and my experience in this area far exceeds Jim's. Making any judgment based upon a line indicating the edge of the table is futile guesswork. The line signifying the table edge could have been added by Smith after the drawings were finished, or even added by someone else after Smith was done. The fact that it's not on the same plane as the deck tells us nothing.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

David Alexander
Posts: 1549
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Aurora IL

Re: ERDNASE

Postby David Alexander » August 4th, 2009, 12:49 am

Bill,

How long do you estimate that it took Smith to make the drawings if he did them from life?

Recall also that Smith did not recognize the work as his while he did recognize his lettering.

So, what do you think the logistics are in producing the book's illustrations?

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » August 4th, 2009, 12:49 am

Larry Horowitz wrote:Interesting point regarding the payment by check.

First, at that time in our country, how common were people to have and pay by check?

I don't know if it was "common", but it certainly wasn't uncommon. My dad (before he died) collected old checks from TN (many had beautiful engravings of the issuing bank). He had hundreds from the turn of the century.
Second, a gambler in need of money (as he states) would he have a checking account? I am not sure where I read it, (possibly Hustlers, Beats and Others), but I recall a statement that gamblers tended to carry money folded in their pockets, not in billfolds or wallets. If so, this would also tend to lay doubt on a gambler paying by check.
The statement by Marshall Smith that he had a "low-numbered" check tells me that he set the account up specifically for the purpose of putting the book together.

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » August 4th, 2009, 1:17 am

David Alexander wrote:Bill,

How long do you estimate that it took Smith to make the drawings if he did them from life?

Recall also that Smith did not recognize the work as his while he did recognize his lettering.

So, what do you think the logistics are in producing the book's illustrations?


I have NO useful background in art (aside from several years as a serious comic book collector), and have no opinion of value as to how long it would have taken to do the drawings. Some who seem informed have said here that they could have been done in a single day, but others have argued convincingly that they couldn't have.

My opinion is that there were at least two meetings between Erdnase and Smith to execute the drawings, and that Smith's memory in the intervening years collapsed these to a single meeting.

Re: recognizing lettering vs art -- this strikes me as odd, since there is so much more room for a personal style to be expressed in drawings vs. lettering. When I collected comics, I could recognize many artists by their work, but no letterers.

In EATCT, sometimes the captions are so neat that they look as if they were done with a LeRoy-type lettering guide, while others are clearly hand drawn, and some are almost sloppy and look very imprecise when compared to the accuracy of the actual drawings. The size of the captions jumps about ("Fig. 43" is larger than "Fig. 44"); most are on a horizontal line, but some are on a slanted line (possibly indicating that the associated drawing was pasted up slightly askew when plates were made? or that the captions themselves were pasted up separately from the drawings (see "Fig. 58" -- it appears to have glue lines around it on the copy downloadable from the CARC)). In some cases the top loop of an "8" is much smaller than the bottom loop; in other cases they are nearly the same size. Whether or not a period follows "Fig" or the digits of the figure number is inconsistent (but this could be an artefact of reproduction). The size and length of the descender in "g" varies from Fig. to Fig. I don't think the lettering shows nearly as much attention to detail as does the artwork.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 4th, 2009, 1:21 am

Bill Mullins wrote: The statement by Marshall Smith that he had a "low-numbered" check tells me that he set the account up specifically for the purpose of putting the book together.

Another possible interpretation (one of many) is that he had only recently arrived in Chicago...

User avatar
Richard Kaufman
Posts: 27054
Joined: July 18th, 2001, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Theodore DeLand
Location: Washington DC
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Kaufman » August 4th, 2009, 1:22 am

I would say that it would have been impossible for Smith to have done the drawings in a day.
Subscribe today to Genii Magazine

Bill Mullins
Posts: 5913
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Huntsville, AL
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Bill Mullins » August 4th, 2009, 1:26 am

Richard Hatch wrote:
Bill Mullins wrote: The statement by Marshall Smith that he had a "low-numbered" check tells me that he set the account up specifically for the purpose of putting the book together.

Another possible interpretation (one of many) is that he had only recently arrived in Chicago...


Which is not inconsistent with what I said. He could have either lived in Chicago, and set up an account for the book (if he already had an account, there is no reason for it not to have been under his real name, so a new account would have been necessary to maintain anonymity), or he could have come in from another area, and set up a local account so that the Printer and Smith would accept his checks, and could have used either his own name or a pseudonym.

OT: We (Alexander, Hatch, Kaufman, etc. and myself) are a sad lot, sitting here in the wee hours discussing the banking and artistic habits of a mystery man who lived a century ago.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 4th, 2009, 2:34 am

Richard Kaufman wrote:I would say that it would have been impossible for Smith to have done the drawings in a day.

Has anyone ever claimed this? Not to my knowledge.
Smith clearly recalled his first meeting with the author, sketching his hands in pencil from life, taking them home to ink them in after each sketch was approved by the author. He claimed the author was not concerned with the illustrations' artistic merit, so long as they accurately conveyed the information. Smith told Gardner he thought the job took him about two weeks. If they met (as I assume) each day five days a week for two weeks, that's ten days of work, 10 illustrations per day. Sounds reasonable to me, though I admit I have no experience either drawing from life or tracing from photos. Why should he have a clear recollection of each day's work? The initial and final meetings would obviously be the most memorable, those in between pretty much repetitive work (we do know that they discussed Louis Dalrymple at some point, though it is not clear when or exactly what was said...). One of Gardner's notes says "He [Smith] recognized his lettering on the book pictures, but not the drawings themselves. He thinks it strange he can't recall doing the drawings, so probably did them from photographs." Alas, it is not clear from the context if this is speculation on the part of Smith or Gardner. It is speculation, in either case, but would be more compelling support of the photo theory if it came from Smith himself. One problem I have with the photo theory is the time and expense involved in making the photos. Setting up the equipment, holding the poses, developing the plates to check them, redoing those that needed it, having prints made for use in the book, or later transfer to illustrations etc. was surely a much more difficult and expensive process 100 years ago than today. Any experts on turn of the century photo technology care to weigh in?

Richard Kaufman wrote:The consistency in the anatomy of the hands in the drawings would lead me to believe that they were drawn from photos, whether copied or traced.

Regarding the anatomical consistency of the hands, Steranko pointed out inconsistencies in the illustrations which could either be interpreted as a single artist whose skill improved over time or more than one artist doing the drawings. In many illustrations the fingernails appear crudely rendered, while in others they are much more realistically defined. In some illustrations the hands appear huge (see figures 61 and 83, for example), while in others they appear small (figure 79 in one interpretation). Incidentally, Smith recalled the author's hands, as well as stature, as being small, and the author makes a positive statement about the Erdnase shift being possible with a small hand (though presumed easier with a large hand), implying greater familiarity with small hands than large. Milton Franklin Andrews was known to have large hands...
Tortuga wrote: Unless of course the book is a collaboration and MFA was involved, but not the person who met Mr. Smith in the hotel room. I haven't heard anyone posit that theory or possibility, unless I missed it.


Marshall Smith himself raised this possibility with Martin Gardner when faced with the inconsitencies in the physical description of Milton Franklin Andrews and his recollections of the man he met and whose hands he sketched. Writing to Gardner on August 20, 1951, he says "Now for Mr. Andrews: As I told you before, I'll never reconcile his being 6' 3" [sic. Andrews was described in the police wanted circular as being 6' 1.5", not 6' 3". Smith accurately references the 6'1.5" height in his earlier response of July 15, 1950]... If the police were after Andrews at the time I met him, could Andrews have had someone represent him while doing business with me or the publisher [NB: the book was self published, but Smith may not have known or recalled that]? I doubt that. The man I met, I'm sure, was the real article..." In point of fact, MFA was not wanted by the police at the time the book was in preparation, so would have had no reason (other than a desire for anonymity) to send a surrogate.

Am I the only one who has a feeling of deja vu in this discussion? I think most of these arguments were similarly discussed in this thread a few years back...

Roger M.
Posts: 1598
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Roger M. » August 4th, 2009, 2:53 am

It would certainly halt the repetition of "new" ideas and arguments that are actually old ideas and arguments if folks would read through all 102 pages before posting.

Besides seeing what's already been posted and discussed, this thread in its entirety is the best read on the internet if you're interested in gambling, history, Americana, cheating, magic and a few other topics that intertwine with the Erdnase story.

Nathan Muir
Posts: 136
Joined: June 7th, 2009, 1:48 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Nathan Muir » August 4th, 2009, 4:35 am

David Alexander wrote:
Nathan - Do you have any idea how long it would take to draw the illustrations in Expert from life?


Yes.

User avatar
Eoin O'hare
Posts: 142
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Eoin O'hare » August 4th, 2009, 6:23 am

I have uploaded all 101 of Smith's drawings to my Flickr account. Here.
Each drawing has it's own url, and can be embedded by... clicking on the required drawing ...right click on the image and select "copy image address"...Paste this into Genii's "Full reply screen" after you have clicked on the "Enter an image" icon.

Something like this... Image
Designer & Maker of The Stripper Jig Card Trimmer

AMcD
Posts: 24
Joined: May 24th, 2009, 8:34 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby AMcD » August 4th, 2009, 7:25 am

I don't know if such a thinking is of any value but looking at the whole set of drawings it appears that small hands have been depicted. The vast majority of figures show small hands. I've got very long fingers and I can assure you the pictures won't look the same as Smith's ones if my hands were used :-).

But more probably Smith just focused on drawing a "scene" and that's why he used a "standard" hand size.

User avatar
Eoin O'hare
Posts: 142
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Eoin O'hare » August 4th, 2009, 7:40 am

Is it not useful (and of value) having the facility to embed drawings into the posts which reference them?
I've simply made it easy for anyone to add the drawings to their posts.
Designer & Maker of The Stripper Jig Card Trimmer

AMcD
Posts: 24
Joined: May 24th, 2009, 8:34 am

Re: ERDNASE

Postby AMcD » August 4th, 2009, 7:53 am

I was talking about MY thinking (about the small hands)... Your idea is just great.

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 4th, 2009, 9:05 am

Thanks, Eoin, that's very useful to this discussion! Here's an illustration (Figure 87) where the left hand (the upper hand) does not look to me like it was traced from a photo:
Image

Richard Hatch
Posts: 2095
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Providence, Utah
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Richard Hatch » August 4th, 2009, 9:20 am

Here are two illustrations that bear on the questions of whether the book had a single illustrator or if the illustrations were traced from photos. Look at the nail of the left thumb (I am assuming that the performer in the illustrations is one individual!):
Image
Image

I assume a manicure of some kind between illustrations would be another explanation!

User avatar
Q. Kumber
Posts: 1851
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: Tom Whitestone

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Q. Kumber » August 4th, 2009, 11:11 am

Does anyone know how many angels can dance on the point of a pin?

User avatar
Eoin O'hare
Posts: 142
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Ireland
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Eoin O'hare » August 4th, 2009, 11:27 am

Quentin... it's the point of a needle, not a pin. ;)
Designer & Maker of The Stripper Jig Card Trimmer

Jonathan Townsend
Posts: 8704
Joined: January 17th, 2008, 12:00 pm
Location: Westchester, NY
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Jonathan Townsend » August 4th, 2009, 11:48 am

It's the head of a pin - as apropos of ...
Mundus vult decipi -per Caleb Carr's story Killing Time

Darryl Harris
Posts: 81
Joined: February 3rd, 2008, 12:00 pm
Favorite Magician: I admire the best!
Location: Woodbridge, NJ
Contact:

Re: ERDNASE

Postby Darryl Harris » August 4th, 2009, 11:51 am

Eye of a needle, head of a pin... the sentiment is clear in either case... (};o)
Is is possible that that Smith did the pencil roughs and handed them to an assistant to ink or "finish?" That could explain why he didn't have a clear memory of the illustrations, but he recognized his lettering.
Live with honor
Act with integrity
No regrets


Return to “General”